The Gadarene Swine

The story of the Gadarene swine who were possessed by a legion of demons and in consequence drowned in the lake is an interesting sidelight upon the general Scriptural presentation regarding the 'fallen angels'. The incident itself is well attested, having been recorded by all three synoptic writers in Matthew 8.28-36, Mark 5.1-20 and Luke 8.20-34. The three narratives agree in all main points except that Matthew declares there were two demoniacs involved and the others tell of only one. The probable explanation is that two men were in fact concerned but one became the centrepiece of the incident and the demons spoke only through this one.

This short note will not touch upon the general subject of demon obsession, which would require much more space for anything like adequate treatment. It will merely be remarked that according to the New Testament it was a very real thing, and trained observers in this present century have come across cases in their own experience where it has been a very real thing also. It is not suggested therefore, that the unfortunate victims in this incident were simply cases of epilepsy or psychological unbalance. Their brains were in sober fact under the control of malevolent spirit creatures, angelic beings living in a state of active rebellion against God and only deterred from their evil course by such restraints as God placed and enforced upon them.

The wider view of this matter is well known to students of the Old Testament. There has been at some remote past time a rebellion against God and righteousness by certain of the angelic creation, which rebellion was dramatically arrested by the Most High at the time of the Noachic Deluge. The story in Genesis 6, coupled with various New Testament allusions affords a sufficiently detailed picture of what happened. The angels concerned, already in a state of rebellion, "kept not their first estate, but left their own habitation" to use Jude's words, and after materialising into physical bodies lived a lawless life as men upon earth. The Flood came and thereafter they were deprived of the power thus to materialise again, but at the same time were excluded from the spiritual world which is the place of the Divine throne (see Jude 6, 1 Pet. 3. 19-20 and 2 Pet. 2. 4). The history of witchcraft and spiritism through the ages since, has been largely the history of these rebellious spirits endeavouring to break through the restraints that have bound them, and continue their evil ways.

Hence, these two men, like so many before and since, having at some time or other, willingly given themselves over to the influence of the evil spirits, found their brains so controlled by them that they no longer had any will-power or volition of their own. Outwardly they manifested all the characteristics of incurable and violent insanity; but the insanity was not the result of a physically diseased brain. It was due to the operation of many supernatural intelligences ‑ a 'legion' we are told in the accounts ‑ all working simultaneously on the one human organism.

This was the state of the crazed wretch who met Jesus as He walked up from the shore of the lake. The local inhabitants would be keeping their distance; the madman had been habitually manacled but such was his demoniac strength that he continually broke free from his fetters and did quite a lot of damage before he could be overpowered and restrained again. He appears at this time to have been free and the impression given is that he rushed upon Jesus immediately the latter had stepped ashore from the boat. Perhaps there was in the madman's dark mind some glimmering realisation that here was the means of deliverance from his fearful plight if only he could get near to the Man of Nazareth. But to speak of his own volition was evidently beyond his power. When his lips did move, the words were controlled by the evil influences that possessed his mind and they were words not of pleading but of resentment. "What have we to do with you, Jesus, Son of God? Are you come here to torment us before the time?"

Now that is a most important statement in Christian theology "before the time". What means this frank avowal, first of Jesus' Divinity and Messiahship at a time when his own friends and followers had not as yet realised the fact, and second of the fact that a future judgment awaited them but that the time had not yet come? 'Torment' in all three narratives is "basanizo", which means trial and testing and judgment as well as the execution of the consequent sentence. These evil angels, speaking through this crazed man's lips, admitted their knowledge that the Man before whom they stood was indeed the Son of God and tacitly admitted his authority over them. They admitted their realisation that judgment and sentence upon their evil course had yet to be passed but asserted that the time was not yet. In short, they accused Jesus of coming upon them for judgment before the time that had been pre-set in the Divine purposes. All of that implies that we are dealing here with definite superhuman intelligences who, despite their admitted evil, did possess some detailed knowledge of the Divine Plan.

The Apostle Paul had some such knowledge when, twenty years or so later, he told some of his disciples that, if faithful, they were destined to "judge angels" (1 Cor.6.3), He was thinking of the 'time' to which these referred in their question to Jesus, the Millennial "Day of Judgment" when not only evil amongst mankind but evil amongst the angelic creation is to be rooted out and all wilful evildoers, human or angelic, finally destroyed.

A significant expression in this narrative takes us back to very early times in human history. Two out of three accounts represent the evil spirits as using the expression "the Most High God" in referring to the Deity. "Jesus thou Son of the Most High God." It is significant because so far as men are concerned, this particular name for God dropped out of use several centuries before Christ. It seems to have been the earliest appellation by which men knew God, in its Hebrew form of "el elyon", being succeeded then by El Shaddai, "the Almighty", and later by the incommunicable name quite incorrectly transliterated into English by 'Jehovah' but meaning 'the Eternal'. These fallen angels, addressing Jesus, used the term that was current in the days that were before their restraining, the days before the Flood. It is significant that the angel who appeared to Mary at the Annunciation (Luke 1. 32-35) and those who sang to the shepherds (Luke 1. 76) used the same expression (Greek hupsistos, equal to the Hebrew el elyon).

