Numbers 9

 Jesus Sends Demons To The Pigs

Matthew 8:28 - 34; Mark 5:1 - 20; Luke 8:26 - 39

The above passages tell the story of Jesus healing a demon possessed man and sending the demons into pigs that were near by.  If there was a time in scripture to dig deeper than the surface it is in reading these three accounts of the event.  For if we remain on the surface we could begin to question the Bible concerning not being contradictory.  There are times we need to look deeper to bring understanding and remove or at the very least reduce confusion.

When reading scripture we often stay on the surface and fail to fully pray for understanding as we read scripture.  Sometimes it pays to go mining for deeper nuggets of truth and chew on the meat of the Word.  Often this will require more research and study than many of us want to do.  We will often either stay on the surface and stay with the milk of the Word or we will become frustrated and  throw the Bible away in disgust.  What we should do instead is allow the Holy Spirit to teach us in order to have greater understanding.

The first thing we notice when looking at these passages is Matthew refers to the area as the territory of the Gadarenes while Mark and Luke calls it the territory of Gerasenes.  We could easily disregard this by simply deciding that the writers were just bad with geography.  Many today have trouble identifying places on a map.  When we dig a little deeper and get just below the surface we find all three writers are correct in their understanding of the region.  Though in general it makes no difference what region they were in.  What is important is what took place.  At the same time considering the region has significance that we will address later.  Let's first deal with what seems as different locations.

The challenge is that this region was known by two different names.  Much in the way some will talk about the Gulf of America or the Gulf of Mexico.  No matter what name you call it all are aware you are talking about the body of water off the coast of Texas and Mexico.  So what about this region? I found the best answer in the Wycliffe Bible Commentary.

Country of the Gadarenes (ASV). So called from the city of Gadara to the southeast. Mark and Luke have “Gerasenes” (ASV), from the village named Khersa (Gerasa)—now in ruins on the lake shore—which was perhaps in the district belonging to Gadara.

ASV American Standard Version

 Pfeiffer, C. F., & Harrison, E. F., eds. (1962). The Wycliffe Bible Commentary: New Testament (Mt 8:28). Moody Press.

Another proposed answer is the difficulty in transliteration of the ancient text.

Gadarenes’ is likely to be a conjectural correction, on the ground that the territory of Gadara did extend to the lakeside while that of Gerasa did not. The strength of attestation in Matthew probably reflects nothing more than the greater popularity, and therefore the more consistent correcting, of Matthew through the crucial period of scribal copying. ‘Of the Gergesenes’ was the reading championed by Origen because of the lakeside cliffs it offered. Of the various proposals, perhaps the most likely is that the name confusion results from the transliteration into Greek of the name of a less-well-known non-Hellenistic lakeside town which, given the curious inconsistencies of ancient transliteration, proved subsequently difficult to identify.¹²⁰ But the various suggestions remain conjectural.

¹²⁰ Cf. Cranfield, Mark, 176. The modern name of Gergesa (which is Kersa or Kursi) is suggestive.

 Nolland, J. (2005). The Gospel of Matthew: a commentary on the Greek text (pp. 374–375). W.B. Eerdmans; Paternoster Press.

So in general it depends on what you knew this area to be as to what you likely would call it.  Some called the region after the city of Gadara and others after the village Gerasa.  Just like whether you call it Gulf of America or Mexico people know of the region you are talking about so people during this era would recognize the area by either of the names the three writers used.

 So what makes this area so significant besides the miracle of delivering the possessed man.  We do not have to look very far in this text to see that there is something different concerning this particular region.  Matthew 8:30 says, “A large herd of pigs was feeding in the distance." (God's Word Translation)  Since pigs are considered to be unclean animals having a large herd of pigs in the area indicates that there was also a significant population of gentiles in the area.  We have no indication if the demon possessed are jews or gentiles.  There is possibility of the possessed being a gentile even if this is not the case we do have an indication of Jesus at least ministering in a region that was strongly a gentile region.  This is significant in that fact he came first to the jews but the Bible does not say he came only to the jews.  It says whoever believes will be saved.

