Exorcism?

[Matt Menge]

In reading Luke 11:24-26 there are some unexpected words from Jesus.
Apparently sometimes when a demon is exorcised from a person it later
returns to the same person, or even comes back with some demon
friends. This notwithstanding I have often found exorcisms to be kind
of a weak miracle anyways (assuming that a possessed person in the
Bible is somewhat similar to a mentally ill person of today). After
all, even the most far gone of mentally ill people can have brief
lapses of sanity. One might assume a lapse of sanity might take place
when being the focal center of a ritual. Yet demon exorcisms are
commonly referred to by many modern preachers as one of the most
amazing examples of Jesus's healing powers.

But my question is, why didn't Jesus simply forbid the unclean
spirit(s) to return to the person? There doesn't seem to be any
obvious reason why he couldn't do this. Is there any explanation? I
have seen some Catholic Bibles suggest he is referring (in the above
passage) to the 'exorcism of Israel' or something prophetic,
political, and symbolic. But even if this were the case, it would
seem difficult to rule out a literal reading as well. And the literal
reading is that exorcism just plain doesn't work very well.

Sincerely,

Matt

[l***@hotmail.com]

Post by Matt Menge
But my question is, why didn't Jesus simply forbid the unclean
spirit(s) to return to the person? =A0

The reference was to an unbeliever. I suggest that you read
such works as Kurt Koch, "Christian Counselling and
Occultism." He had many publications detailing his
extensive experience in this ministry.

Another author that I would recommend is C. Fred
Dickason. "Angels: Evil & Elect" is a book which
grew out of his class notes. More recently he wrote
"Demon Possession & the Christian: A New Perspective."
I think this one would answer many of your questions.

There is also, "Biblical Demonology" which would
address you questions on Luke. The parallel passage
is, of course, Mt. 12:22=9645. The clean house represents
the individual who has not filled himself with the Spirit
in belief. To exercise and unbeliever only leaves that
individual open to great oppression and possession.
C. Fred's would not counsel a non-believer. As for
those who professed faith in Christ, he required a
full medical exam prior to counsel. I don't know all
the parameters, but psychological examination was
also sometimes required prior to consultation.

Theologically there are many arguments against the
"born again" believer being capable of possession,
however, experience proves otherwise.

There is a great deal to learn in regards to this but
as always, I must note that this is not a something
to trivialize. It is most certainly a ministry that one
has unequivocally been called to. The danger is
not only to one's self, but to one's family.

[Matt Menge]

Post by l***@hotmail.com
There is a great deal to learn in regards to this but
as always, I must note that this is not a something
to trivialize. =A0

No, I won't. And yes, it was a serious question. If I occasionally
come on here with questions that seem skeptical, doubt is just part of
my make-up. I figure it is better to address them than let them
simmer. If I can figure something out on my own I will do that
instead.

Best Wishes,

Matt

[Steve Hayes]

Post by Matt Menge
In reading Luke 11:24-26 there are some unexpected words from Jesus.
Apparently sometimes when a demon is exorcised from a person it later
returns to the same person, or even comes back with some demon
friends.

Think of it in relation to a country.

Just say you manage to get Robert Mugabe out of power in Zimbabwe, who will
replace him? Unless the whole political system is overhauled, your likely to
get seven others worse than he is.

Think of Iraq and regime change -- Saddam Hussein was toppled, and seven
others worse than him came to take his place, and now the last state of Iraq
is worse than it was before.

Post by Matt Menge
This notwithstanding I have often found exorcisms to be kind
of a weak miracle anyways (assuming that a possessed person in the
Bible is somewhat similar to a mentally ill person of today). After
all, even the most far gone of mentally ill people can have brief
lapses of sanity. One might assume a lapse of sanity might take place
when being the focal center of a ritual. Yet demon exorcisms are
commonly referred to by many modern preachers as one of the most
amazing examples of Jesus's healing powers.

Demonisation is not the same thing as a loss of sanity, though they can be
related.

Post by Matt Menge
But my question is, why didn't Jesus simply forbid the unclean
spirit(s) to return to the person? There doesn't seem to be any
obvious reason why he couldn't do this. Is there any explanation? I
have seen some Catholic Bibles suggest he is referring (in the above
passage) to the 'exorcism of Israel' or something prophetic,
political, and symbolic. But even if this were the case, it would
seem difficult to rule out a literal reading as well. And the literal
reading is that exorcism just plain doesn't work very well.

See above.

It is not enough simply to throw out evil, it must be replaced by good.