Tag Archives: hades

Between Burial and Resurrection

Posted by expedition44 on

An Exegetical and Theological Inquiry into the Intermediate State of Christ

Introduction

The interval between the death and resurrection of Jesus has long occupied a curious place in Christian theology. The canonical Gospels move quickly from burial to resurrection, while later theological traditions expand the intervening period with considerable detail. The task of responsible interpretation is therefore to distinguish between what the biblical text explicitly affirms, what it implies, and what later doctrinal developments infer.

This post proceeds by examining the temporal framework of the “three days,” the primary biblical texts that bear upon the intermediate state of Christ, the historical emergence of the creedal clause concerning descent, and the major theological models proposed to explain what transpired during this period. Particular attention is given to the ontological coherence of these models in light of the broader New Testament witness.

The Chronology of the “Three Days”

Inclusive Reckoning and the Traditional View

The dominant ecclesial tradition has interpreted the “third day” language through the lens of Jewish inclusive reckoning, wherein any part of a day may be counted as a full day. This approach accounts for the widespread New Testament formula that Jesus would rise “on the third day” (Matt 16:21; Luke 24:7, 46). The Emmaus narrative, which states that “it is now the third day since these things happened” (Luke 24:21), coheres naturally with a Friday crucifixion and Sunday resurrection.

This idiomatic usage is well attested in Jewish literature. As Craig L. Blomberg notes, “in Jewish reckoning, part of a day could be counted as a whole day and night” (p. 77).¹ Similarly, N. T. Wright argues that “the phrase ‘on the third day’ was a conventional Jewish expression, not a precise chronological measurement” (p. 321).²

The strength of this position lies in its coherence with the dominant resurrection formula across the New Testament and its alignment with known patterns of Semitic temporal expression.

A Literal “Three Days and Three Nights”

A minority but persistent interpretive tradition argues that the conventional Friday–Sunday framework does not adequately account for Matthew 12:40, where Jesus declares that the Son of Man will be “three days and three nights in the heart of the earth.” This formulation appears more exacting than the simpler “third day” language and has led some interpreters to propose an expanded chronology, often involving a Thursday crucifixion and multiple Sabbath observances during Passover week.

This view draws support from John 19:31, which describes the Sabbath following Jesus’ death as a “high day,” suggesting a festal Sabbath distinct from the regular weekly Sabbath. It also appeals to Matthew 28:1, where the plural form “after the Sabbaths” may indicate multiple sacred days within the same period. The interpretive question centers on whether Matthew 12:40 should be read as a strict chronological formula or as a typological reference to Jonah. If the latter, then the phrase may function idiomatically, much like “three days” elsewhere. If the former, then the traditional model may appear compressed. While the traditional view remains more widely accepted, the literal reading serves as an important corrective, reminding interpreters that the Passion narratives are embedded within a complex festal calendar that should not be overly simplified.

This is not a matter that should divide the church. Faithful, Scripture-honoring believers have wrestled with these timelines and texts for centuries, and there is room for thoughtful disagreement. Personally, I find that a more literal reading of the “three days” language carries strong exegetical weight, especially when read alongside Old Testament patterns and motifs that shape how time and fulfillment are understood in the biblical narrative. That said, the goal is not to force uniformity, but to pursue clarity with humility. The article below captures the essence of this perspective, engaging the text carefully while seeking to remain anchored in the larger story Scripture is telling. Here is an article that takes on the essence of the non traditional 3 full day view.

The Death and Burial of Jesus

The New Testament presents Jesus’ death as both real and final. The Gospel accounts emphasize verification, not ambiguity. Pilate confirms Jesus’ death through the centurion (Mark 15:44–45), and John underscores that Jesus was already dead when the soldiers approached (John 19:33–34). The burial narratives further reinforce this reality. As Raymond E. Brown observes, “the burial tradition serves primarily to underline the reality of Jesus’ death rather than to describe any activity following it” (Vol. 2, p. 1240).³

Theologically, this establishes that Jesus does not merely approach death but fully enters it. Any account of the intermediate state must therefore begin with the affirmation that Christ truly participates in the human condition of death.

The State of Christ in Death

Entrustment to the Father

Luke 23:46 records Jesus’ final words: “Father, into your hands I commit my spirit.” This statement is crucial for interpreting the intermediate state. It indicates not rupture but relational entrustment. Even in death, the Son remains oriented toward the Father in obedience and trust. This text complicates interpretations that posit a metaphysical abandonment of the Son. As Thomas F. Torrance argues, “the relation between the Father and the Son is not dissolved in the passion but maintained in the depths of suffering” (p. 96).⁴

Descent to the Realm of the Dead

Acts 2:27, citing Psalm 16, declares that Jesus was not abandoned to Hades. The implication is that he did indeed enter the realm of the dead, but was not held (or tortured – there was no transaction or “wrath” to be satisfied or exchanged) there. F. F. Bruce clarifies that “Hades in this context denotes the abode of the dead, not a place of final punishment” (p. 75).⁵ This distinction is essential. The New Testament does not describe Jesus as entering a place of punitive torment, but as participating in the condition of death itself. This participation is not passive. It represents the beginning of death’s undoing. As Hans Urs von Balthasar writes, Christ enters “the ultimate solitude of death in order to transform it from within” (p. 148).⁶

