Luke 11:14

BLIND AND DUMB DEMONIAC HEALED--CHARGE OF BEING IN LEAGUE WITH HELL, AND REPLY--DEMAND OF A SIGN, AND REPLY. (Luke 11:14-36)

dumb--blind also (Mat 12:22).

Jamieson, Fausset & Brown — Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (1871) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

Luk 11:14-23. And he was casting out a devil — See on Mat 9:32-34; and Mat 12:22-23. Some said, He casteth out devils through Beelzebub — These he answers, Luk 11:17. Others, to try whether it were so or not, sought a sign from heaven — These he reproves, in the 29th and following verses. Beelzebub signifies the lord of flies, a title which the heathen gave to Jupiter, whom they accounted the chief of their gods, and yet supposed him to be employed in driving away flies from their temples and sacrifices. The Philistines worshipped a deity under this name as the god of Ekron: from hence the Jews took the name, and applied it to the chief of the devils. He, knowing their thoughts, &c. — See this whole paragraph explained, on Mat 12:25-30. A house divided against a house — That is, one part of a family divided against, and contending with, an other part, falleth, cometh to inevitable ruin. If I cast out devils by the finger of God — That is, by a power manifestly divine. Perhaps the expression intimates further that it was done without any labour: no doubt the kingdom of God is come upon you — Unawares, unexpectedly; so the expression, εφθασεν εφ’ υμας, implies. When a strong man armed — Alluding to Satan, strong in himself, and armed with the pride, obstinacy, and security of him in whom he dwells.

Joseph Benson's Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1811–1818) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

§ 42. HEALING THE DEMONIAC AND THE BLASPHEMY OF THE HOLY SPIRIT, Luk_11:14-23; Mat_12:24-30; Mar_3:22-30.

Daniel D. Whedon (gen. ed.), Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1874–1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

CRITICAL NOTES

Luk_11:14. Casting out a devil.—There seems to be little doubt that this miracle is the same as that in Mat_12:22, as wrought apparently in Galilee. In St. Matthew’s Gospel there is, however, no precise mention of time or place. It is quite hopeless to attempt to fix the exact order in which the events occurred. Dumb.—And blind (Mat_12:22).

Luk_11:15. Some of them.—“Pharisees” (Mat_12:24), “scribes which came from Jerusalem” (Mar_3:22). Beelzebub.—The form of the name in Greek is Beelzebub; the original Hebrew word is Baal-zebub, the form of Baal worshipped at Ekron. The meaning of the latter name is Baal or Lord of the fly, a designation which has parallels in classical mythology. The meaning of the form of the name Beelzebub is either Lord of dung, so called in derision by the Jews, or Lord of the dwelling, as prince of the lower world (cf. Mat_10:25, “Master of the house”), or Lord of idols, and therefore, as here, “the chief of the devils.”

Luk_11:16. A sign from heaven.—In proof of His Messiahship. Perhaps a portent like those foretold by Joel (Luk_2:30-31).

Luk_11:17. Every kingdom.—The kingdom of evil as an organisation with a personal head may be torn by discords, but being wholly evil must be unanimous in its opposition to the kingdom of God. “An organisation which acts against itself, its own distinctive aims, must destroy itself.” The same reasoning is applied to the case of a house and of an individual person.

Luk_11:19. Your sons.—I.e., your disciples. The Pharisees countenanced cases of exorcism wrought by spells and incantations, and perhaps in some instances actual miracles of the kind were accomplished by faith in God and by invocation of the Divine Name. Christ by no means seems to deny the validity of all the cures. As matters stood, therefore, collusion with Satan was not the necessary explanation of casting out devils; and the holiness of Christ’s character, as well as the air of authority with which He wrought miracles, were additional reasons against such a dishonourable explanation of His mighty deeds.

Luk_11:20. The finger of God.—An allusion to Exo_8:19. St. Matthew has “the Spirit of God” (Luk_12:28), which is practically the same thing.

Luk_11:21. A strong man.—An illustration possibly taken from Isa_49:24. The strong man is Satan; He that overcomes him is Christ.

Luk_11:23. He that is not with Me.—There is no middle course between Christ and Satan.

Luk_11:24. Dry places.—Desert regions. According to Jewish ideas the special abode of demons. Seeking rest.—In misery when he is not tormenting a man.

Luk_11:25. Swept and garnished.—But empty, and inviting the re-occupation of the evil spirit.

Luk_11:26. Seven other.—The number suggests completeness—every form and variety of evil. Worse than the first.—Cf. Heb_6:4-6; Heb_10:26-29; 2Pe_2:20-21. “The parable was an allegory, not only of the awful peril of relapse after partial conversion, but also of the history of the Jews. The demon of idolatry had been expelled by the Exile, but had returned with the sevenfold virulence of letter-worship, formalism, exclusiveness, ambition, greed, hypocrisy, and hate; and on the testimony of Josephus himself, the Jews of that age were so bad that their destruction seemed an inevitable retribution” (Farrar).

Luk_11:27. A certain woman.—This incident is peculiar to St. Luke. The arousal of ignorant enthusiasm in the mind of a hearer, on these stern and authoritative words being spoken, is a very natural circumstance. Probably the woman caught sight of “His mother and His brethren” on the outskirts of the crowd, as St. Matthew speaks of their presence in connection with this discourse (see Mat_12:46-50). Of the company.—Rather, “out of the multitude” (R.V.)

Luk_11:29. Were gathered thick.—Rather, “were gathering together unto Him” (R.V.). Jonas the prophet.—Omit “the prophet,” taken probably from the parallel passage in St. Matthew.

Luk_11:30. A sign.—I.e., by his three days’ and three nights’ entombment in the fish (Jon_1:17).

Luk_11:31. The queen of the south.—1Ki_10:1-13. The Queen of Sheba; supposed from this passage in St. Luke to be Yemen in Arabia. A greater than Solomon.—Lit., “more than,’ “somewhat greater.” So, too, in the next verse.

Luk_11:32. They repented.—See Jon_3:5.

Luk_11:33. No man, etc.—The connection of Luk_11:33-36 with what precedes them is somewhat obscure. Jesus had been assailed by His enemies, both with the charge of performing mighty works by the aid of the powers of evil and with a clamour for a sign from heaven to prove the celestial source of His mission, and of the miraculous powers which seemed to authenticate it. Jesus answers in effect, “The sign for which you ask will be given. Jonas was a sign to the Ninevites, and so shall the Son of man be a sign to this generation.” The sign shall be open, public, capable of being read by all men. This is part of the very nature of a sign: no man, when he has lighted a candle, conceals it; that is no sign which is not seen. But in order that a sign may convince, the minds of those to whom it is given must be healthy and unbiassed. The light which is given to all can only profit those whose vision is healthy and natural; and so only those who are free from prejudice can appreciate the spiritual light” (Speaker’s Commentary). Lighted a candle.—The figure is one several times used by Christ in different connections. Cf. Mat_5:15; Luk_8:16; Mar_4:21. A secret place.—Rather, “a covered place,” “a cellar” (R.V.). A bushel.—Rather, “the bushel” (R.V.); so also “the stand” (R.V.), reference being made to the well-known utensils to be found in an ordinary Eastern house.

Luk_11:34. The light of the body.—Rather, “the lamp of the body” (R.V.). The eye here means the conscience. Single.—Not distorted by prejudice.

Luk_11:36. If thy whole body, etc.—“Only when thy body is wholly illumined, without having even an obscure corner left therein, will it become so bright and clear as if the full brilliancy of a bright lamp illumined thee; in other words, thou wilt be placed in a normal condition of light” (Van Oosterzee). A gradual growth in purity and holiness is depicted, which results in the removal of everything that hinders the reception of Divine truth, and in the subjection of every part of the being to that truth.

MAIN HOMILETICS OF THE PARAGRAPH.—Luk_11:14-36

Neutrality Impossible in Religion.—This miracle of casting out the devil from the dumb man served to bring the claims of Christ before those who witnessed it. They were, as it were, compelled to make up their mind to accept Him or to reject Him as their Saviour and Lord. He was evidently armed with supernatural power, and admission of this fact should naturally have led to an acceptance of His teaching. The kingdom of God had come, and men were called to choose what attitude towards it they would take up. Yet the minds of the people were undecided; some were merely astonished at the prodigy they had witnessed, others demanded a further sign of His Divine authority, while a third class boldly accused Him of collusion with Satan—of being aided by Satanic power in order to deceive the people more completely. Our Lord refuted this calumny by appealing to the teaching of common-sense, and by pointing out that all successful exorcism was performed in the. Divine name and by the power of God—the strong being overcome by One yet stronger. He then declared that those that were not with Him were against Him, or, in other words, that there is no neutrality possible in matters of religion.

I. Absence of positive attachment to Christ involves hostility to Him.—As head of the kingdom of God and in conflict with the powers of evil He represents a cause which concerns every living man. There is no alternative between accepting Him and rejecting Him—between being on the side of holiness and being opposed to it. Men may stand outside of other movements—political, social, artistic, literary, or philosophical—and assert that they are incapable of judging between the merits of contending parties, or that they are not interested in the questions debated. But in the strife between good and evil none can be neutral: to do evil and to acquiesce in evil done are treason against God. There is but a difference in degree of culpability between those who openly range themselves on the side of evil and those who refuse to take a place on the side of righteousness. Distaste for holiness is akin to positive love of sin. Christ here brings this home to the consciences of men. Love for God is inextricably involved with allegiance to the Son of God manifest in the flesh, and those who reject Him who was sent, reject Him by whom He was sent. The rejection may be accompanied with malignant feelings and with open outrage, but it is none the less rejection if the summons to follow Him is declined in the most courteous terms.

II. A pretended neutrality is only a prelude to a worse state.—The heart of man is like a house prepared for habitation; if it is not occupied by a spirit of holiness it will be seized upon by an evil spirit. That which is strongest will hold it. The appearance of neutrality between good and evil may for a time be kept up; there may be an absence of openly vicious tendencies in the life, as well as of faith in the Saviour and loyalty to His person. But this mere varnish of decency and respectability will not strengthen the character and enable it to stand against a renewed and more determined assault of evil. Forces are at work that will inevitably degrade the nature that is not consciously in communion with God and Christ, or that deliberately refuses the better part. “The last state of that man is worse than the first.”

SUGGESTIVE COMMENTS ON Luk_11:14-36

Luk_11:14. The Dumb Spirit.—It is thus still. While the devil has possession, the man is dumb. Only when the devil is cast out by the word of Jesus can the dumb speak. The indication of possession in this instance was the silence. There is a very true sense in which every man naturally, and without God, has in him a dumb spirit, and can only lose that spirit under the healing touch of Christ.

I. The curse of a bad temper.—The sullen silence, the overcast brow, the morose reserve, the speechless displeasure, priding itself on its tenacity and perseverance—is not this indeed an example of possession by a dumb spirit? At such times you are under Satanic influence.

II. The pre-occupied, self-engrossed life.—Excluding others from all confidence, having in reality no partner and no associate, giving out in social converse the merest superficialities of thought, and in domestic intercourse the veriest dregs and refuse of one’s being. Does the description sound unamiable? It is so. This is not the man for love, for love is not in him. But is the description exaggerated? Has it no counterpart! Alas! too often is it to be found. The lips may speak, but the soul speaks not: the devil that possesses is not only debasing, but dumb.

III. A more nearly universal experience.—The absence of spiritually helpful speech. The silence of most on the highest themes. A true Christian will use his gift of speech in the service of his Master. What name can we give to that use of speech which leaves out or refuses this high object? With most, alas! as to any value or blessing bestowed on others by our gift of speech, we might as well have been bereft of it. The spirit possessing us has been no better than a dumb spirit.

IV. It has been so towards men.—We have done no good with our speech. And how has it been towards God? Our text stands in immediate connection with a passage on prayer. Possession by the evil one makes us dumb Godward. We all, naturally, hang back from prayer. Is prayer a command? We disobey it. Is it a privilege? We scorn it. Any excuse is enough to put it aside. Books, amusements, are welcome to us if they come instead of, and form an excuse for, neglecting prayer. How can you doubt being under some malign influence if you are prevented from holding communion with your heavenly Father?

V. But the gospel of Jesus Christ comes to our help.—It humbles, that it may raise. The text which condemns, also promises. “When the devil was gone out, the dumb spake.” Has it not been found true a thousand times! The profane, the deceitful, the blasphemous, the frivolous, the impure, have learned to pray, and to praise. There is magic in the contact of Christ’s power. It transforms souls, and fulfils the words “When the devil was gone out, the dumb spake. And all the people gave praise to God.”—Vaughan.

“It was dumb.”—As if the miracle were done as a sign illustrative of this teaching to pray. For this is the real difficulty that many have as to prayer. They are dumb, at least to God, because an evil spirit has got possession of them, and another spirit is needed, that they may begin thus to speak. The very readiness to pray, although long dumb, may be the first sign of such a wonder, as the gift of the Holy Spirit, silently wrought. It is the very finger of God that casts out of men this dumb, prayerless spirit, and all others of the same evil class.—Maccoll.

“Dumb.”—This man, possessed by a devil, was both dumb and blind (Mat_12:22). Some of Christ’s cures were wrought

(1) on persons who appealed for help;

(2) on some, as the paralytic, who, with their own consent, were brought to Him;

(3) on some whom He chanced to meet (chap. Luk_7:12; Joh_5:5); and

(4), in this instance, on one brought to Him without his own consent.

Three Classes of Spectators.—Three classes of people behold this miracle:

1. Those who are for Christ, and marvel as they recognise the Divine power manifested by Him.

2. Those who are against Him, and ascribe the work to the powers of evil.

3. Those who are neutral, and ask a fresh sign, to convince their wavering minds.

Luk_11:14-16. A Terrible Accusation.—The cure having been immediately and completely successful, those present expressed their feelings. From the midst of this multitude, plunged in astonishment, some are heard to state a most terrible accusation. There was, they said, collusion between Jesus and Satan: Satan, in order to secure credit for Him, has given Him this power over the possessed. Others, more moderate in appearance, demand that Jesus, to free Himself from such a suspicion, should work a miracle of a kind different from these cures—a sign proceeding undeniably from heaven, the seat of Divine power; then it will be evident that His power is derived from a holy source.—Godet.

Luk_11:15. “But some of them said.”—It is as if the cast-out devil had just entered into these, to make them blind with a more wicked blindness, and, from being a dumb devil, had, for a change, become one speaking blasphemously.—Stier.

“He casteth out.”—It is well worthy of notice that the enemies of Christ do not deny the fact of the miracle having been wrought, though their hatred of Him led them to draw this injurious inference from the fact.

“Through Beelzebub.”—The imputation was that Satan had, as principal, entered into a compact with Jesus, as subordinate. He had entered into this compact, it was insinuated, for the purpose of putting down the inestimably beneficent influence of the Pharisees. Hence, it was alleged, all the strictures and criticisms of Jesus on the godly ways of the godly people! Power was given from beneath, power even to cast out demons, so that the people might be thoroughly deceived.—Morison.

Luk_11:16. “From heaven.”—Such as the manna from heaven given by Moses: the fire called down by Elijah. A sign was offered by Isaiah to Ahaz “either in the depth or in the height above” (Isa_7:11). The demand was akin to the third temptation in the wilderness.

Luk_11:17-26. The Accusation Refuted; the True Explanation Given.

I. Jesus refutes the blasphemous explanation of His cures (Luk_11:17-19).

II. He gives the true explanation of them (Luk_11:20-26).

Luk_11:18. “Divided against himself.”—The assertion of the Pharisees assumed that there was an organised kingdom of evil with a personal ruler. Our Lord uses this assumption as a terrible fact, which, however, proves the absurdity of the charge made against Himself. This organised kingdom of darkness, because it is only evil, is racked with discords and hatred, but against the kingdom of God it is a unit. The point of the argument here is, not that discords are fatal, which is not always the case, but that an organisation which acts against itself, its own distinctive aims, must destroy itself.—Popular Commentary.

“How shall his kingdom stand?”—Satan would, according to their supposition, have been exerting his power, not only to set this particular person free from his dominion, but to confirm the whole doctrines and precepts of Christ, which were all directly opposed to the kingdom of Satan, and calculated and destined to overthrow it. Such a supposition, therefore, was quite inconsistent with the craft and sagacity of the devil, and was altogether untenable.

Luk_11:20. “With the finger of God.”—An allusion to the ease and despatch with which His mighty works were done.

Luk_11:21-23. Entire Moral Independence is Impossible.—The palace is freed from the usurped dominion of the strong man, only to become the willing recipient of the Stronger than he. But subjection to Christ is no bondage; it is the very law of liberty.—Brown.

Luk_11:21-22. The Two Warriors.—This figure of the two warriors, one of whom takes up his stand fully armed on the threshold of his castle, ready to defend it, and the other comes suddenly and beats him down and divides the spoil among his followers, is taken from Isa_49:24-25; the prophet applies it to Jehovah delivering His people from the hands of the heathen oppressor. There is a truly epic majesty in the picture of the two adversaries, and there is no other saying of Jesus which gives such a striking impression of His consciousness of the sublimity of His position and the greatness of His work.—Godet.

Christ the Conqueror of Satan.—One of the most comprehensive of the Saviour’s titles. There are five steps by which our Lord advances to this victory over Satan.

I. When He vanquished him in Himself.—Through the body, through the mind, through the spirit—in the wilderness.

II. By His works.—Not only by His bodily healings, where He dispossessed Satan, but in those cases where the devil himself was present in the struggle. Those who were possessed by demons, and delivered from them, were the most outstanding monuments of Christ’s power and mercy.

III. By His death.—By submitting to death He redeemed us. His death availed as an atonement for the sins of men; it removed the obstacle of unforgiven and uncancelled guilt which was the very strength of Satan’s kingdom. Since then the kingdom of the devil has become contracted in its limits, and weakened in its dominion.

IV. By His life.—His heavenly life, into which His resurrection introduced Him, and to which the ascension sealed Him. As the living, enthroned Saviour, He imparts the life-giving Spirit. The Spirit alone can extirpate evil, and break the power of Satan in the individual life. This is the individual victory in the case of each separate redeemed soul.

V. By His future judgment.—In the consummation of all things, Satan and his angels will be adjudged to their final doom by the enthroned Saviour.—Vaughan.

Luk_11:22. The Strong Man.—The strong man has indeed been overcome, and his power to harm diminished. Yet ought we not therefore to be careless, for here the Conqueror Himself pronounces him to be strong.