There is another controversy to address in this passage.  In Matthew 8:28 it says, 

“When he arrived in the territory of the Gadarenes on the other side ⌞of the Sea of Galilee⌟, two men met him. They were possessed by demons and had come out of the tombs. No one could travel along that road because the men were so dangerous.”  Matthew‬ ‭8‬:‭28‬ ‭God's Word Translation

Notice in this passage it says two men met Jesus.  If we flip to Mark and Luke it says, "...a man...."  So do we have a contradiction?  As I dug deeper into this I do not believe there is a contradiction.  I will pause here and say as much as I have read the Bible I never caught the difference until recently.  I had a Deputy Commander when I was in the Army require us to read our slides backwards in order to not miss words because, as he put it, we will often remove or add things in our minds eye that are not really there.  I would say such is the case in this.  I know this story and likely skipped over this small difference until someone I am mentoring pointed it out to me.  

Why would Matthew speak of two where the other two Gospels only mention one?  Some commentators seemed to brush aside the controversy, if it is mentioned at all.  There are a few commentators who do address the situation.

For me this is an incident where it was often stressed in my Military Police training to talk to all the witnesses at an incident.  People see things differently.  You get a whole picture when you talked to all witnesses.

One commentator who mentions the differences between the gospels states that Matthew was likely putting an emphasis on two witnesses as required by jewish law.  

Matthew has two demoniacs where Mark and Luke have only one. This is one of a number of doublings in Matthew.¹²¹ They probably represent nothing more than an insistence that the incidents were not ‘one-offs’ but part of a larger pattern. There is likely to be some relationship to the importance in Jewish law of double witness, but Matthew is not focussed on legal proof. In sharp contrast to Mark, the two demoniacs here do not attract reader sympathy; rather, they are presented as being a public menace, making that area unpassable.

¹²¹ For other healings see Mt. 9:27; 20:30. In 26:60 there is an extra witness (cf. 18:16). Jesus rides two animals in 21:7.

 Nolland, J. (2005). The Gospel of Matthew: a commentary on the Greek text (p. 375). W.B. Eerdmans; Paternoster Press.

Though this is a possibility there does not seem to be an indication in the passage that Matthew was concerned about the two witness situation here, especially in light that the other person was demon possessed as well.  

What several of the commentators I looked at seemed to come to conclude is the reason only one is mentioned in the other gospels is one of the two was less fierce and or that one was more dominant and did the speaking.

Matthew mentions two demoniacs; the parallel passages, one; the reason may be either that one was less fierce than the other, or that only one came from Gerasa (Nösgen).

Spence-Jones, H. D. M., ed. (1909). St. Matthew (Vol. 1, p. 328). Funk & Wagnalls Company. 

Only Matthew speaks of two demoniacs, but he does not thereby contradict Mark and Luke. Neither of the other Evangelists refers to “only” one. Perhaps one of the two dominated the conversation. But Matthew elsewhere includes two characters, where parallel accounts have one (9:27; 20:30); so he may be uniquely concerned to follow the principle of Deut 19:15, that a testimony be confirmed by two or three witnesses. Blomberg, C. (1992). Matthew (Vol. 22, p. 151). Broadman & Holman Publishers.

Did we resolve the conflict?  Maybe not for some.  What is more important in these passages is not whether there is one or two men but that Jesus had the power over demons.  Look at the interaction of Jesus and the demons.

“They shouted, “Why are you bothering us now, Son of God? Did you come here to torture us before it is time?” A large herd of pigs was feeding in the distance. The demons begged Jesus, “If you’re going to force us out, send us into that herd of pigs.” Jesus said to them, “Go!” The demons came out and went into the pigs. Suddenly, the whole herd rushed down the cliff into the sea and died in the water.”  Matthew‬ ‭8‬:‭29‬-‭32‬ ‭God's Word Translation

The demons knew who Jesus was.  They did not want to engage him and they asked to be thrown into the pigs.  Their mention of being tortured before their time is the fact they knew he was going to die on the cross and raise again and could be referencing that or they could be referencing the fact that they knew at the end of time they were going to be cast into hell.  As scripture says demons know who God is and tremble.  It is not just about knowing God it is about accepting him as your Lord and savior and living for him that makes a difference.

What is unfortunate is the people of the city came out not to praise Jesus.  Not to see the men no longer possessed by demons.  They come out to ask Jesus to leave.  They see the amazing thing he did and yet reject Jesus.

There is a quote that if I can find it I will give credit and quote it correctly.  In general it talks about tasting the refreshing waters of salvation and then spitting.  That is what these people are doing.  It is what many of us do.  We see God's goodness, we have experienced the joy of salvation but instead of continually drinking from the living water we spit and walk away from God.