The Testimony, February 2000 38

other words, they were seriously lacking in their knowledge of what their faith had to comprise for them to qualify as Christ’s disciples. It was like someone coming into our midst stating that they had been baptized, only for us to find that they had not even heard of some key doctrines. Of course, we would want to correct their mis-understandings and, when they believed the true faith, to rebaptize them.

So these twelve men, who thought they had been baptized unto John’s baptism, had not been, for they did not know properly what John had taught the people. Their ignorance of John’s preaching does not therefore indicate that John’s preaching was anything other than what the evi-dence shows it to have been. The fact that they were rebaptized into Christ after they were in-structed in no way invalidates the truth of John’s proper baptisms.

Finally, the case of Apollos is considered. Acts 18:24-28 records:

“And a certain Jew named Apollos, born at Alexandria, an eloquent man, and mighty in the scriptures, came to Ephesus. This man was instructed in the way of the Lord; and being fervent in the spirit, he spake and taught diligently the things of the Lord, know-

ing only the baptism of John. And he began to speak boldly in the synagogue: whom when Aquila and Priscilla had heard, they took him unto them, and expounded unto him the way of God more perfectly. And when he was disposed to pass into Achaia, the brethren wrote, exhorting the disciples to receive him: who, when he was come, helped them much which had believed through grace: for he mightily convinced the Jews, and that publickly, shewing by the scriptures that Jesus was Christ”.

Apollos, knowing only the baptism of John, was fervent in the spirit, taught diligently the things of the Lord, but did not know it all (and which of us does?), so Aquila and Priscilla in-structed him further. Nowhere is there any indi-cation that, knowing only the baptism of John, he needed to be rebaptized into Christ. That is because he already had been baptized into Christ by John.

The baptisms carried out by John the Baptist were therefore valid Christian baptisms, look-ing forward with a full understanding that Jesus was the Christ, the anointed of God, and that he was going to be their Saviour, as prophesied in the Law and the prophets.

Principles, Preaching and Problems P P

P P

P P P P

Demons (3) Andrew Perry

IN THE FIRST two articles in this short series we have endeavoured to argue the following points:

1 The written records of the demon miracles are carefully crafted accounts, which embody a symbology that associates the demon-pos-sessed with the historical situation of Israel’s idolatrous past. In this symbology the de-mon aspect stands for the nations and their gods. Such a symbology is a powerful argu-ment against a belief in demons.

2 The recorded fragments of what Jesus said that include demon language do not show he believed in demons. In some cases he is op-

posing demon beliefs; in other cases they are part of a natural conversational response; and in some cases he may be accommodating the beliefs of those to whom he is speaking.

In this final article we want to consider the Old Testament.

Systematic Theology Systematic Theology is a scholarly discipline that endeavours to set out the fundamental doctrines of Christianity in a coherent and systematic way. The subjects of whether there is one God or many, and where natural evil comes from, are part of Systematic Theology.

The Testimony, February 2000 39

These subjects are what a debate on demons is all about. Is there one God Who is the author of good and evil? or is there another ‘god’—the devil—with his demons, who afflict mankind with evils? or are many gods involved?

One of the distinctive features of the Christa-delphian approach to this area of doctrine is that it attempts to arrive at a ‘systematic theology’ of the whole Bible. It endeavours to make sense of individual texts within the larger framework of the entire Scripture. The starting point of the exercise is the Old Testament and the book of Genesis. From this point, doctrine about God is developed, working through the whole of the Hebrew Bible. This exercise shows that the Old Testament teaches that there is one God, and that other deities have no real existence. It also teaches that this God is the author of good and evil.

This method of starting in the Old Testament influences Christadelphian thinking about the New Testament, because earlier scriptures are accepted as normative for later scriptures. When, therefore, there is a mention of a divine being, the Devil, and a myriad of other supernatural beings, demons, an attempt is made to deter-mine whether the Old Testament has been read wrongly, or whether something else is going on in the New Testament when it uses the common Jewish doctrines of the day about the Devil or demons. God’s Word is consistent with itself, and this drives Christadelphian systematic the-ology.

This approach is cautious, and for a good reason. A belief in the Devil and demons is not an optional interchangeable component of a sys-tematic theology—a statement of faith.1 Such a doctrine touches on other areas of doctrine, such as the nature of man and temptation, the nature of atonement, the role of angels, the problem of evil (theodicy), as well as the sovereignty of God and the doctrine of monotheism. Biblical theol-ogy is a unity; all the parts fit together beauti-fully.