Luk_11:23. Decision.—Our Lord has been exposing the folly and perverseness of those who would ascribe His power over evil to a compact with evil. He shows that there is a natural and an irreconcileable antagonism between evil and good, between the Saviour and the enemy of man. And He says that each particular person must take a side in that conflict. Whoever does not take the one side, as a matter of course takes the other. By not siding with Christ he sufficiently indicates that he sides against Him. It is a lesson of judgment, to guide us in our estimate of ourselves. It says: “Remember the necessity of decision between Christ and evil. Do not suppose that a merely negative state will suffice for salvation. If you are not with Christ He must look upon you as against Him; practically you are so, and in the final judgment such will be your doom.” Do the words sound harsh and overstrained? Severe though they may sound in connection with religion, I am sure that we feel the force of our Lord’s words in connection with human life.

I. With its business.—How worthless is half-hearted co-operation! We reject vague, vacillating support. It is almost more provoking than direct opposition. A man ought to know his own mind. To be destitute of the quality of decision and determination is to be useless.

II. With life’s friendships.—What is a friend worth who is distrustful and doubting? You expect loyalty towards yourself, even against appearances.

III. So must it be with Christ.—He looks for decision in aim and affection. He is worthy of it. And, having made up our minds about Him, we ought to be bold, resolute, unflinching in our avowal of love and loyalty. “He that is not with Me” is His own description of a half-Christian. Such an one never seeks His company, is never truly “with Him.”

V. But to be with Christ means more—it means to be on His side.—In the daily strife we have chosen to be on Christ’s side. We are in the struggle, and Christ is concerned in that struggle, interested in its progress and in its end. We cannot be neutrals. If we try to be so He speaks of us in this sad fashion: “He that is not with Me.”

VI. This does not necessarily imply active opposition to Christ.—The expression is negative. It implies the absence of interest, of cherishing faith and love, of claiming your position as a son, and living up to it. It implies that it has not been a great and constant object with you to gain heaven, and here to live as an expectant heir of heaven. And for practical purposes, and so far as the final personal issue is concerned, the faint-hearted, cowardly, treacherous soldier of Christ is rather an enemy to Him than a friend.—Vaughan.

None can be Neutral.—Every one must take part in the contest. Neutrality is impossible. To attempt to stand by and merely watch the work of Christ is at once to join the other side. There are two scales of the balance, and there is nothing but these two. Any weight withdrawn from the one scale, of necessity goes into the other. The declaration is one of the most solemn and far-reaching statements in the whole of the Bible.—Plummer.

“He that is not with Me.”—Our Lord has proved that He is the stronger, that He is the Messiah, working miracles by the spirit of God; the alternative is therefore presented in a new form: Christ or Satan. The Pharisees decided for Satan, and were consistent in their opposition. Sentimental admirers of Christ are simply inconsistent enemies.—Popular Commentary.

False Prudence.—A false Gamaliel-prudence thinks to save itself by saying, “If only we are not fighting against God,” and leaves the kingdom and work of God to take its course, without helping it by confession or by action, and thereby coming to the knowledge that it is from God. Let the indolent and undecided only not mock, not persecute, that is thought to count for something in their favour. But this is the middle party of whom Christ knows nothing, and of whom He makes no account; them He condemns and hands over to His enemies.—Stier.

Two Classes of Men.—There are three classes in every community: the friends of Christ, the foes of Christ, and the neutrals. The Bible, however, recognises but two classes: good and bad, sheep and goats, children and rebels.

I. What is it to be with Christ?—It is

(1) to have sympathy with the principles for which His kingdom exists, and

(2) to be identified with Him in carrrying out those principles. Many are for Him in proportion to those who are with Him.

II. The evils of neutrality.—

1. The neutral man hangs as a dead weight upon the Church. 2. He paralyses those who are in active service.

3. Indecision leads not unfrequently to an utter betrayal of Christ to the enemy.

Luk_11:24-26. The Perils of a Vacant Heart.—It will never do to wish for the absence of evil, and yet not to desire the presence of God.

I. We must never, in any work we try to do in God’s name, set before ourselves, or others, a negative aim.

II. We should realise the spiritual capacities of the human heart, that it may become the throne of God.

III. There is great need of patience to bring the life more and more perfectly in subjection to the love of God.—Paget.

The Parable of the Demon’s Return.—The parable grows out of the previous declaration, “He that is not with Me, is against Me.” It illustrates, in a very vivid way, the impossibility of deserting Satan without joining Christ, the impossibility of keeping aloof from Christ without falling into the power of Satan.

I. Christ is not contrasting the imperfect and uncertain methods of Jewish exorcists with His own.—This interpretation is read into the narrative. It is not found there. We do not need to concern ourselves with the literal truth of a parable such as this.

II. The expelled spirit is restless and ill at ease.—He can only be at rest where he can inflict harm. He still calls the man’s soul “my house.” He knows in what condition the house is likely to be. He speaks of it as a sure possession, and a return to the former abode shows that this expectation is correct.

III. The house of the soul is empty.—This is placed first as the main evil, and the chief cause of the ruinous end. There is a grievous defect in this condition. The man is well satisfied with himself. There is no humility, no fear of being enslaved a second time, and so, no earnest seeking for Divine support, no imploring of the Holy Spirit to come and dwell in the heart from which Satan for the moment has departed. The aversion to sin is merely temporary; there is no yearning after holiness. An attempt is made to occupy an untenable position, to renounce the devil without becoming the bond-servant of Jesus Christ.

IV. The return of the foul spirit.—As there is no protection against unworthy tenants, the evil spirit seeks some choice companions to come and share in the work of destruction, and they quickly make the ruin complete. Is there not written here very plainly the history of many a human soul? Though we renounce the devil, he will not renounce us. He watches his opportunity, and comes back with sevenfold subtlety and violence, and quickly has us more completely in his power than before. He comes this time to stay. It is, perhaps, not our old sin that at once begins again; but new forms of sin, less conspicuous, perhaps, but just as fatal, beset us—as the Jews, cured of the worship of idols, took to the worship of the letter of the law, and to covetousness, which is idolatry; or as a man, who has conquered intemperance in drink, falls a victim to pride and intemperance in language and conduct. The experience of thousands has proved that forces which are quite sufficient, even singly, to induce a man to abandon some sinful course, are unable, even when combined, to keep him in the right way. It is only when Christ, through His Holy Spirit, is made a welcome tenant that the liberated soul is secure. Safety from Satan’s bondage can be made sure in no other way than by abiding under the sway of Him whose service is perfect freedom.—Plummer.

Three Stages in the History of a Soul.

I. A change for the better.—A partial, temporary reformation.

II. It becomes again a prepared and inviting habitation for the unclean spirit.—Since it is empty, swept, and garnished.

III. The last and worst state.—Evil habits resumed having sevenfold power, and deliverance from them hopeless.

Three pictures.

I. A dilapidated dwelling-house.

II. The return of the tenant.

III. The last plight of the tenant worse than the first.

Three Lessons.—

1. Men can make new circumstances, but circumstances cannot make new men.

2. An increase of material and intellectual resource adds to the perils of humanity unless accompanied by a restoration of the soul which inherits and dominates the larger possession.

3. In proportion as life’s environment is enlarged and enriched, the urgency of spiritual regeneration is intensified and increased.—Berry.

Two Things Needed.—Two things are wanting to make the state of improvement or reformation permanent.

1. The unclean spirit has not been conquered and bound; he has only gone out, and can return when he will.

2. The house is not inhabited by a new and stronger power; the Spirit of God has not taken the place of the evil spirit now for a time away from his habitation.

Luk_11:24. “Dry places, seeking rest.”—He has a certain pleasure in all that is waste and desolate, in ruined paradises, and overthrown glory. How can a devil find rest, which the creature can find only in God? He has lost it for ever; he seeks it in vain, in all waste places, which otherwise please him; he seeks it especially in vain, there, where God the Lord of creation will have His rest, and where, therefore, the devil also, if he can force an entrance, finds himself relatively best—namely, in man.—Stier.

“Seeking rest.”—“Rest” and “quietness,” “sitting still,” “patient abiding,” is the portion of the good; but “the wicked are like the troubled sea when it cannot rest.” “There is no peace, saith my God, to the wicked.” The unclean spirit “goes to and fro in the earth, walks up and down in it,” restless and miserable. He seeketh rest, but findeth none.

Luk_11:26. “More wicked.”—Not more depraved, for they are all equally depraved, but worse in their power to destroy and in their consequent obstinacy (cf. Mar_9:29).

“Enter in and dwell there.”—Had that house been guarded by watchfulness and prayer, this sad result had been impossible. The goodman watching against the thief’s approach would not have suffered his house to be broken through; and the devil, resisted by the prayer of faith, would have fled away. The soul, aware of its weak points and those parts of its nature against which old sins might most easily direct their attacks, should have kept vigilant guard.—Burgon.

“Last state is worse.”

I. The specific application to the Jews.—The first possession, the early idolatrous tendency of the Jews; the going out, the result of the captivity in Babylon; the emptying, sweeping, and garnishing at their return (Pharisaism, a seeming reformation, but really an invitation to evil influences); the last state, the terrible and infatuated condition of the Jews after they had rejected Christ.

II. Application to the history of Christianity.—The reformation, the casting out of the evil spirit of idolatry, permitted by Rome—the house empty, swept, and garnished; swept and garnished by the decencies of civilisation and discoveries of secular knowledge, but empty of living and earnest faith. The re-possession, the final development of the man of sin.

III. An application to individuals.—External reformation, without permanent spiritual results, leading to a “worse state.”—Popular Commentary.

MAIN HOMILETICS OF THE PARAGRAPH.—Luk_11:27-36

The Secret Cause of Unbelief.—It is evident that the incident recorded in Luk_11:27-28, interrupted the discourse of Jesus, for after gently checking the unwise enthusiasm manifested by this hearer He resumed His teaching, and replied to those who had asked for a sign from heaven (Luk_11:16). We may take those who proffered this request as typical of persons who profess to be hindered by intellectual difficulties from accepting Christ, and who require these difficulties to be solved before they will take any further step. It is quite reasonable to regard them in this light, for they profess to be unconvinced by what they know of Him, and speak of attaining conviction if a sign which they can weigh and estimate is granted to them. Their minds are, they imply, undecided; further evidence of a kind fixed by them would turn the scale—produce and strengthen faith. In Christ’s reply He reveals to them that their unbelief springs from an evil condition of heart.

I. The revelation given in Christ is sufficient of itself to kindle and confirm faith.—To the candid and unprejudiced mind it brings abundant proof of its authenticity and authority. Christ Himself is God manifested in the flesh and is His own best evidence; His holy life, His teaching, His death of self-sacrifice, and His glorious resurrection, are the central facts of Christianity. And to those who are unaffected, by them, no more convincing revelation could be given. They display a Divine purpose to redeem mankind and exhibit Christ as the conqueror of sin and death. They do not, indeed, solve all the intellectual questions that the mind of man can raise, but are amply sufficient to satisfy the longings and aspirations of the human heart. To those who turn aside from this revelation of God in Christ nothing further will be given.

II. The necessary preparation for receiving Christ is a sense of need and a consciousness of sin.—To those who are self-satisfied and self-righteous the gospel is unmeaning. Christ here contrasts the conduct of the queen of the south, who was attracted by the wisdom of Solomon, and that of the Ninevites, who repented at the preaching of Jonah, with that of those to whom He now spoke. The latter were lacking in the sense of ignorance and sin which the former displayed, and were therefore indifferent to the presence of one greater than Solomon and than Jonah. Consciousness of need would draw them to seek the heavenly wisdom that was in Him; conviction of sinfulness would dispose them to obey His summons to repentance.

III. A darkened heart the secret of unbelief.—It was not that light had been withheld from those to whom He spoke, and that thus they were still in darkness of error and unbelief. The light was shining and being displayed in the most conspicuous manner. But for the apprehension of the light a healthy eye was needed. Those, therefore, of prejudiced and wicked hearts were wanting in the very organ that would enable them to see the truth as it is in Jesus. On the other hand, a mind and heart enlightened and free from those prejudices which darken and make blind the soul will direct all our faculties and inclinations, and all the actions of the life, aright, as a light does the man who is travelling at night.

SUGGESTIVE COMMENTS ON Luk_11:27-36

Luk_11:27-28.

I. The woman’s exclamation.—The blessedness of the Lord reflected on His mother.

II. Our Lord’s amendment on it.—It teaches us:

1. That the happiness of Mary herself consisted rather in her being a believer in Christ than in her being the mother of Christ.

2. That all true believers, as such, are more blessed than Christ’s mother, as such. 3. That those who are believers are more blessed on that account than on any other.—Foote.

Luk_11:27. “A certain woman.”—This woman truly represents devout Roman Catholics in their adoration of the virgin. The Ave Maria, as they use it, is but a repetition of her words, and their religious enthusiasm too often manifests the same unintelligent wonder which is here kindly reproved by our Lord.—Popular Commentary.

The Way of Obedience.—How many women have blessed the Holy Virgin and desired to be such a mother as she was? What hinders them? Christ has made for us a wide way to this happiness, and not only women, but men, may tread it—the way of obedience. This it is which makes such a mother, and not the throes of parturition.—Chrysostom.

Luk_11:28. Our Lord’s Reply.—Our Lord’s reply is indeed wonderful.

I. In reproof.—He corrects in her the unapprehensiveness of His word, which had caused her to go no further into the meaning of it than this ordinary eulogy imparted, and gives her an admonition how to profit better by it in future.

II. In humility.—He disclaims all this kind of admiration for His humanity, and says, not “My word,” but “the word of God,” which is, in fact, the same, but takes the view off from Him, in His abasement, unto the Father who sent Him.

III. In truth.—He does not deny the honour thereby pronounced on His mother, but beautifully turns it to its true side—viz., that which was given her long since (chap. Luk_1:45). Her blessedness consisted not so much in being His mother as in her lowly and faithful observance of the word of the Lord spoken to her (cf. chap. Luk_2:19; Luk_2:51). Nor, again, does He deny that to have borne Him was an honour—“yes, indeed, but.”

IV. In prophetic discernment.—It will be seen that this answer cuts at the root of all Mariolatry, and shows us in what the true honour of that holy woman consisted—in faith and obedience.—Alford.

Luk_11:29-32. “They seek a sign.”—The only sign from heaven that would be given would be no mere empty display of supernatural power; but in the course of the ministry of Christ an event would happen which would recall the history of Jonah. As the Hebrew prophet, after his deliverance from death, preached repentance to the Ninevites, so Christ, after resurrection, would proclaim salvation to the world. That it is the resurrection and not the preaching of Jonah that is the point of comparison is evident from the use of the future tense.

The mere presence of Christ should have secured credence for His teaching. Solomon did no miracles, neither was any prodigy wrought by Jonah at Nineveh. The wisdom of the one and the earnest preaching of the other were sufficient to attract and to persuade their contemporaries.

Luk_11:29. “Sign of Jonas.”—The history of the Old Testament presents no more striking example of a wonderful preservation from certain death than that of the prophet Jonah; nay, it is singular in its kind, inasmuch as the prophet, although, as it were, shut up in death, and buried, yet came forth again to life. Therefore is this history recorded as a similitude and type of the resurrection of Christ, as, in the sphere of the type, a resurrection of one really dead was not yet possible.—Stier.

Luk_11:31-32. “The queen of the south … the men of Nineveh.”—

1. Love of truth—manifested by the Queen of Sheba.

2. Repentance of sin and fear of the Divine judgment—manifested by the men of Nineveh. These contrast forcibly with the indifference and insensibility of those whom Christ now addressed.

“A greater than Solomon … than Jonas.”—

1. A greater person.

2. A more important message.

3. A profounder wisdom.

Luk_11:31. The Contrast.—

1. A heathen woman and the Jewish people.

2. “The utmost parts of the earth” and “here.”

3. Solomon and the Son of man.—Godet.

“The queen of the south.”—This incident is contrasted with the journey of Jonah. She came from the utmost parts of the earth—from the country that bounded the known world—to seek out the anointed of the Lord who was so much renowned, while Jonah went to the Ninevites to their own country.

Luk_11:32. Christ’s Power and Wisdom.—The Nineveh of this Jonah will be Rome, whose power will bow before the sign of the cross; and Greece will seek and find in this Solomon the true wisdom.—Stier.

Luk_11:33; Luk_11:36. “See the light.”—They wished a sign; a greater sign than Jonah is granted them, but to perceive it they must not (as they do) cover the light with a bushel, shut the eyes of their understanding.

On the one hand, by the resistance of the heart to Divine truth the soul gradually becomes darkened until it loses every trace of light. On the other hand, by receiving the truth into the heart the nature is gradually purified and enlightened, until it is transfigured and filled with a Divine glory, like that of Jesus on the Mount. The connection of this discourse with what precedes it is as follows: “I am not in collusion with Beelzebub; on the contrary, the kingdom of God has appeared among you. If you loved the truth, no startling miracle would be needed to convince you of this fact. Those whose vision is healthy see it at a glance; and their whole being will be enlightened and transformed by receiving the revelation I bring.”

The heavenly light fails of its purpose

(1) when it is set under a bushel;

(2) when it falls on blind or diseased eyes.

Luk_11:33. Lamps and Bushels.—The saying is a favourite and familiar one of our Lord’s, occurring four times in the Gospels.

I. A lesson as to the apparent obscurities of revelation, and our duty concerning them.—There are no gratuitously dark places in anything that God says to us. His revelation is absolutely clear. We may be sure of that if we consider the purpose for which He spoke at all. There are dark places, there are great gaps: but His own great word remains true, “I have never spoken in secret, in a dark place of the earth.” If there be, as there are, obscurities, there are none there that would have been better away. For the intention of all God’s hiding—which hiding is an integral part of His revealing—is not to conceal, but to reveal. It is good that there should be difficulties. He is not a wise teacher who makes things too easy. Patient attention will ever be rewarded. The desire to learn will not be frustrated.

II. The saying gives us a lesson as to Himself and our attitude to Him.—In the figure thus applied we have the thought that the earthly life of Jesus Christ necessarily implies a subsequent elevation from which He shines down on all the world. God lit that lamp, and it is not going to be quenched in the darkness of the grave. He is not going to stultify Himself by sending the light of the world, and then letting the endless shades of death muffle and obscure it. But, just as the conclusion of the process which is begun in the kindling of the light is setting it on high on the stand, that it may shine over all the chamber, so the resurrection and ascension of Jesus Christ, His exaltation to the supremacy from which He shall draw all men unto Him, is the necessary and, if I may so say, the logical result of the facts of His incarnation and death.