So the demons, perceiving that Jesus intended to bring their domination of this unhappy man to an end, "besought him" according to Mark "that He would not send them away out of the country", but according to Luke "that He would not command them to go out into the deep". Be it noted there was no attempt at defiance or resistance. They recognised the authority of Jesus and would obey, but they endeavoured to get the best terms they could. In Mark, "country" is "choras", meaning one's own proper place or where one should rightfully be, hence, one's own country. In Luke, "deep" is "abussos", from which is derived the English word 'abyss', the same as the "bottomless pit" of Rev.20.1, into which the Devil is cast for the whole period of the Millennium. Neither Mark nor Luke were present at the time; all their information must have come from one or other of those disciples who were there. It may well be that both expressions were used; the accounts are quite likely to be abbreviated and Mark may have had his information from one, and Luke from another, of the witnesses.

By the "abyss" the demons may well have meant the same thing as Peter refers to in 2 Pet.2.4,"God spared not the angels that sinned but cast them down to 'tartarus', and delivered them into chains of darkness, to be reserved unto judgment". Tartarus in Greek mythology was the prison of the Titans, who rebelled against the gods and were overthrown and imprisoned forever in a place "as far below Hades as earth is below heaven" ‑ an apt description of the "bottomless pit" or "abyss". It would almost seem from these and other allusions in Scripture, that these "fallen angels" are constantly seeking to evade their restraints and sometimes partially succeeding. In this case it would appear as if Jesus acceded to their request not so to use his power to return them to "Tartarus" or the abyss, but definitely to command them no longer to obsess the man. So the "legion" of spirits "came out", and in the absence of any prohibition by Jesus ‑ with his permission ‑ they took possession of the nearest living creatures in view, a herd of swine which happened to be feeding in the vicinity.

Whether this is a unique case of demon obsession of brute beasts and just what such a thing involves we have no means of knowing. It can only be assumed that, as with the men, so with the beasts, the effect on the brain was similar to that of madness. The herd exhibited all the signs of sudden terror and panic and in a mad gallop they raced across the greensward, over a little cliff, and into the water, where they quickly drowned. Mark, with all his usual passion for descriptive detail, tells us there were about two thousand of them.

The question has often been asked; is such a proceeding in keeping with the known character of Jesus? Was it thus necessary to encompass the death of two thousand dumb creatures? In another place Jesus had said not even a sparrow can fall to the ground without the Father's knowledge. We may not intrude into the Saviour's motives for acting as He did, but we can assemble a few related facts.

How did the swine come to be there? The use of swine's flesh was forbidden to the Jews and even though the religious observance of many had become perfunctory their inherited antipathy to swine's flesh remained. The explanation is that the district around the sea of Galilee was largely cosmopolitan; five sizeable towns contained a considerable Greek and Roman population and there was a good demand for pork. Here in Gadara, certain not over scrupulous Jews were making a good living rearing pigs for market. The quick death by drowning of this particular herd only anticipated a much more painful death that would have been their fate a little later on. Viewed against that background, Jesus' act was one of mercy.

But the people of the district thought otherwise. They came to Jesus and they besought him to depart. They evidently feared He would do the same to more of their herds and they were more concerned over the preservation of their vested interests than the casting out of demons from the obsessed. It is an ironic comment on the hard heartedness of mankind that whereas at first they all went in fear of the madman who infested their cities they now went in fear of the One who had delivered them from that scourge. In their eyes the remedy was worse than the disease. The casting out of demons was one thing, and a very acceptable thing it was, and all honour to the stranger who had landed on their shores to do this thing. But when it came to touching their financial interests and causing them to lose trade and money the whole attitude changed. That was too heavy a price to pay, and so "the whole multitude… besought him to depart from them".

That part of the story is a parable indeed. There are plenty in this world today who would gladly be delivered from the bondage and oppression of sin, but when they learn what the obligation will be, they turn away. True it is that the saving power of God is free to all, but then that is not the whole of the story. God does not just forgive sin so that man can make a clean start and sin again. God created man in the first place to have definite obligations toward him and to assume definite responsibilities in and towards God's universe. No man will ever attain everlasting life without willingly taking upon himself those obligations and so fitting into the pattern of life which God has devised for him. So, after deliverance, there is a price to be paid, and even although the service of God is perfect freedom, it is still service and man must enter and remain in it.

The man who had been healed realised that. The story closes with the one-time demoniac, clothed and in his right mind, sitting at the feet of Jesus. He at any rate, having come in contact with the power of God which is unto salvation, was not going to lose touch with it again. Luke tells us (8. 38) that this man also besought Jesus. But it was not that he "besought him to depart from them". He "besought him that He might be with him". He wanted to give his life, for what it was worth, to Jesus. He wanted to be a disciple.

Jesus accepted him. It is true that the text says "but Jesus sent him away, saying, return to your own house, and show how great things God hath done for you", That does not mean that Jesus rejected his proffered service. He accepted it, and sent the man straight away to be a missionary to his own people. Obviously his preaching would be much more effective in a circle where his past history was known than in a strange environment where he was just another convert to Jesus of Nazareth.

There the story ends, as so many of these stories do end, on a missionary note. The man who is first sighted coming forth out of the dead world of the tombs, exceeding fierce so that none could approach him, naked and demented, is last seen going forth into the world of living men, childlike and peaceable, clothed, in his right mind, preaching the Gospel of the Kingdom of peace. Jesus has done that same thing for so many in every generation. "Come unto me, you that are weary and heavy laden, and I will give you rest". There is a price to pay, but "take my yoke upon you and learn of me. . for my yoke is easy and my burden is light, and you will find rest to your souls".