Monotheism Monotheism is a doctrine any Christian of any persuasion will own. This does not mean such a claim is valid. Monotheism is widely defined to embrace Trinitarianism. It is also widely held to allow the existence of a Devil and demons. A majority opinion is not necessarily right. It is not in our remit to discuss the doctrine of the Trin-ity, but we ought to question whether a belief in

the Devil and demons is consistent with a belief in one God.

The Ancient Middle East had pantheons of functionally different gods of varying status. The Old Testament prophets present Yahweh as the only God, the author of good and evil, and so the existence of other gods is excluded. Some-one who promotes the Devil and demons as gods, rather than as, say, the spirits of the departed dead, promotes a polytheistic metaphysic in which the supernatural consists of more that just the one true God and His angels who mani-fest Him. True, such ‘gods’ of evil are of inferior status and lesser power, but they are still gods, and this is polytheism. A variation of polythe-ism is ‘dualism’—a doctrine in which it is held that there are just two gods, one of good and one of evil. Dualism is also a violation of the Biblical ‘one God’ doctrine.2

Monotheism is one of the key teachings of the Old Testament.3 The best illustration of this is the teaching of Isaiah. In Isaiah 44:8 we read: “Is there a God beside Me? yea, there is no God; I know not any”. It is this God Who is the author of good and evil for His people: “See now that I, even I, am He, and there is no god with Me: I kill, and I make alive; I wound, and I heal” (Deut. 32:39). It is God Who does all these things to bring His judgements upon His people and those who surround them: “I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things” (Isa. 45:7; cf. Job 42:11). His agents in this activity are the angels, sometimes termed “evil angels” (Ps. 78:49).

God Himself creates, causes, or arranges “evil” in the sense of trials, diseases, punishments and other testing circumstances for specific human beings. Often angels of God, who are under His

1. The Devil is not part of the BASF positive proposi-tions.

2. Dualism has its roots in the Persian Zoroastrian teach-ing of a constant conflict between a god of light (Ahura Mazda) and a god of darkness (Ahriman). It is something of a scholarly consensus that dualism was not part of Judaism until after the exile, when, of course, the Jews were particularly exposed to such thinking. See Edwin M. Yamachi, Persia and the Bible, pp. 438ff. (Baker, 1990).

3. God has absolute control and authority over all His creation: Gen. 17:1; 18:14; Ex. 6:3; 15:11,12; Deut. 3:24; 32:39; 1 Kgs. 20:28; 1 Chron. 29:12; Job 9:4; 40:9; Ps. 62:11; 65:6; 66:7; 68:35; 89:8,13; 113:4-6; 139:1-7; Isa. 43:13; 48:13; Jer. 23:23; 32:27; Dan. 4:35; Mt. 19:26; Rom. 1:20.

The Testimony, February 2000 40

authority, do this as His agents. Here are some examples:

“Who hath made man’s mouth? or who mak-eth the dumb, or deaf, or the seeing, or the blind? have not I the LORD?” (Ex 4:11); “If thou wilt diligently hearken to the voice of the LORD thy God, and wilt do that which is right in His sight, and wilt give ear to His commandments, and keep all His statutes, I will put none of these diseases upon thee, which I have brought upon the Egyptians: for I am the LORD That healeth thee” (Ex. 15:26; cf. Deut. 7:15); “But the Spirit of the LORD departed from Saul, and an evil spirit from the LORD trou-bled him” (1 Sam. 16:14); “Hear, O earth: behold, I will bring evil upon this people, even the fruit of their thoughts, because they have not hearkened unto My words, nor to My law, but rejected it” (Jer. 6:19); “Shall a trumpet be blown in the city, and the people not be afraid? shall there be evil in a city, and the LORD hath not done it?” (Amos 3:6); “For the inhabitant of Maroth waited care-fully for good: but evil came down from the LORD unto the gate of Jerusalem” (Mic. 1:12).

These examples are pertinent because these kinds of affliction were attributed to demons by the people of the New Testament. However, it is God Himself Who brings about these trou-bles.

Yahweh 4 is the only true God, and it is He Who creates good and evil. The objectives that He has in creating evil vary. A common reason for evil is punishment, another reason is correc-tion, and yet another is testing. His angels carry out this work. In contrast, if we suppose that the popular view is correct, what reasons can we imagine for demonic activity? Why did (do) de-mons afflict mankind?