III. A lesson as to the duties of Christian men as lights in the world.—This metaphor frequently occurs in Scripture. The general teaching of such references is that Christian men, not so much by specific effort, nor by words, nor by definite proclamation, as by the raying out from them in life and conduct of a Christ-like spirit, are set for the illumination of the world. God’s act of lighting indicates His purpose of illumination. What are we Christians for? To go to heaven? To be ourselves forgiven? Certainly. But is that the only end? By no means. He gave you His Son that you may give the gospel of His Son to others, and you stultify His purpose in your salvation unless you become ministers of His grace, and manifesters of His light.—Maclaren.

Luk_11:34. “The light of the body is the eye.”—The eye gives light which it receives from without, and is not light itself. So the conscience lights the spirit by light from above.

It is plainly declared here that the truth revealed to man in the gospel is not something entirely foreign to his nature—something over against and outside of him—but akin to him, as the eye and the light are, as it were, made for one another. The same truth is taught in other parts of Scripture: the heavenly graft is akin to the tree in which it is inserted, or else it would not be assimilated to it (Jas_1:21); the leaven is not foreign to the meal in which it is hidden, or else it might as well be set in sand (Mat_13:33).

The Preacher's Complete Homiletical Commentary (gen. ed. Joseph S. Exell; Funk & Wagnalls, c. 1892) — public domain (pre-1929). A full-Bible homiletical/sermon-outline anthology covering 65 of 66 books (2 John is absent from the source module). Text from a community e-Sword module.

D. The Son of Man in His relation to hypocritical Enemies and Friends weak in Faith

Luk_11:14 to Luk_12:59

1. The Kingdom of Satan and the Kingdom of Christ (Luk_11:14-28)

(Parallel to Mat_12:22-30; Mat_12:43-45; Mar_3:22-30.)

14And he was casting out a devil [demon], and it was dumb. And it came to pass, when the devil [demon] was gone out, the dumb spake; and the people wondered 15But some of them said, He casteth out devils [the demons] through Beelzebub thechief of the devils [demons]. 16And others, tempting him, sought of him a sign from heaven. 17But he, knowing their thoughts, said unto them, Every kingdom divided against itself is brought to desolation; and a house divided against a house falleth [and house is precipitated against house6]. 18If Satan also be divided against himself, how shall his kingdom stand? because [for] ye say that I cast out devils [the demons] through Beelzebub. 19And if I by Beelzebub cast out devils [the demons], by whom do your sons cast them out? therefore shall they be your Judges 20 But if I with the finger of God cast out devils [the demons], no doubt the kingdom of God is come upon [unto] 21you. When a [the] strong man [one] armed keepeth his palace, his goods are in peace: 22But when a stronger than he shall come upon him, and overcome him, he taketh from him all his armour wherein he trusted, and divideth [distributeth] his spoils. 23He that is not with me is against me; and he that gathereth not with me scattereth. 24When the unclean spirit is gone out of a [the] man, he walketh through dry places, seeking rest; and finding none, he saith, I will return unto my house whence I came 25,out. And when he cometh, he findeth it swept and garnished. 26Then goeth he, and taketh to him seven other spirits more wicked than himself; and they enter in, and dwell there: and the last state of that man is [becomes] worse than the first.

27And it came to pass, as he spake these things, a certain woman of the company [multitude] lifted up her voice, and said unto him, Blessed is the womb that bare thee, and the paps which thou hast sucked. 28But he said, Yea, rather, blessed are they that hear the word of God, and keep it.

EXEGETICAL AND CRITICAL

Luk_11:14. And He was casting out.—This miracle is not to be parallelized with Mat_9:32-34 (Neander, Tischendorf), but with Mat_12:22 seq. The demon here driven out was, according to the more precise account of Matthew, also blind. As to the rest, we must carefully distinguish this sufferer from the ordinary infirm man who suffers under organic defects: of sight and hearing. He is by no means called demoniac because he was blind and deaf, but he was blind and deaf because he was in a high degree demoniac. “He was dumb through psychical influence. Undoubtedly this manifested itself as a kind of insanity, only this insanity is not to be considered as merely one of imagination, but as the consequence of the real work of hostile potencies. Its overcoming through the light and might of the Redeemer restores again the normal psychical and physical relation, in the sufferer.” Olshausen.

And the people wondered.—According to the parallel passage in Matthew, they are even on the point of publicly proclaiming Jesus as the Messiah. It is this very culmination of enthusiasm which awakened the strongest reaction of the Pharisees, who now declare our Lord not the Elect of God, but the instrument of Satan. “Ubi ad extremum cœcitatis venit impietas, nullum est tam manifestum Dei opus, quod non pervertat.” Calvin.

Luk_11:15. Through Beelzebub or Beelzebul.—The name Beelzebub signifies properly: Fly-god, 2Ki_1:2-3; 2Ki_1:16; Beelzebul signifies: god of dung. Sec Lightfoot, ad loc. That by this name another spirit is signified than the one that in other places is called Satan, or the head of the fallen angels, is without proof. Except in the gospels, Beelzebul appears nowhere as a name of the devil. As to the rest, not Beelzebub but Beelzebul appears to be the more correct reading.

Luk_11:17. And house is precipitated against house.—Graphic representation of the desolation of a city divided within itself, in which the one falling house necessarily draws down the other with it in its fatal fall. It is quite as arbitrary to take οἶκος here in the sense of family (Bornemann) as to understand here merely a falling of the separated house ἐφ̓ ἐαυτόν (Paulus, Quesnel, De Wette).

Luk_11:18. If Satan also.—The Saviour places Himself entirely on the position of His opponents. If He actually cast out the demons through their Chief, then it would follow that Satan was now busy in destroying his own work. Every kingdom, every town, every family stands in itself a complete whole; so soon as it breaks this unity, it breaks up with its own hand the foundation of its independent existence. So was also the kingdom of darkness a whole, which had risen against the kingdom of truth and of light. Satan could not, therefore, possibly drive out evil spirits without doing injury to his own realm. Perhaps the Pharisees might here have made the objection that Satan, for the accomplishment of a higher purpose, might admit a lesser hurt, and might drive out one of his satellites in like manner as Caiaphas (Joh_11:50) wished to have one man die that the whole people might perish not. As they, however, in this passage, betray no acquaintance with these higher tactics of the kingdom of darkness, it was not necessary for our Lord to remove this objection or anticipate it. Respecting this whole polemics against the blasphemy of the Pharisees, comp. Neander, ad loc.

Luk_11:19. By whom do your sons cast them out?—To the argumentum ex absurdo, the Saviour adds here an argument e concessis. By the sons of the Pharisees we have doubtless to understand none other than their spiritual sons, their disciples, the exorcists. Comp. Act_19:13. From the lack of adequate information respecting these, it is difficult to form a perfectly correct judgment respecting the driving out of devils by the disciples of the Pharisees. Without doubt charlatanism was connected therewith, and many a healing would be found to be only temporary and apparent, although they must, nevertheless, more than once have succeeded, by adjuration in the name of the Lord, in expelling a condition of possession that would not yield to other means. See the very remarkable passages of Irenæus and Tertullian, which Grotius, ad loc., cites. And why might not individual better-minded Pharisees accomplish such an act in faith and the Spirit of God, and see their weak endeavors crowned with heavenly blessing?

Luk_11:20. By the finger of God.—According to Matthew, ἐν πνεύμ. Θεοῦ, comp. Exo_8:19.

Luk_11:21. When the strong one.—Our Lord now passes over to a third counter-argument—this time of an entirely empirical nature. He first gives us to see in what light He views the prince of this world, whom the Pharisees had here so unbeseemingly mentioned, and the opposing of whom they regarded as a comparatively unimportant matter. He was a strong man who, well accoutred, relied upon his equipment and his secure rocky castle. Whoever can fall upon, bind, and despoil such an one, must not stand below but above him, and be stronger than he. How could the victor stand in a covenant of peace and friendship with the vanquished, and how would it be possible to overmaster the Strong One, except only ἐν δακτύλῳ Θεοῦ? Comp. Isa_49:24-25. With right Bengel: “Gloriosior victoria Christi, postquam vicit Satanam tot sœculis grassatum et confisum.” If any one thinks that he is obliged to explain all the particular features of the figurative language, he can, with Stier, by the house of the strong man = Satan, understand the world; by σκευή understand men, whom he uses as his instruments, after he has previously robbed them themselves, and in the preceding blind man see a concealed allusion to the death of Christ, and His descent into hell. But it is more natural to have regard here simply to the tertium comparationis, and to stop with the chief thought: Only the stronger can overcome the strong.

Luk_11:23. He that is not with Me.—Respecting the connection of this saying with an apparently opposite declaration, see before on Luk_9:50. The discourse advances regularly: after the triple refutation of the blasphemers, follows now a word of warning. It is this time addressed especially to such as on the one hand seized with astonishment at the miracle, on the other hand struck by the blasphemous allegation of the Pharisees, did not know what they should think of Jesus, and were secretly inclined, at least for the moment, to remain neutral in respect to the two parties. These He gives to understand that in the case of so intense a conflict of principles such a neutrality was impossible, and at bottom was no better than open enmity. It was not sufficient that they did not join in with the blasphemy of the Pharisees; they must decidedly take a stand. The so-called juste milieu between friendship and enmity could not possibly be longer maintained; indifference would of itself be injury. But how much more worthy still of punishment were those who openly opposed themselves to Him! For them is meant the saying that now follows.

Luk_11:24. When the unclean spirit.—Luke gives this parabolic discourse before, Matthew, on the contrary, after the discourse of Jesus concerning the sign of the prophet Jonas. Comp. Mat_12:43-45. Apparently this latter arrangement is to be taken as the original. Luke moreover again places what is similar together, and gives this declaration as early as this because it belongs to the sphere of demonology, with which the preceding accusation and vindication also stood in relation, and perhaps for this cause also omits the words with which, according to Matthew, Luk_11:45, the Saviour concluded the whole address: “Even so shall it be also unto this wicked generation.” The sense and the intention of the imagery here is moreover, in and of itself not hard to understand. Not He was possessed or in covenant with Beelzebub, as His enemies blasphemously alleged, but Israel itself, which stood under the influence of its blind leaders, was now the possessed party. A demon had been driven out after the Babylonian captivity, the demon, of idolatry: but that the unhappy nation was now in so much better case, was by no means true; as a sevenfold worse scourge had blasting Pharisaism taken the place of the first demon. No wonder! his former house he, the demon, finds empty, σχολά ζοντα (Matthew). Forsaken indeed by him, it is yet by no means inhabited by a better,—by the Holy Spirit. He finds therefore abundant room for return; finds the house as if in festal adornment already prepared for him, as it were demoniacally tricked out by the ruling spirit of lies. He now takes seven other spirits with him worse than he, that is, in not a moral respect, for the Scripture does not teach us to know any degrees of demoniacal wickedness, but worse, inasmuch as they can accomplish yet more than he. With these he takes possession of his former dwelling-place, so that the temporary redemption of the poor possessed is followed by a sevenfold greater misery. “Reperil domum vacantem: eos procul dubio designat Christus, qui vacui Dei spiritu ad recipiendum diabolum parati sunt, nam fideles, in quibus solide habitat Spiritus Dei, undique muniti sunt, ne qua rima Satanœ pateat.” Calvin.

How shaming this representation was for the Pharisees, strikes the eye quite as quickly as in what a striking manner it was fulfilled, in the continually deeper fall of this whole generation. At the same time, however, it must not be overlooked that this whole instruction contained a weighty intimation for the man who had just been healed by the Saviour (Luk_11:14). It was to remind him of this truth, that it did not suffice for this instant to be redeemed from the evil spirit, if his heart was not at once united in sincerity with Jesus, and if he did not by that alone remain in security against renewed demoniacal influence; nay, for the whole multitude the portraiture of a man was instructive, who, after he had been, in the first instance, purified from sin, gives himself again into its service, and now sinks deeper than ever before. Nor does it indeed admit of any doubt that this word found an echo in the consciences of many. A trace we find in the enthusiasm which it awakened, according to Luke’s account alone, in one of the female hearers.

Luk_11:27. A certain woman of the multitude.—That it was a mother (according to tradition, Marcella, a maid-servant of Martha) appears from the nature of her felicitation. Her enthusiasm is by no means incomprehensible after such a severe discourse (Strauss), for without doubt she admired more the how than the what of the words of the Saviour. “The whole anecdote betrays a fresh and living remembrance, which appears to have inserted it on the very spot where it occurred.” Schleiermacher. The unnamed woman listened to the words as only a mother can listen who, perhaps herself childless, or it may be unhappy in her children, in silence envies Mary. Her words form a striking contrast with those which the Saviour Himself, on the way to the cross, utters over the daughters of Jerusalem, Luk_23:28-29. He does not gainsay her utterance, but He rectifies it (μενοῦνγε, immo vero, as in Rom_9:20; Rom_10:18).

“Very true, blessed,” &c. An intimation for the woman not to let herself be borne along too much by transient impressions, but rather to hear still farther; an eulogy of Mary, whom He already perhaps discovered among the throng (comp. Luk_2:19-51); a transition to further instruction of the people, which however was now interrupted by the intelligence that His mother and His brethren were calling Him. Comp. Mat_12:45-46; Luk_8:19-21. “It may not be impossible that even during Jesus’ discourse in vindication of Himself, the rumor of the arrival of His relatives had made its way, and had given this woman occasion for the exclamation which she made, but it is more probable that Jesus addressed two separate answers, one to the woman, the other to those who gave Him notice of the arrival of His mother, because Luke distinguishes altogether too definitely the two utterances from each other for us to suppose them to have been one. Therefore, we shall be able to conclude that the actual information of His mother’s arrival did not itself reach Jesus until after this exclamation of the woman, and that it then gave Him occasion to that saying respecting His disciples.” Lichtenstein.

DOCTRINAL AND ETHICAL

1. Not unjustly has there often been found in this whole discourse of our Lord one of the strongest proofs of the objective truth of the New Testament Satanology. How much of its force does the whole argument of this discourse lose if we should assume that our Lord here accommodated Himself to a popular belief, above which He Himself was infinitely elevated! If it is not true that He cast out actual demons and that by the Spirit of God, then the conclusion derived from it that the kingdom of God therefore had come to them, is in this passage an assertion without proof. That the Saviour, in the form of His representation, attaches Himself to the prevailing ideas, especially in Luk_11:25-26, must be conceded; but He would never have permitted Himself such an accommodation had He not, in the substance of these conceptions, recognized the elements of higher truth. There exists a remarkable contrast between His portrayal of the Strong man who keeps his palace and can only be overcome by a stronger one, and the slight importance which many rationalistic theologians attribute to the locus de Diabolo.

2. The energetic manner in which the Saviour on this occasion insists upon a decided position, for or against Him, proves sufficiently how intensely the opposition of parties had then increased; but at the same time this declaration gives indirectly a powerful testimony to the entirely unique value of His person and His work, towards which it is impossible permanently to maintain a strict neutrality, and which lay claim to so undivided an interest, that indifference is itself a kind of covert enmity.

3. The parable of an evil spirit who returns with seven others, was strikingly fulfilled, first upon the Jewish people, not only in the days of our Lord, but also in the apostolic age. The first impression which was made upon some, after the death of the Saviour, passes away again, and shortly before the destruction of Jerusalem, it may be especially said that the nation was possessed not only by seven, but by seventy times seven devils. Moreover, this phenomenon recurs perpetually in the Christian church, when, after a time of commencing growth, a period of mournful retrogression, and when, after short awakening, a time of spiritual stiffening into dead forms, begins. So was it when, after the Reformation, the letter-worship of ecclesiastical orthodoxy established itself; so does it now perhaps threaten to be in some regions after that religious awakening of the first half of this century has cooled off; and, finally, there is here portrayed the image of every one who has made the first step on the way to conversion, but afterwards has fallen from this height into the most unhappy depth (2Ti_4:10; Heb_6:4-6; 2Pe_2:20-22). How far this remains possible even after genuine conversion, is a question which cannot here be answered. In no case can one, in the dwelling out of which only one demon had been driven, and which is only empty, swept, and garnished, recognize the image of one truly regenerate.

4. The woman that lifts up her voice to bless Jesus, is the prototype of all those who have honored the mother of the Saviour more than they have her Son, and have incurred the guilt of Mariolatry. If the Saviour does not favor this honoring of His mother, even here, where it moves within modest bounds, what judgment will He then pass upon the new dogma of Pio Nono, upon which an entirely new Mariology is built?

HOMILETICAL AND PRACTICAL

The threefold temper towards the miracle-working Saviour: 1. Enthusiasm and its right; 2. hatred and its blindness; 3. neutrality and its impossibility.—The Son of God was manifested that He might destroy the works of the devil, 1Jn_3:8.—He hath done all things well: the dumb speaking, Mar_7:37.—No sign great enough to overcome the repugnance of unbelief.—The might of Satan a fearful, well-ordered, but yet vincible might.—The enemies of the Lord condemned, 1. By their conscience; 2. by those holding their own views; 3. by the Saviour.—Satan’s defeat a sign that the kingdom of God has come near.—The strife of the Strong with the Stronger: 1. The Strong One, a. his palace, b. his booty, c. his false rest; 2. The Stronger, a. His courageous assault, b. His complete triumph, c. His brilliant crown.—Neutrality in the Christian sphere no virtue, but a chimera.—The Saviour would rather have to do with open foes than with half-friends.—Whoever begins to stand apparently neutral towards truth becomes, for the most part, at last an opposer of the same.—The dangerousness of half-conversion.—Not easily does the Evil One give up his rights over the heart which he has for a while had dominion over.—The Spirit of Evil finds nowhere abiding rest.—What matters it that one is in a measure free from the Evil Spirit, if he is not filled with the Holy Spirit?—The wretched reëntrance upon the hardly forsaken way of sin: 1. Undoubtedly possible, 2. in the last degree ruinous.—Hypocrisy the worst kind of possession.—All the seven deadly sins come up at once in the heart that is sold under sin.—“It had been better for them not to have known the way of righteousness,” &c., 2Pe_2:22.—The female mind more receptive than many a masculine one of the greatness of the Saviour.—The first Mary-worship.—The woman that blesses Jesus’ mother the type of superficial religious feeling: 1. Nature of this feeling, a. it is easily aroused, b. promptly revealed, c. soon evaporated; 2. value of the same, a. the Saviour does not disapprove it wholly, b. still less does He approve it unconditionally, c. He will have it pass over to something better—the hearing and keeping of His word.—Blessed are they that hear the word of God and keep it. Their blessedness has, 1. A higher character; 2. a firmer ground; 3. a longer duration than any other.

