SUMMA DÆMONICA BIBLIOGRAFIA

WITMER: 2009

Amanda R. Witmer

Jesus, a Jewish Galilean Exorcist:

A Socio-Political and Anthropological Investigation

(Teză de doctorat)

McMaster University, 2009, 360 p. (pdf)

Table of Contents

Chapter 1: Introduction. 1.1 Purpose and Scope of Inquiry – 1, 1.2 Previous Scholarship – 8, 1.3 Materials – 21, 1.4 Methodology and Mode of Procedure – 25, 1.5 Use of Significant Terms – 34, Chapter 2: Spirit Possession and Exorcism in the Ancient World – 37, 2.1 Introduction – 37, 2.2 Sociological and Anthropological Insights into Spirit Possession – 38, 2.3 Evil Spirits and Spirit Possession in the Ancient World – 52, 2.4 Spirit Affliction, Sin and Illness in Jewish Texts – 55, 2.5 Dualism and Marginality in Jewish Texts – 64, 2.6 Exorcism and Exorcists in the Ancient World – 72, 2.7 Jewish Prophets and Spirit Possession – 89, 2.8 Conclusion – 96, Chapter 3: The Socio-Political Context: Galilee in 30 CE – 97, 3.1 Introduction – 97, 3.2 Galilee as an Agrarian Society – 100, 3.3 Galilee Under Roman Rule – 117, 3.3.1 Herod the Great – 117, 3.3.2 Herod Antipas – 125, 3.4 Social Resistance in Galilee and Judea – 131, 3.4.1 Banditry – 133, 3.4.2 Prophetic and Messianic Movements – 136, 3.5 Conclusions – 145. Chapter 4: Jesus the Exorcist: The Indirect Evidence – 148, 4.1 Introduction – 148, 4.2 Baptism and Trials – 149, 4.2.1 Baptism – 149, 4.2.2 Trials – 158, 4.3 The Beelzebul Controversy – 167, 4.3.1 Beelzebul in Mark – 169, 4.3.2 Beelzebul in Q – 180, 4.3.3 Satan and Beelzebul: Binding the Strong Man – 184, 4.3.4 By the Finger ofGod – 190, 4.3.5 Sin Against the Spirit – 197, 4.3.6 Accusations in the Gospel of John – 198, 4.3. 7 Conclusions – 200, 4.4. Ther Evidence in Mark – 201, 4.4.1 The Strange Exorcist – 201, 4.4.2 Authority over Unclean Spirits (Mark, Q) – 203, 4.5 Evidence in Special L – 206, 4.5.1 The Return of the Seventy and the Fall of Satan – 207, 4.5.2 Mary Magdalene and the Seven Demons – 209, 4.5.3 Antipas the Fox – 214, 4.5.4 Jesus Rebukes a Fever – 218, 4.5.5 A Woman Crippled by a Spirit – 220, 4.6 Evidence in Q – 223, 4.6.1 Jesus' Reply to John – 224, 4.6.2 The Return of the Unclean Spirit – 226, 4.7 Evidence in Special M – 230, 4.8 Conclusions – 231, Chapter 5: Jesus the Exorcist: The Direct Evidence – 234, 5.1 Introduction – 234, 5.2 Evil Spirits, Illness and Sin in the Synoptic Gospels – 235, 5.3 The Exorcisms: Jesus and the Unclean Spirits – 239, 5.3.1 A Demoniac in a Synagogue – 240, 5.3.2 A Demoniac in Gerasa – 258, 5.3.3 A Boy with a Spirit of Muteness and Deafness – 287, 5.3.4 A Syro-Phoenician Woman's Daughter – 295, 5.4 Conclusions – 311, Chapter 6. Conclusion: Reconstructing Jesus, the Jewish Galilean Exorcist – 313.

Abstract

This study is a broad based investigation ofexorcism in the activities ofthe historical Jesus, particularly the connection between spirit possession and exorcism on the one hand and the socio-political context of first-century Galilee on the other. As such, it draws on research from the areas of sociology, anthropology, archaeology and biblical studies to illuminate this aspect of Jesus' career, as well as the broader social implications of spirit possession in those he treated and the exorcisms themselves. Evidence found in the Synoptic Gospels is evaluated using the criteria of authenticity and comparative analysis in order to establish early and historical material. Questions posed and answered concern the historical plausibility ofJesus' role as exorcist, the possibility that his own career began with a period of spirit possession, and the meaning that his exorcisms conveyed to his first-century audience. Thus, the methodology includes textual analysis, sociological analysis of general cultural patterns within which first-century Palestine can be fitted, and anthropological analysis ofthe plausible functions ofboth spirit possession and exorcism in agrarian societies. Jesus' role as exorcist, his own experience of spirit possession, and the fact that he was accused of being possessed by the demon Beelzebul are attested across all strands of the tradition, with the exception ofthe Gospel ofJohn. This aspect ofhis career also finds support in the criteria ofauthenticity, particularly embarrassment, is coherent with his role as healer and prophet and also fits the general pattern ofhealers and exorcists across cultures, particularly in agrarian societies.