The information to answer this question is not given in the New Testament. And it is diffi-cult to think of reasons why demons would af-flict men and women. For instance: • the demons of the New Testament do not

attack their victims in any moral way—they do not corrupt their victims

• they do not teach false doctrine or lead peo-ple astray; in fact, they express belief in Je-sus.5

In fact, all demons appear to do is provide the perfect foil for Jesus’s ministry. They do not turn

people away from God, but rather make people turn to God.6

If there is a supernatural world of demons, the Bible is silent on their goals. They appear only in a small area and during a short period in history. Why are they not all over the place and in all ages if they are a significant part of the make-up of the supernatural?

We can go further than this argument and suggest that a belief in demons is a form of blasphemy. If God is responsible for good and evil, then to ascribe evil to the work of demons is blasphemy against the Holy Spirit. This argu-ment is drawn from Jesus’s own argument with the Jews of his day. They accused Jesus of hav-ing an unclean spirit when he cast out demons, but this was the power of the Holy Spirit. Like-wise, if the power of the Holy Spirit brings evil upon people, as in the case of the miracles of Exodus, then to ascribe such happenings to de-mons is a form of blasphemy.

An idol argument 7 The gods and demons of the nations were repre-sented by idols, and they are not to be confused with idols. We tend to think of the Old Testa-ment prophets as opposing the gods of the na-tions, but their arguments are equally valid when it comes to demons, some of whom could be regarded as ‘gods’ or intermediaries of the gods. The prophetic argument is that such gods do not exist and the idols are dumb and mute.8 This prophetic rhetoric is effective only because the peoples believed that their idols represented real gods and spoke through their priests as they

4. God’s names and titles often have meanings that show that He reigns unchallenged over all without any heavenly opposition.

5. How does a believer in demons as evil spirits recon-cile the true beliefs that demons at times express with them being deceivers and lying spirits (1 Tim. 4:1)?

6. In this way ‘they’ correct people’s behaviour. Of course, the people misperceived what was going on, because it was God Who was doing the correction.

7. I am indebted to Brethren Stephen Snobelen and Richard Morgan for the argument in this section.

8. The prophet’s argument is ranged against the gods rather than the demons of the nations. Both were represented by idols, amulets and figurines, as well as in art. Their argument is therefore applicable to both categories of divine being. The Septuagint trans-lators who were hostile to a belief in demons confirm that the prophetic argument can embrace demons.

The Testimony, February 2000 41

offered obeisance to the gods in front of their idol representations.

Jeremiah argues: “For the customs of the people are vain: for one cutteth a tree out of the forest, the work of the hands of the workman, with the axe. They deck it with silver and with gold; they fasten it with nails and with hammers, that it move not. They are upright as the palm tree, but speak not: they must needs be borne, because they cannot go. Be not afraid of them; for they cannot do evil, neither also is it in them to do good. Forasmuch as there is none like unto Thee, O LORD; Thou art great, and Thy name is great in might” (10:3-6).

If the gods behind the idols existed, then this argument falls down, because such gods would certainly be able to do evil. This is a prime char-acteristic of demons and gods. Hence we must conclude that demons do not exist, if we follow Jeremiah.

Similarly in Psalm 115 we read: “Wherefore should the heathen say, Where is now their God? But our God is in the heavens: He hath done whatsoever He hath pleased. Their idols are silver and gold, the work of men’s hands. They have mouths, but they speak not: eyes have they, but they see not: they have ears, but they hear not: noses have they, but they smell not: they have hands, but they handle not: feet have they, but they walk not: neither speak they through their throat. They that make them are like unto them; so is every one that trusteth in them. O Israel, trust thou in the LORD: He is their help and their shield” (vv. 2-9).

This passage would lose all its force if the demon-believer replied, “Well of course these idols don’t speak and are made of wood and stone”. Such a reply would miss the point; the prophet is not describing iconography. The ar-gument is that it is the gods represented by idols who have no mouth.

Psalm 135:15-18 makes the same points, but adds the denial that there is any “breath” or “spirit” in the mouths of idols. Habakkuk con-tinues this tradition of argument:

“What profiteth the graven image that the maker thereof hath graven it; the molten im-age, and a teacher of lies, that the maker of his work trusteth therein, to make dumb idols? Woe unto him that saith to the wood, Awake; to the dumb stone, Arise, it shall teach! Behold, it is laid over with gold and

silver, and there is no breath at all in the midst of it” (2:18,19).

These warnings are irrelevant if the idols rep-resent real gods and demons. In this case, the prophet should be warning against the real forces behind the idols and advocating that the people trust in Yahweh. Attacking bits of stone and wood is a very lame approach unless the prophet means to ridicule the gods of the nations by arguing, in effect, that they are nothing more than bits of stone and wood.