Starke:—Hedinger:—The mockers blaspheme God’s work; they that are better doubt.—Brentius:—It is the way of perverse people to count devils’ works for God’s works, and God’s works for devils’ works.—Christ is also Judge of the word and the thoughts. Comp. Psa_139:1-2.—It is undoubtedly permitted to defend ourselves against all those who blaspheme our function, which we discharge to God’s honor.—Here on earth even children are often the judges of their parents, 1Sa_19:5.—Nothing but the finger of God—no human power—is capable of driving Satan out of the heart.—Christ and Belial agree not together.—Quesnel:—The converted sinner is a palace which the devil has lost, but of which he knows all the weak quarters and entrances, and where he often even yet has secret confederates. [Diabolonians in Mansoul.]—With children of Satan it fares as with their wicked father, Isa_57:20-21.—All presumptuous sins are garnishings of the heart for the habitation of many devils.—Zeisius:—Spiritual relationship with Christ is more excellent than all natural connection of blood.—Brentius:—True Christianity consists not in word but in deed and in truth, 1Co_4:20.

Starke:—One must be free if he will make others free.—Moral relapses risk the soul’s salvation.—Massillon:—Sur l’inconstance dans les voics du salut, sermon sur Luk_11:26, pour le troisième dimanche de la carême.—Marheineke:—How ingenious the human heart is when the question is of closing itself against the impressions of manifest truth!—Ulber:—The many enemies of Jesus, who yet is all men’s Friend.—Fuchs:—Enmity against Christ: 1. It testifies of unthankfulness; 2. betrays folly; 3. prepares wretchedness.—Ahlfeld:—How standest thou with reference to Christ? 1. Art thou His enemy? 2. Art thou indifferent? 3. Makest thou half work? 4. Believest thou on Him?—Palmer:—The kingdom of the world and the kingdom of Christ: 1. Nature; 2. relation of these two kingdoms.—Von Gerlach:—How Christ overcomes the kingdom of the devil, 1. Without us; 2. in us.—Rautenberg:—The reproach of Christ our honor. A reproach: 1. For us; 2. from us; 3. upon us.—Wankel:—The fearful power of the Evil One: 1. Fearful by its unnoticed commencement; 2. rapid progress; 3. wretched issue.—Alt:—“Who is not with Me,” &c.: 1. Who does not believe with Me, he speaks against Me; 2. who does not walk with Me, he strives against Me; 3. who does not work with Me, he labors against Me; 4. who does not combat and sacrifice with Me, he betrays Me.

Footnotes:

[6][Luk_11:17.—Οῖ̓κος ἐπὶ οἶκον πίπτει. This appears to be a continuation of the figure. When a kingdom comes to ruin everything in it shares that ruin, and house is dashed against house. Οῖ̓κος ἐπὶ οἶκον may, indeed, be taken as a pregnant expression for οἶκος ὤν ἐπὶ οῖ̓κον. But, as Bleek remarks, in this case, instead of ἐπὶ οἶκον we should at least expect ἐφ̓ ἑαυτόν. It is better, therefore, with the Vulgate and various distinguished critics, to take it as a variation of the idea in Matthew and Mark, rather than as an exact equivalent of it.—C. C. S.]

Lange's Commentary on the Holy Scriptures (Critical, Doctrinal, and Homiletical), ed. John Peter Lange, English translation edited by Philip Schaff (1864–1880) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

THE UNPARDONABLE SIN (BLASPHEMY AGAINST THE HOLY GHOST)

Mar 3:20-30; Mat 12:22-37; & Luk 11:14-23. Mark: “And they come into the house; and again a multitude comes together, so that they are not able even to eat bread. And those who were along with Him came out to arrest Him; for they continued to say, That He is beside Himself.” Their common charge against Jesus was, that He is beside Himself; i.e., gone crazy, that He has run mad, and that He has a demon. Look out! If you walk in His footprints, do not be jostled if they speak of you in a similar manner. Matthew: “Then a demonized man, blind and dumb, was brought to Him, and He healed him, so that the blind and dumb spake and saw. And all the multitudes were astonished? and continued to say, Is not this the Son of David?” Mark: “The scribes, having come down from Jerusalem, were saying, He has Beelzebul, and that through the prince of the demons, He casteth out demons; and calling them to Him, He spake to them in parables, How is Satan able to cast out Satan? If a kingdom is divided against itself, how is that kingdom able to stand? And if it is divided against itself, that house is not able to stand; and if Satan has risen up against himself, and is divided, he is not able to stand, but has an end.” Beelzebub, E.V., is the name of a heathen god, but Beelzebul is simply another name for the devil, as it here occurs in the original. The scribes at Jerusalem had laid all their wits under contribution, and settled down on a theory which they thought would explain all the demoniacal ejectment which Jesus was doing in Galilee; i.e., that He had entered into a collusion with the devil, who is commander-in-chief of these evil spirits, to cast them out. They thought their theory would bear criticism, as, of course, Beelzebul, the prince of devils, had power over all these demons which Jesus was casting out. Do you not see the utter imperturbability of Jesus amid these vile, false accusations? He simply proceeds to answer their argument and expose their sophistry from a logical standpoint, showing up the utter untenability of their exegesis, as in that case, Satan would be divided against himself, and would destroy and utterly break down his own kingdom. Are there not endless division, discord, and disharmony in the kingdom of Satan? Of course there is, hell itself being the very pandemonium of conflict, rage, and all conceivable dissension, animosity, perturbation, variance, and torment. But the point in all this is, that Satan’s kingdom, both in earth and hell, is a single unit of evil, there being no admixture of good, but evil, with all its endless diversifications. And, pursuant to the Savior’s argument, if the kingdom of Satan had a mixture of good and evil, those elements, mutually antagonizing each other, would ultimate in the annihilation of his kingdom. There is no such a mixture in this world, as here we have the two kingdoms at war with each other, and destined, in the case of every individual, the one or the other, to triumph. Hence you will find the argument of our Savior in this case perfectly tenable from the standpoint of fact and logic. Matthew: “If I cast out demons through Beelzebul, through whom do your sons cast them out? Therefore they shall be your judges.” We see from this Scripture that the Jews were accustomed to cast out demons. How was that? Do you not know that the Jews, from the days of Abraham, were the chosen people of God? How do we cast out demons? We do it by invoking the mercy and power of God on them to cast out the demons and save their souls; e.g., when we gather around an altar of penitence. In a similar manner did the godly Hebrews cast out the demons by invoking the God of Israel. “And if, by the Spirit of God, I cast out demons, then has the kingdom of God come nigh unto you.” Well said; because none but God can cast out demons. The kingdom of God is the Divine government, in which His power and authority are exercised. Therefore, all of this demoniacal ejectment demonstrates the presence and power of God’s kingdom, involving the logical sequence that the King is present — the very fact which they were so slow to apprehend. Luke: “When the strong man armed may keep his palace, his goods are in peace; but when the one stronger than he having come, may conquer him, he taketh away his panoply in which he trusted, and spoileth his goods. He who is not with Me, is against Me; and he that gathereth not with Me, scattereth abroad.” This world is Satan’s palace, and he is the strong man. So long as he occupies his palace, his goods, which are human souls, are secure in his possession. Jesus is the Stronger Man, who is going to conquer the devil, when He comes in His glory, and take this world out of his hands; i.e., “spoil” it, which does not mean to destroy it; but this is a military phrase, and means to take it as spoils are captured and appropriated by a conquering army. So our Savior, the Stronger Man, in the great wars of Armageddon, is going to conquer Satan, the strong man, and take this world out of his hands; i.e., “spoil” all of his goods, leaving him bankrupt, and locked up in hell. (Rev 20:3.) The Bible is unlike any other book in the wonderful copiousness of its meaning. While the above paragraph is thus expounded, it has another exegesis, equally true and pertinent. While Satan is the “strong man,” his palace is the human heart, and his panoply, in which he trusts, the evil habits into which he leads his miserable votaries. Jesus, the Stronger Man, conquers the devil in regeneration, taking away the evil habits of the converted soul, in which Satan trusted to hold him fast. Then Jesus goes on, sanctifies that soul, “spoiling” the devil of all his goods, as in sanctification He takes the soul completely out of the hands of the devil. We see here, in this last verse, that no one can stand neutral in this terrible conflict between the strong man and the Stronger Man, but every one is forced to take sides, either with Jesus or the devil, as neutrality in this case is downright conservatism to Satan and rebellion against God. Matthew: “Therefore, I say unto you, All sin and blasphemy shall be forgiven unto the people, but the blasphemy of the Spirit shall not be forgiven unto the people. Whosoever shall speak a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven unto him; but whosoever may speak against the Holy Ghost, it shall not be forgiven him, either in this age or in that which is to come.” While there is but one God, He is manifested in Three Persons, Father, Son, and Spirit, the latter being the Executive of the Trinity. While the personal Father sits upon the throne of the universe, administering the government of the boundless Celestial Empire, the Son incumbers the Mediatorial Throne at His Right Hand, administering the boundless resources of redeeming grace to all the people in this world, and even the earth itself. Both the Father and the Son send forth the Holy Ghost, the Third Person of the Trinity, into this world, to shed light on every human being, convict every sinner, convert every mourner, sanctify every believer, and glorify every disembodied saint, and thus prepare this whole world for heaven. He is the Successor of our ascended and glorified Savior in the execution of the redemptive scheme on the earth. (Joh 16:7.) Hence you see that the Holy Ghost is the Divine Person of the Trinity who deals with human souls, administering the love of the Father and the grace of the Son, saving and sanctifying all who will let Him. There is a great eleemosynary institution for the relief of all beggars, administered by three officers, A., B., and C. A. has his office in London, England; B., in New York, America; and C., is present on the spot with every dying beggar, and ready to dispense the needed alms. Now you see these poor victims of decrepitude and misery must receive the benefits of this philanthropic institution at C.’s hands, as they can never reach A. at London or B. at New York. Here is the dying sinner. The Holy Ghost is with him in his dismal hovel or his gilded palace, ready to dispense to him the infinite benefactions of the loving Father and the dying Son. Suppose he unfortunately reject or grieve Him away, he is at the end of his resources, and must eternally perish. If he will receive the Holy Ghost in conviction, regeneration, and sanctification, He will administer to him all the blessings of the Father and the Son. Blasphemy means contempt. Therefore the ultimate neglect and contemptuous rejection of the Holy Ghost, consummates the sin against Him, which is unpardonable, either in the present age or in that which is to come; i.e., millennial age. Though some very stoutly deny the succession of the gospel age by another, we must remember that the Word of the Lord is the end of all controversy.

Not only this passage, but Heb 6:5, and others, speak positively of the coming age. You now see clearly in what the sin against the Holy Ghost, which is unpardonable, consists. It is clearly revealed and expounded by the Savior in this chapter. It is the imputation of the miracles wrought by the Savior, through the Holy Ghost, to Beelzebul; i.e., the devil. In this way the scribes and Pharisees, and others who followed their influence, committed the sin against the Holy Ghost. A simple analysis of this problem will thoroughly elucidate it. If you impute the work of the Holy Ghost to the devil, your doom is sealed, as it is impossible to convince you. Suppose God literally inundates you with evidence, He must give it all by His Spirit, and you will turn it over to the devil as fast as it comes, and see nothing but the devil in it all. Consequently, you are unconvincible. In this way the antediluvian world was ruined, having sunk so deep in the black darkness of sin, they imputed all the efforts of the Holy Ghost to convict and save them to Satanic influence, thus crossing the dead-line and rejecting God. In a similar manner the Jews, as we see here, imputed the miracles of Jesus to the devil, thus committing the unpardonable sin, rejecting the Son, and sealing their hopeless doom, to the awful destruction which soon overtook them in the Roman wars, as the antediluvians had been destroyed by the flood. In a similar manner the present age is fast rejecting the Holy Ghost, and ripening for the great tribulation, which, to illuminated minds, is already heaving in view, while the wonderful fulfillment of the latter-day prophecies draweth nigh. While the fallen Churches of the present age are fast rejecting the Holy Ghost, pronouncing His work fanaticism, and thus imputing it to the devil, whose trend is the unpardonable sin, the world, with wonderful expedition, is plunging into the same yawning abyss, down Satan’s greased plank of infidelity, which is wonderfully and fearfully on the increase, both in Christendom and heathendom. God, in His mercy, waited on the antediluvians to repent till the last hope had fled. He did the same for the Jews. A similar destruction is on the track of the God- rejecting Gentile world (Rom 11:21), though, I trow, God, in His unutterable mercy, as in former dispensations, will wait till they cross the deadline, the Churches rejecting the Holy Ghost and the world espousing infidelity, and thus all putting themselves beyond the reach of redeeming mercy, and sealing their doom in hell. “Make the tree good, and the fruit will be good; make the tree corrupt, and the fruit will be corrupt; for a tree is known by its fruits.” There is no good in this fallen world; it all comes from heaven; therefore when the Holy Ghost is rejected, nothing but corruption is left.

“O ye generation of vipers, how are you, being evil, able to speak good things? Out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh.” How awfully plain this preaching, calling His intellectual auditors “generation of vipers!” Do not forget that He is especially addressing the preachers and official members; i.e., the scribes and Pharisees. Does not history repeat itself? Shall we be so blind as to leave this with a congregation 1,870 years ago? God forbid! Let us take it home, wake up, and profit by this awful truth. “A good man, out of the good treasure of his heart, bringeth forth good things; and an evil man, out of the evil treasure of his heart, bringeth forth evil things.” How awful the state of the Jewish Church! The leading preachers and laymen in the hands of the devil! “I say unto you, That every idle word which the people may speak, they shall give an account for the same in the day of judgment. For by thy words thou mayest be justified, and by thy words thou mayest be condemned.” Language is the exponent of the heart. God has put us here on probation, trying and testing us for vast eternity. “Idle” is argon, from ergon, “work,” and is the strongest negative in the Greek language when preceding a word. Hence it means the very absence of all work. God has put us here to work in His vineyard. Hence we have no time to lose. Idle words mean idle minds and bodies, which are condemnatory in the sight of God. O the momentous issues which hang on our words, the exponents of both soul and body! When we are idle, the devil always finds an open door. We see here, in the contingent tense, it is our prerogative to so speak as to determine our justification or condemnation before the judgment-seat of Christ.

William B. Godbey, Commentary on the New Testament (1896–1900) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Section 2. (Luk 11:14-54; Luk 12:1-59.)

Confirmation in view of opposition.

The provision of God for His people having been shown; we have now the opposition on the part of the enemy, who is moreover the prince of this world. Thus the world becomes a scene of strife just so much the more because the Prince of peace has come into it. The Lord prepares His disciples for this, warning and confirming them, and setting them in view of His coming again, when winds and waves shall cease. A great deal in all this part is similar to what we have had before, -especially in Matthew; so that we shall notice it more briefly.

1. (1) The substance of what is here we find in Mat 12:22-30. The man out of whom the demon is cast is there said to have been blind as well as dumb; and the multitudes ask, "Is this the Son of David?" But there is only wonder, and not conviction; and others refer the power over demons (which they cannot deny) to Beelzebul the prince of the demons. The Lord, addressing Himself to them, shows them that He has read their thoughts, and refutes them by the argument that then Satan would be against himself. But if this were the finger of God, then it was the Kingdom of God that had come upon them.

(2) The result in this case was the spoiling of Satan, whom it required power greater than his own to dispossess. And for Himself the Lord declares that He accepted no compromise, and allowed no indifference on the part of any to Him. It was simply for or against; and he that gathered not with Him was only scattering.

(3) But indeed there might be the case in which Satan had not been expelled, but merely left his house empty, to return when he pleased. As the Lord applies it in Matthew, it was indeed their own. Nationally they had reformed from their once constant idolatry, and were now swept clean and adorned, but hollow-hearted. God was not enshrined among them, as their empty temple witnessed. Satan then could come back, and bring with the old spirit of idolatry an intensity of wickedness never before known. The Lord does not say, as in Matthew, that it would be so with them; and the word is left for wider application.

2. We have now the competence of the testimony given asserted, and the reason assigned for its failure with them, in the lack of the spirit of obedience, the want of singleness of eye.

(1) A woman in the crowd that was listening to Him lifted up her voice, and said, "Blessed is the womb that bare Thee, and the breasts that Thou hast sucked." And He answers, "Yea, rather" -so it is, indeed, but there is a greater blessedness -"blessed are they who hear the word of God, and keep it."

It was in fact the central feature of Israel’s condition; that with professed reverence for the word of God, they had crusted it over with their traditions, their "unwritten law," which they exalted above it, and so made it of no effect, as the Lord told them. This is a condition of things which, as we know, has once more come about in the history of the professing Church, human nature manifesting itself similarly in all generations. It is striking, and shows the prophetic character of Scripture, that the Lord here takes occasion by the woman’s words, to guard against an error which has assumed of late, in that body which has, more than any other, adopted and developed the traditionalism of the Jews, the most colossal proportions. Romanism has exalted the mother of our Lord above all creatures, and into a perilous nearness to Deity itself. In its cruder forms it would, by virtue of this human relationship to Him, exalt her in some sense above Him to whom she owes this exaltation. The Lord declares here the blessedness of the spiritual tie above the natural, and most distinctly characterizes this blessedness as that of those who "hear the word of God and keep it;" which Rome, as far as lies in her, will not permit. Good reason she has, surely, not to permit it.

(2) The last incident is recorded by Luke alone; what follows is in Matthew also, with some difference. In it He contrasts the spirit of the very heathen at Nineveh, and that of the Arabian queen of Solomon’s days, with the people then around Him. A greater than Jonah was then among them, and as Jonah had been a sign to the Ninevites so would He be in His death and resurrection a greater sign; but they would not repent. Nor could a wiser than Solomon attract them with His wisdom.

(3) Not signs were wanting, but the heart to interpret them. God had not done what man would not do: He had not lighted a lamp to hide it from men’s eyes, but that all might see and rejoice in the light. But whatever the light might be outside, the light that illumined the man within was his eye: his eye must be single, without any veil there, or the light outside would not light the lamp that could alone be light to him. But the testimony given was not insufficient. If the light within them was not darkness, they would walk in the full brightness of the illuminating lamp.

3. The Pharisees and lawyers are now put in the light, and searched out by it: an exposure, indeed, scathingly severe, and which rouses them to the utmost. The denunciation so closely resembles that in Mat 23:1-39, which took place at a later time, that Van Oosterzee* supposes that Luke has, in fact, borrowed from this, and interpolated what was actually now said with it. But besides the natural difficulty of accepting what we should certainly object to in an ordinary historian; there is no part of what is here that we might not imagine to be borrowed; to be sure, with some changes. If we confine ourselves to the unchanged parts, these can only be found in vers. 43 and 52: too small a debt to be worth while to incur. On the other hand, that Matthew borrowed from Luke of what was uttered at this time has similar difficulty, and is rejected by Van Oosterzee himself.

{*In Lange’s Commentary.}

Why may we not accept it as the truth that the Lord in His final judgment of Pharisaism repeated much of what He had said at the earlier time recorded by Luke? Why may He not, at the end of His ministry in Israel, have deliberately reaffirmed His former judgment of those scribes and Pharisees whose characters were so well marked? a double testimony suited to the solemnity of it.

(1) To the Pharisee the Lord’s words denounce the self-righteousness which was their prominent characteristic. This failed in its externalism, as if God had made the body, not the soul; -the form, but not breathed the spirit into it. Instead of the excessive scrupulosity which this engendered, let them only be ready to impart to the necessities of others, and all else would be clean to them.

Then their scrupulosity in these minutiae -tithes of mint and rue and every kind of herb -went with the great defects in things of great account, as judgment and the love of God.

With this, self-exaltation; which made them love the chief seat and public greeting.

While the hypocritical smooth outside, with the defilement underneath, made them like graves which rendered men unclean, without their being aware of them.

(2) The doctors of the law He rebukes for their well-known laying on of intolerable burdens (see p. 215), which they would not even put forth a finger to remove. They built also the sepulchres of the prophets whom their fathers had killed, and honored those whose living voices disturbed men’s consciences no longer. Tested by new prophets, they would act as their fathers did, and bring upon themselves the gathering vengeance for all righteous blood from the beginning. Again, as professors of knowledge, they had taken away the very key of it, and, not entering in by it themselves, had only hindered those who were ready to enter.

4. What has been said with regard to the connection of the address to the Pharisees and lawyers with Mat 23:1-39 may be and has been said as to the connection of the present chapter with the tenth and other parts of Matthew. That Luke does not always preserve the order of time or the historical connection of events or words may be freely admitted, nor does he here give as definitely as in the last case the time or times of these sayings of the Lord. After the most searching investigation that we can give to such matters, Van Oosterzee allows that definite certainty will, probably, be impossible. If it could be, we would have to ask, would there be any particular profit in such knowledge? It is hard to imagine what. We have the Gospels in the form the Spirit of God has been pleased to give them, and shall surely find divine wisdom in this as elsewhere in Scripture. When it leads commentators to talk of "heterogeneous elements of discourse," we can realize the dangers of too much theorizing in things unknown. We shall do well to take it as we find it, assured that none can mend what needs no mending, and that "to this man will I look," saith the Lord, "even to him that is lowly and of a contrite spirit, and that trembleth at My word" (Isa 66:2).

In that which is now before us disciples are addressed, in view of such a condition of things as what has gone before implies. The multitudes are crowding after Him, so that they tread one upon another, and it was at just such times that the Lord’s warning voice was almost certain to be heard, to break the spell of that seductive influence which apparent popularity was so apt to exert over the minds of His real followers. The multitudes were under the sway of the Pharisees, as we know, and their pretentious religiousness helped to maintain them in this place. The Lord warns them against "the leaven of the Pharisees, which is hypocrisy," and puts them in the light of that coming day when all disguise will be stripped off, and what may have been spoken in privacy in the chamber will be proclaimed openly as on the house-tops.

But fear in the presence of the multitude might be as potent a governing principle as the love of power or applause. He exhorts them, therefore, not to be afraid of those whose power was confined at most to the body and the present life, but to fear Him who could not only kill the body, but cast afterwards into hell.

Then He reminds them of His care and tenderness, with whom not a sparrow is forgotten, and who numbers the hairs of their head. They need not fear, who were more to God than many sparrows.

Then He calls for confession of Himself before men, and they would be confessed by Him before the angels of God; but those who denied Him before men must look to be denied also before the angels. Yet a word spoken against the Son of man should be forgiven, but blasphemy against the Holy Spirit -as in the malevolent imputing of power that they could not deny to Satan, -that would not be forgiven. It was the sign of malignant enmity to God manifested openly as God.

On the other hand, in the presence of accusers and judges they were to expect the Spirit of God to give them a mouth and wisdom: they needed no anxiety with regard to that.

Evidently, the theme in all this is a world that they must neither court nor fear, but before which Christ must be held up, with the Spirit of Christ to hold up those who did this.

5. (1) He goes on to speak of those to whom the world was all: not persecutors necessarily, but quietly enjoying it; God and the life beyond forgotten. He pictures such an one making his count of long prosperity and suddenly turned out of it into the presence of Him he had made no account of, and leaving all he valued here to whom he knew not. Folly indeed, but how common a folly! the independence of a nature fallen away from God.

(2) On the other hand, the dependence of faith is the remedy for all care, in the consciousness of the care of Him whose presence and power all creation testifies. Seeking His Kingdom -the maintenance of His authority over what was but His own; and whom they could call, "Father," -the men of faith with their hearts in the unseen; would find the good of all else ministered to them.

All this is simple to us, thank God. We have listened to such words from childhood, and they are not difficult to apprehend, whether or not we have drunk in their blessedness.

6. The Lord carries us on to what is the limit of the life of faith; not death, but His own coming. Death might come, of course, but we must not, and cannot, confound, in such words as we have here, one thing with the other. The whole thought is different, the blessing of the whole Church, and of the earth, and the glory of Christ Himself being connected with His coming. It is not that we know either when He will come; for the injunction to watch implies the reverse of this. "Watch; for ye know not what hour your Lord doth come."

(1) First of all, we have the assurance which permits the heart to go out freely after this. The gift of the Kingdom is assured to us as the Father’s good pleasure; and this gift qualifies for giving, which, in fact, is but laying up treasure in it. There no possibility can be, of change or loss; and one’s treasure being there, fixes the heart there also. (See p. 93 seq. notes.)

(2) The loins are to be girt up in readiness for removing, and the lamps burning, for it is night while Christ is absent. The whole attitude is governed by the fact that at any time He may return: His servants are to be as those waiting for their lord, when he shall return on occasion of the wedding, that when he cometh and knocketh they may immediately open to him. The common rendering here ("from the wedding") raises a difficulty unnecessarily: for all other passages represent the wedding as following the coming of the Lord, not preceding it, and it would only be possible to say either that the passage here applied to Jewish saints after the heavenly ones were already united to the Lord (Rev 19:7); or that the figure was only in loose application to the facts. The last is not to be thought of: why introduce a difficulty so easy to be avoided? The former seems contrary to what is here; for we have seen that since the transfiguration the heavenly things have been more opening to us. Hence it is preferable to translate "on occasion of the wedding," which, while quite justifiable, removes every difficulty.

The blessing of those found in this expectant service is great indeed. The heart of Him who was amongst us "as one that serveth" is called forth in response; He will gird Himself, and make them sit down to meat, and will come forth and serve them. Blessed be His Name, He is the same in heaven as He was on earth. How easy should service be to Him!

"’Whether He come in the second watch, or come in the third watch, blessed are those servants." "The Romans divided the night," says Van Oosterzee, "into four night-watches, a division which the Jews had accepted from them. The opinion is entirely without ground that the Saviour here followed another division into only three night-watches. He says nothing of the fourth, simply for the reason that the disciples, from that, should note that His return was by no means to be expected as late as possible; even as He does not name the first, because it would weaken the whole representation of the watchful servants. The Parousia does not come so quickly as impatience, nor yet so late as carelessness supposes, but in the very middle of the night, when the temptation to fall asleep is great and therefore must be most vigorously combated. It may even tarry longer than the servants think; but, grant that it should not take place even till the third, or should come even in the second watch of the night, whosoever perseveres faithfully at his post shall in no wise lose his reward."

The Lord has a word on the other side, where the servant has somehow become "the master of the house," and the coming of the Son of man like the unwelcome visit of a thief. It would be needful for such to remember that the thief does not come at an hour expected, or perhaps the house would not have been dug through. "If he had known" only presses the fact that he does not know.

(3) Peter asks whether this parable is limited to the twelve, or applies to all. The Lord answers, not directly, but by giving, on the one side and on the other, the portion of the faithful and of the unfaithful steward. Responsibility attaches wherever there is trust; and proportionate to the reward of faithfulness is the recompense of unfaithfulness. The parables here, if we may call them such, are almost word for word those at the end of the twenty-fourth chapter of Matthew; yet seem to have been given at another time, and the repetition of specially important lessons may surely have had its purpose in imprinting them the more on the minds of the disciples. (See p. 232, notes.)

(4) The only difference in the parable of the unfaithful servant is that instead of eating and drinking with the drunken; he is himself drunken; and the association with others is omitted. His portion is said also to be "with the unbelievers," as in Matthew "with the hypocrites."

(5) There is added here, as not in Matthew, the statement as to the gradation of penalty according to the measure of knowledge of his lord’s will on the part of the servant. On the other hand, the want of knowledge, since it was capable of being obtained, does not secure the offender. Indeed the smiting of fellow-servants and the drinking until drunken could not be excused after that manner. The common conscience of men is sufficient to condemn the grossness of what is often done by professing Christians without apparent check from their religion.

7. The Lord closes now with putting the purpose of God in connection with its present effects among men. These in fact were very different. The Prince of peace had brought a sword. Israel, so long identified with the revelation of God to men, -from which salvation was to come for men, -was nevertheless to be set aside. Yet His purposes moved on; spite of all this, to their accomplishment, and the signs were already in the world, though they might be blind to them.

(1) Christ had come to cast fire upon earth. The holiness of God was to be manifested; nay, already the effects of it were showing themselves: the fire was being kindled among men. The grace in which it was displayed did not alter this, for grace in no wise means tolerance of sin. Alas, men could little bear the exposure of it: "The world hateth Me," said the divine Speaker here, "because I testify of it that its works are evil" (Joh 7:7). Thus the fire that would have purified, consumed.

And of Him holiness required the baptism of suffering that was before Him, before His full heart, otherwise straitened, could be poured out as He longed to pour it out. He Himself must satisfy this necessity of the divine nature. Thus on God’s part there should be no hindrance to fullest blessing. According to the significance of baptism, these sufferings would put Him into a new place with God, a place of sanctification on account of His people (Joh 17:19), through which they would find a new and blessed place in Him.

(2) But what would be the result of this as to men at large? Peace among men, in the union of heart with heart in the acceptance of it? No; but everywhere division, and among the most intimate relations of life; a man’s foes would be those of his own household. "The world would no more endure faith in the Saviour than it did the Saviour Himself, who was faith’s object, and whom it confessed. It is well to note how the presence of the Saviour draws out the evil of the human heart. The state described here is in Micah, the description of the most dreadful state of evil conceivable (Mic 7:1-7)." (Synopsis.)

(3) Yet God had not left them without witness, plainly to be read as the face of the heavens which they were so skilful in discerning. It was hypocrisy to pretend they had not what only their unwillingness to see rendered obscure. Conscience only was needed, the discernment of what was right. The signs given of God are of moral character, and the right is what appeals to every man; yet the appeal may be none the less in vain.

(4) Israel had thus failed as the witness of God on earth. Their own law had pronounced upon them; Moses, in whom they trusted, was but their accuser; while they were refusing Him through whom they might have been reconciled to him. The Lord utters still His warning, but with the consciousness in His heart that their doom was at hand.

F. W. Grant, The Numerical Bible (4th ed., 1903) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

11:14-32 Jesus faced two challenges. He answered the first, an accusation that he was casting out demons by Satan’s power (11:15), in 11:17-26. The second was a demand for miraculous signs (11:16), which he answered in 11:29-32.

11:14 a demon from a man who couldn’t speak: Demons sometimes inflict physical disease or disability.

Tyndale Open Study Notes — © Tyndale Open Resources, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

Luk 11:14. Ἦν ἐκβάλλων, He was casting out) that is to say, He was actually at the time engaged in that miracle. These things took place before mid-day. Comp. Luk 11:37.

Bengel's Gnomon of the New Testament — English translation (T&T Clark, Edinburgh, 1860) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Luk_11:14-22. See on Mat_12:22-29; Mar_3:22 ff. Luke agrees with Matthew rather than with Mark.

ἦν ἐκβάλλ.] he was busied therein.

καὶ αὐτό] and he himself, the demon, by way of distinguishing him from the possessed person.

κωφόν] See on Mar_9:17.

Luk_11:16. A variation from Matthew in the connection of this (in Luke premature) demand for a sign (see on Mat_12:38), and in its purport (ἑξ οὐρανοῦ).

Luk_11:17. καὶ οἶκος ἐπὶ οἶκον πίπτει] a graphic description of the desolation just indicated by ἐρημοῦται: and house falleth upon house. This is to be taken quite literally of the overthrow of towns, in which a building tumbling into ruins strikes on the one adjoining it, and falls upon it. Thus rightly Vulgate, Luther, Erasmus, and others, Bleek also. Comp. Thucyd. ii. 84. 2 : ναῦς τε νηῒ προσέπιπτε. This meaning, inasmuch as it is still more strongly descriptive, is to be preferred to the view of Buttmann, which in itself is equally correct (Neut. Gr. p. 291 [E. T. 338]): House after house. Many other commentators take οἶκος as meaning family, and explain either (Bornemann), and one family falls away after another (on ἐπί, comp. Php_2:27), or (so the greater number, Euthymius Zigabenus, Beza, Grotius, Valckenaer, Kuinoel, Paulus, de Wette) they supply διαμερισθείς after οἶκον, and take ἐπὶ οἶκον as equivalent to ἐφʼ ἑαυτόν: et familia a se ipsa dissidens salva esse nequit (Kuinoel). It may be argued against the latter view, that if the meaning expressed by ἐφʼ ἑαυτόν had been intended, the very parallelism of the passage would have required ἐφʼ ἑαυτόν to be inserted, and that οἶκος ἐπὶ οἶκον could not in any wise express this reflexive meaning, but could only signify: one house against the other. The whole explanation is the work of the Harmonists. It may be argued against Bornemann, that after ἐρημοῦται the thought which his interpretation brings out is much too weak, and consequently is not sufficiently in accordance with the context. We are to picture to ourselves a kingdom which is devastated by civil war.

Luk_11:18. καὶ ὁ Σαταν] Satan also, corresponding with the instance just referred to.

ὅτι λέγετε κ.τ.λ.] the reason of the question.

Luk_11:20. ἐν δακτύλῳ Θεοῦ] Matthew: ἐν πνεύματι Θεοῦ. Lukes mode of expressing the divine agency (Exo_8:19; Psa_8:3; Philo, Vit. Mos. p. 619 C; Suicer, Thes. I. p. 820) appeals more to the senses, especially that of sight. It is a more concrete form of the later tradition.

Luk_11:21. ὁ ἰσχυρός] as τοῦ ἰσχυροῦ, Mat_12:29.

καθωπλισμένος] not the subject (Luther), but: armed.

τὴν ἑαυτοῦ αὐλήν] not: his palace (see on Mat_26:3), but: his own premises, at whose entrance he keeps watch.

ἐν εἰρήνῃ ἐστί κ.τ.λ.] This is the usual result of that watching. But the case is otherwise if a stronger than he, etc. See what follows. Thus in me has a stronger than Satan come upon him, and vanquished him!

τὰ σκῦλα αὐτοῦ] the spoils taken from him.

Meyer — Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament — English translation by Peter Christie, edited by Frederick Crombie (T&T Clark, 1880) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Luk 11:14-16 . Brief historical statement introducing certain defensive utterances of Jesus .

Luk 11:14-15 answer to Mat 9:33-34 ; Mat 12:22-24 , and Luk 11:16 to Mat 12:38 . The reproduction of these passages here is very summary: the reference to Israel , Mat 9:33 , and the question “is not this the Son of David?” Luk 12:23 , e.g. , being omitted. Then, further, it is noticeable that the references to the Pharisees and scribes, as the authors of the malignant theory as to Christ’s cure of demoniacs and the persons who demanded a sign, are eliminated, the vague terms τινὲς (Luk 11:15 ) and ἕτεροι (Luk 11:16 ) being substituted. The historical situation in which Jesus spoke is wiped out, the writer caring only for what He said.

The Expositor's Greek Testament, edited by W. Robertson Nicoll (1897–1910) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

14-36.] Accusation of casting out devils by Beelzebub, and demand of a sign from heaven. Our Lord’s discourse thereupon. Mat 12:22-45.Mar 3:23-30Mar 3:23-30. The reasonings of Greswell to shew that Luke relates an entirely different incident from Matt. and Mark, able and well conducted as they are, fail to carry conviction to my mind. The marks of identity are too many and striking to be mistaken; and on the plan of discrimination which he has adopted, I am persuaded that we might prove four distinct Crucifixions and Resurrections to have happened just as easily. Besides, it is quite impossible to carry the hypothesis throughout this section of Luke’s Gospel: and when it has been once given up, a considerable difference is made in the way of regarding the various narrations. On the side of which Evangelist the strict accuracy lies, it is next to impossible for us now to decide. I am inclined to think with Schleiermacher (transl., p. 190), that the section from ch. 11:14-12:53 (or rather perhaps 59) is a connected whole, or, at all events, is intended to form such. But then the whole is introduced (ver. 14) without any mark of connexion with the preceding, and terminated as abruptly.

On the other hand, the narrative in Matt. is introduced by his usual τότε, following upon a very general description of a retirement of our Lord, and His being pursued by multitudes, all of whom He healed; but whether the οἱ ὄχλοι are the same, and the τότε meant to specify that this incident occurred then and there, is by no means certain. Nor is the close of the section (12:50) bound very closely to 13:1, which commences ἐν τῇ ἡμέρᾳ ἐκείνῃ, and can hardly be said with certainty to define the very same natural day. We may observe that the attendant circumstances, as introduced and closed in Mar 3:20; Mar 4:1, are equally indeterminate. I therefore leave the difficulty where I found it, and where I believe it will ever remain, during our present state of imperfection: only observing, that the important incident and discourse grounded on it is no way thereby invalidated in authority. It seems to have been a portion of the evangelic history, the position of which was not exactly and satisfactorily fixed; of which there have been already some instances (see ch. 9:57-62), and there are, as will be seen, yet more as we proceed.

14.] κωφόν—and blind, Matt. ver. 22, where see notes on all the common matter.