The prophetic view is that foreign gods are ‘made’ by the people: “They lavish gold out of the bag, and weigh silver in the balance, and hire a goldsmith; and he maketh it a god: they fall down, yea, they worship. They bear him upon the shoulder, they carry him, and set him in his place, and he standeth; from his place shall he not remove: yea one shall cry unto him, yet can he not answer, nor save him out of his trouble” (Isa. 46:6,7). Isaiah 46 speaks of two Babylonian gods, Bel and Nebo. The language used is not about a supernatural realm, but about the idols and images. Such gods were literally fashioned by men, and literally carried from place to place. What is significant here in this rhetoric is that Isaiah (that is, the Spirit through Isaiah) is not attacking Bel and Nebo directly. It is the graven image that the prophet refers to, rather than any-thing supernatural.

Because of the close association between the idol-representation and the god (or demon), the prophets use the same language for both. For example: “Declare ye among the nations, and publish, and set up a standard; publish, and conceal not: say, Babylon is taken, Bel is con-founded, Merodach is broken in pieces; her idols are confounded, her images are broken in pieces” (Jer. 50:2). Here Merodach and idols alike are broken in pieces. We might conclude that Jer-emiah is arguing that both the idol and the su-pernatural being were literally broken in pieces. On the other hand, it is more likely that Jeremi-ah’s argument is that Merodach is nothing more than an image.

Another similar account is found in 1 Samuel 5:1-4:

“And the Philistines took the ark of God, and brought it from Eben-ezer unto Ashdod. When the Philistines took the ark of God, they brought it into the house of Dagon, and set it by Dagon. And when they of Ashdod arose early on the morrow, behold, Dagon was fallen upon his face to the earth before the

The Testimony, February 2000 42

ark of the LORD. And they took Dagon, and set him in his place again. And when they arose early on the morrow morning, behold, Dagon was fallen upon his face to the ground before the ark of the LORD; and the head of Dagon and both the palms of his hands were cut off upon the threshold; only the stump of Dagon was left to him”.

The prophet speaks of the god as falling down, and yet it was the idol that had fallen.

Or again: “Let them bring them forth, and shew us what shall happen: let them shew the former things, what they be, that we may consider them, and know the latter end of them; or declare us things for to come. Shew the things that are to come hereafter, that we may know that ye are gods: yea, do good, or do evil, that we may be dismayed, and behold it to-gether. Behold, ye are of nothing, and your work of nought: an abomination is he that chooseth you” (Isa. 41:22-24).

Idols are not only mute and powerless, they are of nothing.

Finally, Jeremiah makes no mistake when he labels idols ‘no-gods’: “Hath a nation changed their gods, which are yet no gods? but My people have changed their glory for that which doth not profit” (2:11; cf. 5:7; 16:20; Isa. 37:19; Gal. 4:8).

The conclusion is inescapable. The nations believed in gods and demons, and these were

represented by idols and in their art, but such gods did not exist. The fact that idols are just bits of wood and stone with no power behind them (except to lead men away from worship-ping God) is seen in the complete lack of warn-ing about anything supernatural associated with them.

Conclusion In this article we have argued that Yahweh is the author of good and evil—natural evils that come about in the world. This is a simple view because it does not populate heaven, hell or any ‘supernatural’ realm with beings in conflict over the earth. The evidence for this view is also sim-ple: it consists of straightforward statements that God brings about various evils—and such state-ments are a good source for descriptive doc-trine. In contrast, the view that there is a Devil and demons that cause various evils has no di-rect evidence.

When we couple together the New Testament evidence, that the demon-possessed symbolise idolatrous Israel under the yoke of foreign pow-ers, with the devastating Old Testament argu-ment against the idols/gods of the nations, the case against believing in demons becomes over-whelming.

(Concluded)

Brother Perry has now published Demons, Magic and Medicine, a 269-page book. The book begins by setting out the first-century understanding of demons in literature, magic and medicine. It then examines New Testament demon miracles against this background, describing the symbology and typology of these miracles in order to answer the question, Do demons exist? The conclusion is that demons do not exist, and this is supported by many different arguments and observations, including espe-cially echoes and allusions to the Old Testament. The book also examines the ques-tions of whether Jesus or the apostles believed in demons and why they used demon language in their speech, the conclusion being that Jesus could not and did not believe in demons. The book concludes with a look at the Old Testament teaching that there is one God, the author of good and evil. The book is available at £5.50 + 98p postage and packing in the UK from: 13 St George’s Terrace, East Bolden, Tyne and Wear, NE36 0LU. Cheques payable to E. R. Perry.