Henry Alford, The Greek Testament (1849–1861) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

7. The Blasphemy of the Pharisees: Luk 11:14-36.

We have already observed (see on Luk 6:11) how remarkably coincident in time are the accusations called forth in Galilee by the healings on the Sabbath, and those which are raised about the same period at Jerusalem by the healing of the impotent man (John 5). There is a similar correspondence between the yet graver accusation of complicity with Beelzebub, raised against Jesus on the occasion of His healing demoniacs, and the charge brought against Him at Jerusalem at the feasts of Tabernacles and of the Dedication: “Thou art a Samaritan, and hast a devil!” (Joh 8:48); “He hath a devil, and is mad!” (Luk 10:20). Matthew (Matthew 12) and Mark (Mark 3) place this accusation and the answer of Jesus much earlier, in the first part of the Galilean ministry. The accusation may and must have often been repeated. The comparison of John would tell in favour of Luke’s narrative. Two sayings which proceeded from the crowd give rise to the following discourse: the accusation of complicity with Beelzebub (Luk 11:15), and the demand for a sign from heaven (Luk 11:16). It might seem at first sight that these are two sayings simply placed in juxtaposition; but it is not so. The second is intended to offer Jesus the means of clearing Himself of the terrible charge involved in the first: “Work a miracle in the heavens, that sphere which is exclusively divine, and we shall then acknowledge that it is God who acts through thee, and not Satan.” This demand in appearance proceeds from a disposition favourable to Jesus; but as those who address Him reckon on His powerlessness to meet the demand, the result of the test, in their view, will be a condemnation without appeal. Those last are therefore in reality the worst intentioned, and it is in that light that Luke’s text represents them. Matthew isolates the two questions, and simply puts in juxtaposition the two discourses which reply to them (Luk 12:22 et seq., 38 et seq.); thus the significant connection which we have just indicated disappears. It is difficult to understand how Holtzmann and other moderns can see nothing in this relation established by Luke, but a specimen of his “[arbitrary] manner of joining together pieces which were detached in the Logia (Λ).”

This piece includes: 1 st. A statement of the facts which gave rise to the two following discourses (Luk 11:14-16); 2 d. The first discourse in reply to the accusation of Luk 11:15 (Luk 11:17-26); 3 d. An episode showing the deep impression produced on the people by this discourse (Luk 11:27-28); 4 th. The second discourse in reply to the challenge thrown out to Jesus, Luk 11:16 (Luk 11:29-36).

1 st. Luk 11:14-16.— ῏Ην ἐκβάλλων, He was occupied in casting out. The word κωφός, dull, may mean deaf or dumb; according to the end of the verse, it here denotes dumbness. On the expression dumb devil, see vol. i. p. 434. Bleek justly concludes from this term, that the dumbness was of a psychical, not an organic nature.

The construction ἐγένετο...ἐλάλησεν betrays an Aramaic source. The accusation, Luk 11:15, is twice mentioned by Matthew: Mat 9:32, on the occasion of a deaf man possessed, but without Jesus replying to it; then Mat 12:22, which is the parallel passage to ours; here the possessed man is dumb and blind. Should not those two miracles be regarded as only one and the same fact, the account of which was taken first (Matthew 9) from the Logia, second (Matthew 12) from the proto-Mark, as Holtzmann appears to think, therein following his system to its natural consequences? But in that case we should have the result, that the Logia, the collection of discourses, contained the fact without the discourse, and that the proto-Mark, the strictly historical writing, contained the discourse without the fact,—a strange anomaly, it must be confessed! In Mark 3 this accusation is connected with the step of the brethren of Jesus who come to lay hold of Him, because they have heard say that He is beside Himself, that He is mad (Luk 3:21, ὅτι ἐξέστη). This expression is nearly synonymous with that of possessed (Joh 10:20). According to this accusation, it was thus as one Himself possessed by the prince of the devils that Jesus had the power of expelling inferior devils. From this point of view, the ἐν, through, before the name Beelzebub, has a more forcible sense than appears at the first glance. It signifies not only by the authority of, but by Beelzebub himself dwelling personally in Jesus.

This name given to Satan appears in all the documents of Luke, and in almost all those of Matthew, with the termination bul; and this is certainly the true reading. It is probable, however, that the name is derived from the Heb. Baal-Zebub, God of Flies, a divinity who, according to 2 Kings 1 et seq., was worshipped at Ekron, a city of the Philistines, and who may be compared with the Ζεῦς ᾿Απομυῖος of the Greeks. The invocation of this god was doubtless intended to preserve the country from the scourge of flies. In contempt, the Jews applied this name to Satan, while modifying its last syllable so as to make it signify God of Dung (Baal-Zebul). Such is the explanation given by Lightfoot, Wetstein, Bleek, etc.

Those who raise this accusation are, in Luke, some of the numerous persons present; in Matthew (Mat 9:34; Mat 12:24), the Pharisees; in Mark (Mar 3:22), scribes which came down from Jerusalem. This last indication by Mark would harmonize with the synchronism which we have established in regard to this accusation between Luke and John.

The demand for a sign from heaven (Luk 11:16) is mentioned twice in Mat 12:38; Mat 16:1. It is not impossible that it may have been repeated again and again (comp. Joh 6:30). It corresponded with the ruling tendency of the Israelitish mind, the seeking for miracles, the σημεῖα αἰτεἶν (1Co 1:22). We have already explained its bearing in the present case. In John it signifies more particularly, “Show thyself superior to Moses.” In those different forms it was ever the repetition of the third temptation (πειράζοντες, tempting Him). How, indeed, could Jesus avoid being tempted to accept this challenge, and so to confound by an act of signal power the treacherous accusation which He found raised against Him!

Frédéric Louis Godet — Commentaries on Luke, John, Romans, and 1 Corinthians — English translation (T&T Clark, Edinburgh, 1870s–1890s) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

The substance of these verses we had in Mat 12:22, etc. Christ is here giving a general proof of his divine mission, by a particular proof of his power over Satan, his conquest of whom was an indication of his great design in coming into the world, which was, to destroy the works of the devil. Here too he gives an earnest of the success of that undertaking. He is here casting out a devil that made the poor possessed man dumb: in Matthew we are told that he was blind and dumb. When the devil was forced out by the word of Christ, the dumb spoke immediately, echoed to Christ's word, and the lips were opened to show forth his praise. Now,

I. Some were affected with this miracle. The people wondered; they admired the power of God, and especially that it should be exerted by the hand of one who made so small a figure, that one who did the work of the Messiah should have so little of that pomp of the Messiah which they expected.

II. Others were offended at it, and, to justify their infidelity, suggested that it was by virtue of a league with Beelzebub, the prince of the devils, that he did this, Luk 11:15. It seems, in the devil's kingdom there are chiefs, which supposes that there are subalterns. Now they would have it thought, or said at least, that there was a correspondence settled between Christ and the devil, that the devil should have the advantage in the main and be victorious at last, but that in order hereto, in particular instances, he should yield Christ the advantage and retire by consent. Some, to corroborate this suggestion, and confront the evidence of Christ's miraculous power, challenged him to give them a sign from heaven (Luk 11:16), to confirm his doctrine by some appearance in the clouds, such as was upon mount Sinai when the law was given; as if a sign from heaven, not disprovable by any sagacity of theirs, could not have been given them as well by a compact and collusion with the prince of the power of the air, who works with power and lying wonders, as the casting out of a devil; nay, that would not have been any present prejudice to his interest, which this manifestly was. Note, Obstinate infidelity will never be at a loss for something to say in its own excuse, though ever so frivolous and absurd. Now Christ here returns a full and direct answer to this cavil of theirs; in which he shows,

1. That it can by no means be imagined that such a subtle prince as Satan is should ever agree to measures that had such a direct tendency to his own overthrow, and the undermining of his own kingdom, Luk 11:17, Luk 11:18. What they objected they kept to themselves, afraid to speak it, lest it should be answered and baffled; but Jesus knew their thoughts, even when they industriously thought to conceal them, and he said, "You yourselves cannot but see the groundlessness, and consequently the spitefulness, of this charge; for it is an allowed maxim, confirmed by every day's experience, that no interest can stand that is divided against itself; not the more public interest of a kingdom, nor the private interest of a house or family; if either the one or the other be divided against itself, it cannot stand. Satan would herein act against himself; not only by the miracle which turned him out of possession of the bodies of people, but much more in the doctrine for the explication and confirmation of which the miracle was wrought, which had a direct tendency to the ruin of Satan's interest in the minds of men, by mortifying sin, and turning men to the service of God. Now, if Satan should thus be divided against himself, he would hasten his own overthrow, which you cannot suppose an enemy to do that acts so subtlely for his own establishment, and is so solicitous to have his kingdom stand."

2. That was a very partial ill-natured thing for them to impute that in him to a compact with Satan which yet they applauded and admired in others that were of their own nation (Luk 11:19): "By whom do your sons cast them out? Some of your own kindred, as Jews, nay, and some of your own followers, as Pharisees, have undertaken, in the name of the God of Israel, to cast out devils, and they were never charged with such a hellish combination as I am charged with." Note, It is gross hypocrisy to condemn that in those who reprove us which yet we allow in those that flatter us.

3. That, in opposing the conviction of this miracle, they were enemies to themselves, stood in their own light, and put a bar in their own door, for they thrust from them the kingdom of God (Luk 11:20): "If I with the finger of God cast out devils, as you may assure yourselves I do, no doubt the kingdom of God is come upon you, the kingdom of the Messiah offers itself and all its advantages to you, and, if you receive it not, it is at your peril." In Matthew it is by the Spirit of God, here by the finger of God; the Spirit is the arm of the Lord, Isa 53:1. His greatest and most mighty works were wrought by his Spirit; but, if the Spirit in this work is said to be the finger of the Lord, it perhaps may intimate how easily Christ did and could conquer Satan, even with the finger of God, the exerting of the divine power in a less and lower degree than in many other instances. He needed not make bare his everlasting arm; that roaring lion, when he pleases, is crushed, like a moth, with a touch of a finger. Perhaps here is an allusion to the acknowledgment of Pharaoh's magicians, when they were run aground (Exo 8:19): This is the finger of God. "Now if the kingdom of God be herein come to you, and you be found by those cavils and blasphemies fighting against it, it will come upon you as a victorious force which you cannot stand before."

4. That his casting out devils was really the destroying of them and their power, for it confirmed a doctrine which had a direct tendency to the ruining of his kingdom, Luk 11:21, Luk 11:22. Perhaps there had been some who had cast out the inferior devils by compact with Beelzebub their chief, but that was without any real damage or prejudice to Satan and his kingdom, what he lost one way he gained another. The devil and such exorcists played booty, as we say, and, while the forlorn hope of his army gave ground, the main body thereby gained ground; the interest of Satan in the souls of men was not weakened by it in the least. But, when Christ cast out devils, he needed not do it by any compact with them, for he was stronger than they, and could do it by force, and did it so as to ruin Satan's power and blast his great design by that doctrine and that grace which break the power of sin, and so rout Satan's main body, take from him all his armour, and divide his spoils, which no one devil ever did to another or ever will. Now this is applicable to Christ's victories over Satan both in the world and in the hearts of particular persons, by that power which went along with the preaching of his gospel, and does still. And so we may observe here,

(1.) The miserable condition of an unconverted sinner. In his heart, which was fitted to be a habitation of God, the devil has his palace; and all the powers and the faculties of the soul, being employed by him in the service of sin, are his goods. Note, [1.] The heart of every unconverted sinner is the devil's palace, where he resides and where he rules; he works in the children of disobedience. The heart is a palace, a noble dwelling; but the unsanctified heart is the devil's palace. His will is obeyed, his interests are served, and the militia is in his hands; he usurps the throne in the soul. [2.] The devil, as a strong man armed, keeps this palace, does all he can to secure it to himself, and to fortify it against Christ. All the prejudices with which he hardens men's hearts against truth and holiness are the strong-holds which he erects for the keeping of his palace; this palace is his garrison. [3.] There is a kind of peace in the palace of an unconverted soul, while the devil, as a strong man armed, keeps it. The sinner has a good opinion of himself, is very secure and merry, has no doubt concerning the goodness of his state nor any dread of the judgment to come; he flatters himself in his own eyes, and cries peace to himself. Before Christ appeared, all was quiet, because all went one way; but the preaching of the gospel disturbed the peace of the devil's palace.

(2.) The wonderful change that is made in conversion, which is Christ's victory over this usurper. Satan is a strong man armed; but our Lord Jesus is stronger than he, as God, as Mediator. If we speak of strength, he is strong: more are with us than against us. Observe, [1.] The manner of this victory: He comes upon him by surprise, when his goods are in peace and the devil thinks it is all his own for ever, and overcomes him. Note, The conversion of a soul to God is Christ's victory over the devil and his power in that soul, restoring the soul to its liberty, and recovering his own interest in it and dominion over it. [2.] The evidences of this victory. First, He takes from him all his armour wherein he trusted. The devil is a confident adversary; he trusts to his armour, as Pharaoh to his rivers (Eze 29:3): but Christ disarms him. When the power of sin and corruption in the soul is broken, when the mistakes are rectified, the eyes opened, the heart humbled and changed, and made serious and spiritual, then Satan's armour is taken away. Secondly, He divides the spoils; he takes possession of them for himself. All the endowments of mind and body, the estate, power, interest, which before were made use of in the service of sin and Satan, are now converted to Christ's service and employed for him; yet this is not all; he makes a distribution of them among his followers, and, and having conquered Satan, gives to all believers the benefit of that victory. Hence Christ infers that, since the whole drift of his doctrine and miracles was to break the power of the devil, that great enemy of mankind, it was the duty of all to join with him and to follow his guidance, to receive his gospel and come heartily into the interests of it; for otherwise they would justly be reckoned as siding with the enemy (Luk 11:23): He that is not with me is against me. Those therefore who rejected the doctrine of Christ, and slighted his miracles, were looked upon as adversaries to him, and in the devil's interest.

5. That there was a vast difference between the devil's going out by compact and his being cast out by compulsion. Those out of whom Christ cast him he never entered into again, for so was Christ's charge (Mar 9:25); whereas, if he had gone out, whenever he saw fit he would have made a re-entry, for that is the way of the unclean spirit, when he voluntarily and with design goes out of a man, Luk 11:24-26. The prince of the devils may give leave, nay, may give order, to his forces to retreat, or make a feint, to draw the poor deluded soul into an ambush; but Christ, as he gives a total, so he gives a final, defeat to the enemy. In this part of the argument he has a further intention, which is to represent the state of those who have had fair offers made them, - among whom, and in whom, God has begun to break the devil's power and overthrow his kingdom, - but they reject his counsel against themselves, and relapse into a state of subjection to Satan. Here we have,

(1.) The condition of a formal hypocrite, his bright side and his dark side. His heart still remains the devil's house; he calls it his own, and he retains his interest in it; and yet, [1.] The unclean spirit is gone out. He was not driven out by the power of converting grace; there was none of that violence which the kingdom of heaven suffers; but he went out, withdrew for a time, so that the man seemed not to be under the power of Satan as formerly, nor so followed with his temptations. Satan is gone, or has turned himself into an angel of light. [2.] The house is swept from common pollutions, by a forced confession of sin, as Pharaoh's - a feigned contrition for it, as Ahab's, - and a partial reformation, as Herod's. There are those that have escaped the pollutions of the world, and yet are still under the power of the god of this world, Pe2 2:20. The house is swept, but it is not washed; and Christ hath said, If I wash thee not, thou hast no part with me; the house must be washed, or it is none of his. Sweeping takes off only the loose dirt, while the sin that besets the sinner, the beloved sin, is untouched. It is swept from the filth that lies open to the eye of the world, but it is not searched and ransacked for secret filthiness, Mat 23:25. It is swept, but the leprosy is in the wall, and will be till something more be done. [3.] The house is garnished with common gifts and graces. It is not furnished with any true grace, but garnished with the pictures of all graces. Simon Magus was garnished with faith, Balaam with good desires, Herod with a respect for John, the Pharisees with many external performances. It is garnished, but it is like a potsherd covered with silver dross, it is all paint and varnish, not real, not lasting. The house is garnished, but the property is not altered; it was never surrendered to Christ, nor inhabited by the Spirit. Let us therefore take heed of resting in that which a man may have and yet come short.

(2.) Here is the condition of a final apostate, into whom the devil returns after he had gone out: Then goes he, and takes seven other spirits more wicked than himself (Luk 11:26); a certain number for an uncertain, as seven devils are said to be cast out of Mary Magdalene. Seven wicked spirits are opposed to the seven spirits of God, Rev 3:1. These are said to be more wicked than himself. It seems, even devils are not all alike wicked; probably, the degrees of their wickedness, now that they are fallen, are as the degrees of their holiness were while they stood. When the devil would do mischief most effectually, he employs those that are more mischievous than himself. These enter in without any difficulty or opposition; they are welcomed, and they dwell there; there they work, there they rule; and the last state of that man is worse than the first. Note, [1.] Hypocrisy is the high road to apostasy. If the heart remains in the interest of sin and Satan, the shows and shadows will come to nothing; those that have not set that right will not long be stedfast. Where secret haunts of sin are kept up, under the cloak of a visible profession, conscience is debauched, God is provoked to withdraw his restraining grace, and the close hypocrite commonly proves an open apostate, [2.] The last state of such is worse than the first, in respect both of sin and punishment. Apostates are usually the worst of men, the most vain and profligate, the most bold and daring; their consciences are seared, and their sins of all others the most aggravated. God often sets marks of his displeasure upon them in this world, and in the other world they will receive the greater damnation. Let us therefore hear, and fear, and hold fast our integrity.

Matthew Henry's Commentary on the Whole Bible (1708–1710) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

Verse 14. Casting out a devil] See Clarke on Mt 12:22.

Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible (1810–1826) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

(14, 15) He was casting out a devil.—See Notes on Mat_9:32-34.

A Bible Commentary for English Readers, edited by Charles John Ellicott (1878–1897) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

14-26. The dumb Devil. Blasphemy of the Pharisees.

14. it was dumb] i.e., of course, the possession by the spirit caused dumbness in the man. If this incident be the same as in Mat_12:22, the wretched sufferer seems to have been both dumb, and blind, and mad.

the people wondered] Exorcisms, and attempted exorcisms (Act_19:14), were indeed common among the Jews (see on Luk_9:49. Gfrorer, Jahrh. d. Heils, I. 413), but apparently only in the simplest cases, and never when the possession was complicated with blindness and dumbness.

The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges (gen. ed. J. J. S. Perowne; Cambridge University Press, 1878–1918) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

But some of them said,.... The Pharisees, Mat 9:34 Mat 12:24 who could not bear that he should be thought to be the Messiah, and therefore put an ill construction on the miracle:

he casteth out devils through Beelzebub, the chief of devils; in several copies he is called Beelzebul, and in the Arabic and Ethiopic versions; which last adds these words, "and he answered and said, how can Satan cast out Satan?" See Gill on Mat 12:20.

John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible (1746–1763) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

14 And he was casting out a devil, and it was dumb. And it came to pass, when the devil was gone out, the dumb spake; and the people wondered.

Ver. 14. And it was dumb] So it was a double miracle. God’s favours seldom come single; there is a series, a concatenation of them, and every former draws on a future.

John Trapp, A Commentary or Exposition upon All the Books of the Old and New Testament (1647–1656) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

See this passage explained in the notes at Mat 12:22-30.

Albert Barnes' Notes on the Bible (1834–1885) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

This possessed person is said in St. Matthew to have been also blind. Upon him, therefore, were wrought three wonders: the blind saw, the dumb spoke, the possessed was delivered; which daily takes place in the persons of such as are converted to the number of true believers: the devil is expelled, and they both receive the light of faith beaming upon their eyes, and having the strings of their silent organs loosed to sound forth the praises of God. (Ven. Bede) --- And the multitude, &c. The multitude, though devoid of learning, were constant admirers of the actions of our Lord, whilst the Scribes and Pharisees either denied them, or by a sinister interpretation, ascribed them to the power of the unclean spirit. (Ven. Bede)

George Leo Haydock (1774–1849), Haydock's Catholic Family Bible and Commentary, 1859 edition — public domain. Excludes Psalms (Douay-Rheims chapter numbering differs from Protestant) and Deuterocanonical books (Catholic canon only).

The devil is here called dumb, from his effect upon the demoniac, in restraining the use of his tongue.

Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible (1683–1685) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

Vers. 14-36. The bitter attack of the Pharisees. Their accusation of the Lord that he was in league with the evil one. His reply. The grave and terrible charge which was formally made by persons evidently of rank and position sent down from the capital to watch, and if possible to entrap, the hated Galilaean Teacher, was a charge no doubt brought against the Lord on more than one occasion. Of this we have clear evidence in the Gospel narratives. Puzzled and dismayed by the marvellous acts of power worked by Jesus, it was only too easy to say that he had friends and helpers among these spirits of evil which the Jew knew well were working unseen on earth.

The circumstances under which the accusation was made, and the reply of the Lord spoken, were as follows: The scene is still in the provinces, the time somewhere in the period between October and the spring of the last Passover the period which the Master spent in that slow solemn progress, through as yet unvisited places, towards Jerusalem. Learned and experienced members of the Pharisee party, scribes and doctors of the Law, had been told off to watch the dangerous and popular Galilaean Teacher, and, whenever it was possible, to lessen his influence among the people.

Jesus (ver. 14) had been occupied in one of his (probably) daily works of healing. He had expelled an evil spirit from a sufferer whose malady had assumed the grave form of insanity which refused to speak. The people around were wondering at this gracious act of power; then broke in voices of accusation, voices to challenge him to show them some sign from heaven, saying that his power was only derived from evil sources. To this the Master replies with consummate skill, knowing the trained minds with whom just then he had to do. He is interrupted by murmurs of approval from the crowd (vers. 27, 28). He notices these for a me-merit, and then proceeds in detail to reply to that subtle request that he would prove his claims by showing them some sign from heaven.

And he was casting out a devil, and it was dumb. Some very terrible and apparently helpless form of possession which manifested itself in a mute, possibly in a motionless, melancholy insanity. And the people wondered. Not improbably the professional exorcists had tried here and signally failed; hence the special wonder of the people.

Vers. 14-26. Christ and his adversaries.

Observe

I THE CONTRAST. "He was casting out a devil, and it was dumb." This was his work. As the Redeemer, he was ever intent on setting the human nature free from its manifold evil by acting on the hidden cause of the evil.

It is to be noted that the dumbness is traced to a demon to the possession of the inner nature by a spirit whose fettering of the man was evidenced in the fettering of the organ of speech. "To cure sorrow by curing sin" is the special service of Christ"s Church. In this deeper reference the reference to sin and the evil one it is distinguished from mere philanthropy. Philanthropy contemplates the evil, and seeks to remove its occasions in social life or in the personal history. Christianity reaches to the springs of the evil. It contemplates sin; and it sees in sin an enslavement from which the soul is to be delivered by the One stronger than Satan. But see the attitude of the world. There is wonder (ver. 14) on the part of some when the long silence is broken, and the dumb speaks. There is (ver. 15) the tempting or provocation of the Holy One by the demand for some flaming portent. And there is the devilish opposition of the Pharisees, who always hung on his rear, and who, unable to deny facts, insinuated that there was a league between the Lord and Beelzebub. So it is still. The darkness which will not receive the light has degrees of guilt. The blackest form of the guilt is that which cannot but admit the force that is active amongst men, which sees the results of that force, and yet refuses to acknowledge it to be light, closes the soul against it. "The deaf may hear the Savior"s voice, The fettered tongue its chain may break; But the deaf heart, the dumb by choice, The laggard soul, that will not wake, The guilt that scorns to be forgiven, These baffle e"en the spells of Heaven. In thought of these, his brows benign Not e"en in healing, cloudless shine.

II THE LORD"S DISCOURSE IN REPLY TO THE THOUGHTS WHICH HE READS, The three ifs" in vers. 18, 19, 20, may well be studied. The first exposes the absurdity of the supposition that he is possessed by Beelzebub. Beelzebub in him divided against Beelzebub without him! the one destroying the works of the other! How could such a power stand? The second takes another ground. Before him there are heads of the state; now, their sons claimed to exorcise spirits by repeating formulas of incantation: would they allow that such exorcism was by Beelzebub? They pointed to it as an evidence of Divine favor; how inconsistent and absurd to see the hand of the devil in his work, and the finger of God in theirs? The third drives the argument home. If the same finger as that which they recognized in their so-called exorcisms is being really put forth, as they themselves can discern, is it not clear that the kingdom of God is come on them, and that to resist this kingdom is their condemnation? The parable and the words which follow (vers. 21-26) relate to this. A strong man, fully armed, guards his own court, and all his goods are secure; he and his will stand or fall together. How can the goods be taken? Only by overcoming the strong man, by proving that there is Another stronger than he. It is only through this personal conflict that the possessions can be abstracted. So in the Lord"s holy wars, a symbol of which had been given that day. Satan had been holding the afflicted person in his grasp; and the wasted life could be restored only by the mightier power of love the love incarnated in Christ upon him, and overcoming him, and taking from him his whole armor wherein he trusted." This he had done; the departure of the malignant spirit, and the restoration of the man, were the sign of his victory to be fulfilled through all the ages.

III And then follow Two WORDS CONSTANTLY TO BE PONDERED.

1. In respect of this, Christ"s holy war, there can be no neutrality. The eye, perhaps, is directed to the groups of the people "wondering," and of those tempting him. They had not actually token part with the scorners; they are now reminded, as all in all times are reminded, that a negative attitude is virtually an attitude of hostility. It is, by so much, a subtraction of the strength to be utilized against the enemy. It is an occasion of stumbling to others. More than this, it withdraws from the attraction of his presence and love, and lays the heart open to alienating influences. Ever to be insisted on is the sentence, "He that is not with me is against me." There is another saying of Christ, one uttered a short time before, (Luk_9:50) which may seem to be at variance with the tone of this saying, "He that is not against us is for us." But a glance at the context shows the difference between the circumstances in which the words are spoken, and the references which they bear. The case brought before us in the ninth chapter is this: John mentions that he and his brethren had seen a man casting out demons in Christ"s Name, and that they had forbidden him, because he was not one of their company. This was the only offense. The man acknowledged the authority of Jesus, was really receiving the power from Jesus. He wanted only in knowledge el the Lord; the affection and will were right. And the charge of the Master is, "Do not forbid such a one; No one can do a miracle in my Name who will lightly speak evil of me; he that is not opposing me is, in such a ministry, on our part." In the case introduced in the eleventh chapter Christ is alluding to the attitude of the affections and will. The one sentence is a reproof of exclusiveness of spirit; it is virtually and truly the lesson is most necessary to-day not ban one who is seeking the same ends as yourself, who is acknowledging me as you do, because his methods are not yours, or his orders seem of doubtful validity, or he stands apart from your fellowship." The other sentence is a reproof of indecision, of colourlessness in the religious life, of the absence of vital sympathy with the Lord. Virtually it is, "Let every one take his side, and stand by it; be out and out with me; have his share in my war with the devil: for all purposes, the unsympathetic or faint-hearted is my enemy; he whose life by its influence, whose action by its tone and aims, is not gathering with me, is practically scattering." We hear the old cry, sounding ever on, "Who is on the Lord"s side?

2. The picture of moral deterioration in vers. 24-26 is most graphic. Those around Christ had been witnesses to the exodus of an unclean spirit. Let them suppose that such a spirit is impelled by a ceaseless activity; "it passes through waterless places, seeking rest, but finding none." It must have some embodiment. It resolves to return to the old home the house whence he came out." "How can a devil find rest which the creature can find only in God? He has lost it for ever; he seeks it in vain in all waste places, which otherwise please him; he seeks it especially in vain there where God, the Lord of creation, will have his rest, and where, therefore, the devil, if he can force an entrance, finds himself relatively best namely, in man. Therefore the desire soon returns upon him to look after his own more peculiar house" (Stier). He finds the old home "swept and garnished." "Empty" is a word added and an expressive word it is by Matthew. Good the sweeping would have been, if the house had not been empty. God is not there; it is open to the evil one. There is his opportunity. He comes to it, resumes possession, but with reinforcements. "Seven other spirits more evil than himself. And the last estate is worse than the first." Verily, a sketch awfully true! It was applied by the Lord to the generation whom he addressed. Israel had indeed been swept from the corruption of idolatry; it had been garnished by the traditions of the elders, by the scrupulosities of the Pharisees; but it was empty a living faith in God had been crushed out. And the attitude of its wise men towards the Truth was the token of an occupation by a spirit of darkness, sevenfold more virulent than in the earlier days. But its applications reach to all. "He that hath an ear, let him hear.

Vers. 14-36. Inspirations.

Our Lord had just held out the possibility of Divine inspirations for prayerful disciples, and the evangelist next takes up and contrasts diabolical inspirations with this. Unless we notice the artistic treatment by the accomplished author of the Third Gospel, we shall miss much of his meaning. The circumstance which led to the question of infernal inspiration was the healing of a man who was possessed by a dumb devil. Here was a case, then, where a demon, entering into and possessing a human being, had sealed his lips so that he could not speak. Our Savior expelled the demon, and the man immediately recovered the power of speech. At this the people wondered. But the wise men among his enemies had a theory to meet the case; they insisted that it was because Beelzebub, the chief of the devils, dwelt in Christ that he was able to expel the inferior demon. Others insisted on a sign from heaven to supplement these "signs" on earth. To both classes he gives due answer. Let us look at the two theories, and the interlude which separates Christ"s treatment of them, in their order.

I THE THEORY THAT JESUS WAS POSSESSED BY BEELZEBUB. There was something plausible in this. Assuming that demons are subject to their superiors, the hostile spirits insinuated that Jesus had got the chief of the devils in him, and so was able to order the inferior demons. In the theory there was the admission that the devil, who had made the poor possessed one dumb, had obeyed Christ"s command and left his victim. But so far from this demonstrating Christ"s goodness to their suspicious souls, it only demonstrated his league with the chief of the devils. It is truly wonderful how unholy hearts can twist the clearest demonstrations into the foulest suspicions and insinuations. The question of infernal inspirations is thus raised, as a set-off and contrast to the Divine inspirations which Jesus showed his disciples were possible for them, and which he illustrated in perfection himself. Let us see how our Lord meets the Insinuation of his enemies.

1. Christ shows that in expelling the dumb devil he had been so far breaking up Satans kingdom. Although, therefore, it must be acknowledged that Satan and his emissaries do often take suicidal courses , and by fancied wisdom really undermine their kingdom, yet it could not be supposed that the chief of the devils would deliberately restore a man to sanity and the power of speech. This would be too insane a course for the arch-fiend to take. When souls are rendered sane and social, we may conclude at once that it is not Satan"s work. Hence in the fact that the kingdom of Satan was being broken up by the philanthropic policy of Jesus, there was proof positive that their theory was false.

2. Christ reminds them of Jewish exorcism, and asks if they have considered the suspicion their theory casts on their own exorcists. By certain incantations and tedious processes the Jews had been accustomed to expel the demons and cure the demented ones. The difference between the Jewish exorcisms and this one of Jesus was that his was simpler and speedier. Hence if it was Beelzebub that enabled him to exorcise the demon, it must be some other form of diabolic inspiration which enabled their own exorcists to succeed. Our Lord thus used a crushing argumentum ad hominem, which they could not resist.

3. Jesus insists on the victorious character of the spiritual inspiration of which he was at once an Embodiment and the Source. It was by" the finger of God" he expelled the demons, and in his Person the triumphant kingdom of God had come nigh to them. For, as he here shows, there is a contention between two opposing parties for the palace of the human heart. The devil may for a time usurp possession. There is peace throughout the palace; there may even be silence, as in the present case, when the devil had made the possessed one dumb. But the Stronger One comes, the Spirit of Christ enters, overcomes the devil, robs him of his armor in which he trusted, and divides the spoil. Thus graphically does our Lord represent the conquest of the soul and the glorious result of the victory. It is the Mightiest overcoming the strong, and claiming his rights in the palace of the soul. Thus does God"s kingdom come within us!

4. Jesus shows the dangers of a vacant soul. Referring possibly to the Jewish exorcisms, wherein the demons were expelled, but no stronger occupant introduced to the palace of the soul, our Lord shows how the vacant soul becomes a prey to demons once more. And the result of reoccupation is generally worse than the first occupancy. How often is it seen that superficial reform is followed by a backsliding worse than any previous sin! The last state of the man is worse than the first. It is essential, therefore, that when a soul is freed from one spirit, it should be tenanted by another and a better. Only the radical change which the indwelling of the Divine Spirit secures can make the soul safe amid the temptations of Satan and his hosts.

II THE INTERLUDE UPON THE BLESSEDNESS OF OBEDIENCE. (Vers. 27, 28) As Jesus spake these wise words about inspiration, a woman in the crowd, touched by their beauty and faithfulness, exclaimed, "Blessed is the womb that bare thee, and the paps which thou hast sucked!" Her idea was that it must have been a great privilege to be related to such a Person, especially to have been his mother. And the blood-relationship, of course, could have no wide radius; only a select few could stand around him in actual relationship. But Jesus interposes at once to show that there is a blessedness which all may realize, a blessedness which his mother or brethren could not monopolize, and this is the blessedness of obedience to God"s Word. Motherhood involved many trials in the case of Mary, as well as many privileges; but obedience is an open door into which all may enter. In the keeping of God"s commandments there is a great reward. Thus he forbade all discontent and all envy, and put the woman and the audience generally upon the true track in which to realize blessedness. Receiving God"s Word in humble faith, trying to keep it in dependence upon God"s grace, this is the secret of true blessedness. Such spiritual relationship is better than blood-relationship. At it all of us should aim.

III THE THEORY OF INSUFFICIENT SIGNS. (Vers. 16, 29-36) The miracles of healing, it would seem, were insufficient to convince Christ"s enemies that he was from God. They demanded more a sign from heaven; something, that is, which would connect him with the heavenly world.

1. Now, the way our Lord meets this unreasonable demand is by denying their right to such a sign. It was most unreasonable, and to unreasonable clamor our Lord never yielded. His miracles were of such a character, were so numerous, and so instructive, that nothing but wilful blindness could prevent the demonstration from being final and conclusive.

2. Jesus declares that in the history of Jonah they would have a sign. (Vers. 29, 30, 32) Now, in what respect was Jonah a sign to the Ninevites? Accepting as historic the narrative of his flight, his imprisonment in the fish, his release from it, and his subsequent preaching to the Ninevites, we see a striking parallel between it and the history of Christ. As Jonah was buried in the fish, and so the endangered seamen were saved, so Jesus was buried in the tomb, and through his death saved endangered sinners. Again, as Jonah was cast forth from his imprisonment to land and life again, so Jesus by resurrection passed from the imprisonment of the tomb into the newness of immortal life. And as Jonah became a witness to the Ninevites of the truth of God"s threatenings and God"s mercy, so Jesus, in the persons of his apostles, and in Pentecostal power, became a witness to his generation. Moreover, the Ninevites repented at the preaching of Jonah, and in so doing they would be a standing rebuke and condemnation to Christ"s contemporaries, who resisted his preaching and would not repent of their sins. In the light of Christ"s subsequent fate, the sign of the Prophet Jonah must have proved striking in the extreme.

3. Jesus declares that the Queen of Sheba would condemn his contemporaries, as she was attracted by the wisdom of Solomon, while a greater than Solomon was here. (Ver. 31) The wisdom of Solomon was not associated with any miracle. It stood alone. It was rendered impressive by a halo of worldly glory; but this was all. Yet it commanded the queen of the south, who came from her distant land and learned wisdom at Solomon"s feet. The worth of wisdom is the lesson of her long journey. But Christ"s contemporaries, who have more wisdom by far in his discourses, and who have the miracles backing up the whole, are refusing the matchless testimony. Their condemnation shall be all the greater considering the noble conduct of the queen. How prone we are to despise the present opportunity, and to imagine that the former days were better than these, when the truth may be that now the most magnificent opportunity of all the ages is lying to our hands!

4. The great necessity he shows is singleness of eye. (Vers. 33-36) This is the practical lesson with which our Lord closes his answer to his enemies. There is a light in the world, and it is not hidden. As the Light of the world, he was himself occupying a sufficiently elevated candlestick, and illumining all within the house. But if his hearers and interviewers had duplicity and not singleness of aim, they would miss the illumination and be filled with darkness. This was their danger. Hence he urges singleness of eye. If they but gazed on him with the proper motive, they would find their whole lives illumined, and glory waiting upon their work. He was anxious for this result hence his warning. We learn, then, the necessity of singleness and simplicity of aim. In such a case we shall need no theories to account for Christ"s power, but acknowledge its Divine and gracious character at once. Then shall our whole heart go forth in sympathy to him, and we shall be with him in co-operation and in success. R.M.E.

The Pulpit Commentary (1880–1919), ed. H.D.M. Spence-Jones & Joseph S. Exell — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

It was dumb - That is, it made the man so. Matt. xii, 22.

John Wesley, Explanatory Notes Upon the Whole Bible (1754–1765) — public domain. Text via the GEBible commentary corpus.

Christ Casts Out a Devil and Rebukes the Pharisees.

The miracle and its effect:

v. 14. And He was casting out a devil, and it was dumb. And it came to pass, when the devil was gone out, the dumb spake; and the people wondered.

v. 15. But some of them said, He casteth out devils through Beelzebub, the chief of the devils.

v. 16. And others, tempting Him, sought of Him a sign from, heaven.

Luke makes the historical setting of this story very meager, stating merely the fact that Jesus cast out a demon that was dumb, but omitting to mention the Pharisees and scribes, since his readers would not have known what these persons represented in this connection. The evangelist’s purpose is to bring out the words of Jesus upon this occasion. Three classes of people are mentioned as being influenced by the miracle of casting out the demon. The great majority of the common people wondered; that was their usual status after some extraordinary proof of Christ’s power. Had they but searched the Scriptures and believed what Jesus said of Himself, their astonishment might have had some value. Their direct descendants are the modern persons that want to bear the Christian name, that marvel at the beauty and power of the Gospel, but are not interested in its deeper meaning, in the salvation of their souls. The second class was much smaller. It was recruited from the ranks of the Pharisees, and their feeling toward Christ was that of implacable, malignant hatred. Sneeringly they remarked that in and through the power of Beelzebub (the god of flies) or Beelzebub (the god of dung), the prince and foremost of the demons, He cast out the demons. That was infamous, base slander, against their own knowledge and conviction. And the third class, agreeing with, the second in their hatred of Jesus, tempted Him, tried to draw Him on, sought a sign from heaven from Him, as though the many signs and wonders which had been done before the people were not sufficient evidence of the Lord’s divine mission. To this day the enemies of the Lord resort to lies and slanders to harm the work of the Gospel; their object is to suppress the truth at all costs.

Paul E. Kretzmann, Popular Commentary of the Bible (1921–1924) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

A relation is here given of a famous miracle wrought by our Saviour in casting a devil out of a possessed man. It is called a dumb devil, because of the effect upon the poor possessed person in restraining the use of his tongue.

Learn here, 1. That among the many calamities which sin has rendered human nature liable and obnoxious to, this is one, to be bodily possessed by Satan.

Observe, 2. That one demonstration of Christ’s divine power, and a convictive evidence of his being truly and really God, was his casting out devils by the word of his power.

Observe, 3. What a sad and contrary effect this miracle had upon the wicked Pharisees, through their own own blindness, obstinacy, and malice: instead of magnifying his divine power, they maliciously accuse him for holding a correspondence with the devil, and acting by a power derived from him; as If Satan should lend our Saviour a power against himself, and that for the destruction of his own kingdom. Lord, how dangerous is a willful opposition against the truth! It provokes the Almighty to deliver persons up to the most unreasonable infidelity, and obstinate obduracy.

Observe, 4. Our Saviour knowing their thoughts, makes a just apology for himself, by showing how improbable and unlikely, how unreasonable and absurd, it is once to imagine or suppose that Satan should cast out himself, and any ways seek to oppose or destroy his own kingdom. Now, if I have received (says Christ) my power from Satan, for casting out Satan, then is the devil like a family divided within itself, and like a kingdom against itself, which can never stand, but must be brought to destruction.

Observe, lastly, our Saviour tells the Pharisees, that they might with as much reason attribute all other miracles to the power of the devil, as those wrought by himself; for there were certain Jews among them that cast out devils in the name of the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. Now our Saviour asks them by what power these their children cast them out? They acknowledged that what they did was by the power of God, and there was no cause but their malice, why they should not acknowledge that what he did was by the same power; If I by Beelzebub cast out devils, by whom do your sons cast them out? But if I with the finger of God cast them out, no doubt the kingdom of God is come upon you; that is, the long expected kingdom of the Messiah is certainly come, and I having wrought these miracles by my own power, is a demonstrative proof that I am the promised Messiah.

William Burkitt's Expository Notes on the New Testament (1700–1703) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

J. W. McGarvey's The Fourfold Gospel [XLVIII. Blasphemous Accusations].

XLVIII. BLASPHEMOUS ACCUSATIONS OF THE JEWS. (Galilee.) aMATT. XII. 22-37; bMARK III. 19-30; cLUKE XI. 14-23.

b19 And he cometh into a house. [Whose house is not stated.] 20 And the multitude cometh together again [as on a previous occasion-- Mar_2:1], so that they could not so much as eat bread. [They could not sit down to a regular meal. A wonderful picture of the intense importunity of people and the corresponding eagerness of Jesus, who was as willing to do as they were to have done.] 21 And when his friends heard it, they went out to lay hold on him: for they said, He is beside himself. [These friends were his brothers and his mother, as appears from Mar_3:31, Mar_3:32. They probably came from Nazareth. To understand their feelings, we must bear in mind their want of [298] faith. See Joh_7:3-9. They regarded Jesus as carried away by his religious enthusiasm ( Act_26:24, 2Co_5:13), and thought that he acted with reckless regard for his personal safety. They foresaw the conflict with the military authorities and the religious leaders into which the present course of Jesus was leading, and were satisfied that the case called for their interference. Despite her knowledge as to Jesus, Mary sympathized with her sons in this movement, and feared for the safety of Jesus.] a22 Then was brought unto him one possessed with a demon, blind and dumb: c14 And he was casting out a demon that was dumb. aand he healed him, insomuch that cit came to pass, when the demon was gone out, athe dumb man spake and saw. [The man was brought because he could not come alone. While Luke does not mention the blindness, the similarity of the narratives makes it most likely that he is describing the same circumstances as Matthew and Mark, so we have combined the three accounts.] 23 And all the multitudes cmarvelled. awere amazed, and said, Can this be the son of David? [It was a time for amazement, for Jesus had performed a triple if not a quadruple miracle, restoring liberty, hearing and sight, and granting the power of speech. It wakened the hope that Jesus might be the Messiah, the son of David, but their hope is expressed in the most cautious manner, not only being stated as a question, but as a question which expects a negative answer. The question, however, was well calculated to arouse the envious opposition of the Pharisees.] c15 But some of them said [that is, some of the multitude. Who these "some" were is revealed by Matthew and Mark, thus:], a24 But when the Pharisees heard it, they b22 and the scribes that came down from Jerusalem said, aThis man doth not cast out demons, but by Beelzebub the prince of the demons. bHe hath Beelzebub, and, By the prince of the demons casteth he out the demons. [Beelzebub is a corruption of Baalzebub, the god of the fly. There was a tendency among the heathen to name [299] their gods after the pests which they were supposed to avert. Thus Zeus was called Apomuios (Averter of flies), and Apollo Ipuktonos (Slayer of vermin). How Beelzebub became identified with Satan in the Jewish mind is not known. In opposing the influence of Jesus and corrupting the public mind, these Pharisees showed a cunning worthy of the cultivated atmosphere, the seat of learning whence they came. Being unable to deny that a miracle was wrought (for Celsus in the second century is the first recorded person who had the temerity to do such a thing), they sought to so explain it as to reverse its potency, making it an evidence of diabolical rather than divine power. Their explanation was cleverly plausible, for there were at least two powers by which demons might be cast out, as both were invisible, it might appear impossible to decide whether it was done in this instance by the power of God or of Satan. It was an explanation very difficult to disprove, and Jesus himself considered it worthy of the very thorough reply which follows.] c16 And others, trying him, sought of him a sign from heaven. [These probably felt that the criticisms of the Pharisees were unjust, and wished that Jesus might put them to silence by showing some great sign, such as the pillar of cloud which sanctioned the guidance of Moses, or the descending fire which vindicated Elijah.] b23 And he called them unto him [thus singling out his accusers], a25 And c17 But aknowing their thoughts he said unto them, bin parables [We shall find that Jesus later replied to those who sought a sign. He here answers his accusers in a fourfold argument. First argument:], How can Satan cast out Satan? aEvery kingdom divided against itself is brought to desolation; and every city or house [family] divided against itself shall not stand: b24 And if a kingdom be divided against itself, that kingdom cannot stand. cA house divided against a house falleth. b25 And if a house be divided against itself, that house will not be able to stand. a26 And if Satan cast out Satan, he is divided against himself; c18 And if Satan also is [300] divided against himself, ahow then shall his kingdom stand? b26 And if Satan hath risen up against himself, and is divided, he cannot stand, but hath an end. cbecause ye say that I cast out demons by Beelzebub. [The explanation given by the Pharisees represented Satan as divided against himself; robbing himself of his greatest achievement; namely, his triumph over the souls and bodies of men. Jesus argues, not that Satan could not do this, but that he would not, and that therefore the explanation which supposes him to do it is absurd. We should note that Jesus here definitely recognizes two important truths: 1. That the powers of evil are organized into a kingdom with a head ( Mat_13:29, Mat_25:41, Mar_4:15, Luk_22:31). 2. That division tends to destruction. His argument therefore, "constitutes an incidental but strong argument against sectarianism. See 1Co_1:13" (Abbott). Second argument:] 19 And if I by Beelzebub cast out demons, by whom do your sons cast them out? Therefore shall they be your judges. [The sons of the Pharisees were not their children, but their disciples ( 2Ki_2:3, Act_19:13, Act_19:14). Josephus mentions these exorcists (Ant. viii. 2, 5, and Wars vii. 6, 3), and there is abundant mention of them in later rabbinical books. Our Lord's reference to them was merely for the purpose of presenting an argumentum ad hominem, and in no way implies that they exercised any real power over the demons; nor could they have done so in any marked degree, else the similar work of Christ would not have created such an astonishment. The argument therefore is this, I have already shown you that it is against reason that Satan cast out Satan; I now show you that it is against experience. The only instances of dispossession which you can cite are those of your own disciples. Do they act by the power of Satan? They therefore shall be your judges as to whether you have spoken rightly in saying that Satan casts out Satan. Third argument:] 20 But if I with the finger { aby the Spirit of God cast out demons, then is the kingdom of God come upon you. [The finger of God signifies the power of God [301] ( Exo_8:19, Exo_31:18, Psa_8:3). [Jesus exercised this power in unison with the Spirit of God. Jesus here draws a conclusion from the two arguments presented. Since he does not cast out by Satan, he must cast out by the power of God, and therefore his actions demonstrated the potential arrival of the kingdom of God. The occasional accidental deliverance of exorcists might be evidence of the flow and ebb of a spiritual battle, but the steady, daily conquests of Christ over the powers of evil presented to the people the triumphant progress of an invading kingdom. It is an argument against the idea that there was a collusion between Christ and Satan. Fourth argument:] c21 When the strong man fully armed guardeth his own court, his goods are in peace: 22 but when a stronger than he shall come upon him, and overcome him, he taketh from him his whole armor wherein he trusted, and divided his spoils. b27 But no one can a29 Or how can one enter into the house of the strong man, and spoil his goods, except he first bind the strong man? and then will he spoil his house. [Satan is the strong man, his house the body of the demoniac, and his goods the evil spirit within the man. Jesus had entered his house, and robbed him of his goods; and this proved that, instead of being in league with Satan, he had overpowered Satan. Thus Jesus put to shame the Pharisees, and caused the divinity of his miracle to stand out in clearer light than ever. The power of Jesus to dispossess the demon was one of his most convincing credentials, and its meaning now stood forth in its true light.] 30 He that is not with me is against me; and he that gathereth not with me scattereth abroad. [Jesus here addresses the bystanders. In the spiritual conflict between Jesus and Satan, neutrality is impossible. There are only two kingdoms, and every soul is either in one or the other, for there is no third. Hence one who fought Satan in the name of Christ was for Christ ( Luk_9:50). In the figure of gathering and scattering, the people are compared to a flock of sheep which Jesus would gather into the fold, but which Satan and all who aid him (such as the Pharisees) would [302] scatter and destroy.] b28 Verily a31 Therefore I say unto you, Every sins and blasphemy ball their sins shall be forgiven unto the sons of men, and their blasphemies wherewith soever they shall blaspheme [Jesus here explains to the Pharisees the awful meaning of their enmity. Blasphemy is any kind of injurious speech. It is the worst form of sin, as we see by this passage. This does not declare that every man shall be forgiven all his sins, but that all kinds of sin committed by various men shall be forgiven. The forgiveness is universal as to the sin, not as to the men]: abut the blasphemy against the Spirit shall not be forgiven. 32 And whosoever shall speak a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him; but whosoever shall speak bblaspheme against the Holy Spirit hath never forgiveness, but is guilty of an eternal sin: ait shall not be forgiven him, neither in this world, nor in that which is to come. b30 because they said, He hath an unclean spirit. [Blasphemy against the Son may be a temporary sin, for the one who commits it may be subsequently convinced of his error by the testimony of the Holy Spirit and become a believer ( 1Ti_1:13). But blasphemy against the Holy Spirit is in its nature an eternal sin, for if one rejects the evidence given by the Holy Spirit and ascribes it to Satan, he rejects the only evidence upon which faith can be based; and without faith there is no forgiveness. The difference in the two sins is therefore in no way due to any difference in the Son and Spirit as to their degrees of sanctity or holiness. The punishment is naturally eternal because the sin is perpetual. The mention of the two worlds is, "just an extended way of saying 'never'" (Morison). Some assert that the Jews would not know what Jesus meant by the Holy Spirit, but the point is not so well taken. See Exo_31:3, Num_11:26, 1Sa_10:10, 1Sa_19:20; Psa_139:7, Psa_143:10, Isa_48:16, Eze_11:24. We see by Mark's statement that blasphemy against the Spirit consisted in saying that Jesus had an unclean spirit, that his works were due to Satanic influence, and hence wrought to [303] accomplish Satanic ends. We can not call God Satan, nor the Holy Spirit a demon, until our state of sin has passed beyond all hope of reform. One can not confound the two kingdoms of good and evil unless he does so maliciously and willfully.] a33 Either make the tree good, and its fruit good, or make the tree corrupt, and its fruit corrupt: for the tree is known by its fruit. [The meaning and connection are: "Be honest for once; represent the tree as good, and its fruit as good, or the tree as evil, and its fruit as evil; either say that I am evil, and that my works are evil, or, if you admit that my works are good, admit that I am good also and not in league with Beelzebub"--Carr.] 34 Ye offspring of vipers, how can ye, being evil, speak good things? for out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaketh. [Realizing the hopelessness of this attempt to get an honest judgment out of dishonest hearts, Jesus plainly informs them as to the condition of their hearts. Their very souls were full of poison like vipers. Their sin lay not in their words, but in a condition of heart which made such words possible. The heart being as it was, the words could not be otherwise. "What is in the well will be in the bucket"--Trapp.] 35 The good man out of his good treasure bringeth forth good things: and an evil man out of the evil treasure bringeth forth evil things. [We have here a summary of the contrast given in the Mat_12:33, Mat_12:34. The good heart of Jesus brought forth its goodness, as the evil hearts of the Pharisees brought forth their evil.] 36 And I say unto you, That every idle word that men shall speak, they shall give account thereof in the day of judgment. 37 For by thy words thou shalt be justified, and by thy words thou shalt be condemned. [It may have seemed to some that Jesus denounced too severely a saying which the Pharisees had hastily and lightly uttered. But it is the word inconsiderately spoken which betrays the true state of the heart. The hypocrite can talk like an angel if he be put on notice that his words are heard. Jesus here makes words the basis of the judgment of God. Elsewhere [304] we find it is works ( Rom_2:6, 2Co_5:10), and again we find it is faith ( Rom_3:28). There is no confusion here. The judgment in its finality must be based upon our character. Our faith forms our character, and our words and works are indices by which we may determine what manner of character it is.]

[FFG 298-305]

J. W. McGarvey (with Philip Y. Pendleton), Commentaries on the New Testament (The Fourfold Gospel, 1914; Acts; and the epistles) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

14–26. He casteth out devils through Beelzebub. See notes on Matt. 12:22–29; 43–45. This discourse was given in Galilee (Matthew).

B. W. Johnson's The People's New Testament with Notes (1889–1891) — public domain. Electronic text from the Christian Classics Ethereal Library (CCEL) ThML edition.

General Information:

Jesus is questioned after he drives a demon out of a mute man.

Now

The author uses this word to mark the beginning of a new event. (See: Introduction of a New Event)

Jesus was driving out a demon

It may be helpful to add extra information. AT: "Jesus was driving a demon out of a person" or "Jesus was making a demon leave a person" (See: Ellipsis)

demon that was mute

The demon has power to prevent people from speaking. AT: "demon that caused the man to be unable to speak" (See: Assumed Knowledge and Implicit Information)

Now

This word is used here to mark where the action starts. If your language has a way for doing this, you could consider using it here. When the demon comes out of the man, some of the people criticize Jesus, and that leads to Jesus teaching about evil spirits.

When the demon had gone out

It may be helpful to add extra information. AT: "when the demon had gone out of the man" or "when the demon left the man" (See: Ellipsis)

the man who had been mute spoke

"the man who had been unable to speak now spoke"

By Beelzebul, the ruler of demons, he is driving out demons

"He is driving out demons by the power of Beelzebul, the ruler of demons"

translationWords

cast out

demon

amazed

Beelzebul

rule

unfoldingWord translationNotes — © Distant Shores Media and the Door43 World Missions Community, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Source: git.door43.org/Door43/en_tn.

14–26. THE DUMB DEVIL. BLASPHEMY OF THE PHARISEES

14. ἦν ἐκβάλλων. The continuous analytic imperfect perhaps implies that this was like some of those later miracles of Christ in which the result was not instantly accomplished.

αὐτὸ ἦν κωφόν. i.e., of course, the possession by the spirit caused dumbness in the man, comp. Mar 9:17. If this incident be the same as in Mat 12:22, the wretched sufferer seems to have been both dumb, and blind, and mad.

ἐγένετο … ἐλάλησεν. The construction shews an Aramaic document. See on Luk 1:5; Luk 1:8-9.

ἐθαύμασαν οἱ ὄχλοι. Exorcisms, and attempted exorcisms (Act 19:14), were indeed common among the Jews (see on Luk 9:49. Gfrörer, Jahrh. d. Heils, I. 413), but apparently only in the simplest cases, and never when the possession was complicated with blindness and dumbness.

Cambridge Greek Testament for Schools and Colleges (Cambridge University Press, 1896; 21 vols, various authors incl. Carr, Maclear, Plummer, Farrar, Lumby, Moule, M. R. James, Simcox) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

14-26. The Dumb Demoniac and the Blasphemy of the Pharisees. Mat 12:22-30; Mar 3:19-27 may be parallels.

14. δαιμόνιον κωφόν. The demon is called dumb because it made the man dumb: Mt. has τυφλὸν καὶ κωφόν. When the demon is cast out, it is the man who speaks, ἐλαλησεν ὁ κωφός. For ἐγένετο see P. 45.

ἐθαύμασαν. stupebant (a2 i l), obstupebant (b), stupuerunt (ff2.). Mt. has ἐξίσταντο. The combination of dumbness and blindness with possession made them suppose that no exorcist could succeed in such it case. Probably the man was deaf also, so that there seemed to be no avenue through which the exorcist could communicate with a victim who could neither see him, nor hear him, nor reply to his manipulations.

International Critical Commentary — older volumes (1896–1929), various authors — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Dumb [κωφον] . See on Mt 9:32.

Marvin R. Vincent, Word Studies in the New Testament (1887–1900) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.