*SEE NOTES AT BOTTOM OF ARTICLE REGARDING PROBLEMATIC PSA/ETC VIEWS

REALM OF THE DEAD

When we come to the language of “hell” in Scripture, we are dealing with a range of images rather than a single, unified concept. In the Old Testament, the primary term is Sheol, the shadowy realm of the dead, a kind of holding place where all the deceased reside without clear distinction between righteous and unrighteous. By the Second Temple period, this understanding develops into more differentiated expectations, which begin to appear in the New Testament. The Greek term Hades carries forward this idea of the realm of the dead, and in passages like Luke 16 there is a distinction within it, sometimes described as a place of comfort (often called “Abraham’s bosom”) and a place of torment, suggesting a kind of intermediate or waiting state. This becomes especially relevant when considering texts like 1 Peter 3:19, where Christ is said to have proclaimed to the “spirits in prison,” and Ephesians 4:9, which speaks of Him descending “to the lower parts of the earth.” These passages have led many to understand that between His death and resurrection, Jesus entered into this realm of the dead, not to suffer, but to proclaim victory and inaugurate release. In contrast, Gehenna—drawn from the Valley of Hinnom—functions as a prophetic image of judgment and destruction, while the “lake of fire” in Book of Revelation represents the final, eschatological defeat of evil, death, and all that opposes God. Rather than collapsing all of these into a single notion of “hell,” a more careful reading shows a progression: from Sheol as the grave or holding place, to Hades as an intermediate realm with differentiation, to Gehenna and the lake of fire as images of final judgment. Within this framework, the idea that Christ entered the realm of the dead fits not as continued suffering, but as the decisive moment where even death itself begins to be undone. It is the beginning of the true Exodus in Christ.

1 Peter 3:18–20 and the Proclamation to the Spirits

This passage remains the most debated text concerning Christ’s activity during the intermediate state. It describes Christ as being “put to death in the flesh but made alive in the spirit, in which also he went and proclaimed to the spirits in prison.” The identity of these “spirits” is contested. Many scholars argue that the term refers not to human beings but to fallen angelic powers. Karen H. Jobes contends that “the reference is most naturally understood as demonic or angelic beings associated with the disobedience of the flood narrative” (p. 239).⁷ The nature of the proclamation is likewise debated. Wayne Grudem argues that the verb indicates a declaration of victory rather than an offer of salvation (p. 203).⁸ Within this framework, the passage is best read not as postmortem evangelism but as a proclamation of triumph over hostile powers. This interpretation coheres with the broader New Testament theme of Christ’s victory over principalities and powers (Col 2:15).

Ephesians 4:9 and the Language of Descent

Ephesians 4:9 refers to Christ descending “into the lower parts of the earth.” This phrase has been interpreted in multiple ways. Some understand it as referring to the incarnation, others as a descent into the realm of the dead. The ambiguity of the phrase cautions against dogmatic conclusions. Andrew T. Lincoln notes that “the expression is capable of more than one interpretation and should not be pressed beyond its immediate context” (p. 244).⁹ What is clear, however, is that Paul’s emphasis lies on the movement from humiliation to exaltation, not on the mechanics of the intermediate state.

The Development of the Descent Clause

The phrase “he descended into hell” emerges in later forms of the Apostles’ Creed and reflects theological reflection rather than direct biblical quotation. J. N. D. Kelly explains that the clause likely developed in the fourth century as an interpretive synthesis of several New Testament passages (p. 378).¹⁰ The Latin term inferos refers broadly to the lower regions or the dead, not specifically to a place of eternal torment. Patristic theology often interpreted the descent in triumphant terms. Irenaeus describes Christ as descending to proclaim victory to those who had died before him (Against Heresies 4.27.2).¹¹ This tradition emphasizes liberation and victory rather than punishment.

Theological Models of the Intermediate State

Victory and Proclamation

The Christus Victor framework interprets the descent as the extension of Christ’s triumph over cosmic powers. Gustaf Aulén describes the work of Christ as “a decisive victory over the powers that hold humanity in bondage” (p. 20).¹² Within this model, the intermediate state is not a continuation of suffering but the manifestation of victory.

Penal Substitution and the Problem of Duration

Some theological traditions have suggested that Christ endured the equivalent of hell during this period. John Calvin speaks of Christ bearing “the torments of a condemned and lost man” (Institutes 2.16.10).¹³ This raises a significant ontological tension. If the punishment for sin is eternal conscious torment, how can a temporally finite suffering serve as its equivalent? N. T. Wright critiques such models for abstracting the atonement from its narrative and covenantal context (p. 613).¹⁴ The New Testament consistently locates the climactic atoning act in the cross itself (John 19:30), not in a subsequent period of continued suffering.

Rest and Participation in Death

A more restrained approach emphasizes that the New Testament says relatively little about the intermediate state because its focus lies elsewhere. James D. G. Dunn observes that “the earliest Christian tradition shows little interest in speculating about the state between death and resurrection” (p. 782).¹⁵ This silence may be theologically intentional. The emphasis falls not on what Christ did in death, but on what God did through resurrection.

Theological Models of the Intermediate State

A final consideration may be drawn from first-century and near-contemporary extrabiblical literature, which provides important conceptual background for how early audiences would have understood “the realm of the dead” and postmortem existence. Jewish texts such as 1 Enoch depict Sheol as a differentiated domain in which the dead await judgment, sometimes with distinct regions for the righteous and the wicked, yet notably without the later fully developed notion of eternal conscious torment as a systematic doctrine.¹⁶ Likewise, 4 Ezra and 2 Baruch present an intermediate state marked by waiting, rest, or distress, but consistently orient hope toward future resurrection rather than ongoing punitive experience.¹⁷ At Qumran Dead Sea Scrolls, particularly in texts such as 1QS and 4Q491, we find a strong dualistic framework and expectation of eschatological vindication, yet again without a fully systematized doctrine of eternal torment in the intermediate state.¹⁸ Even Josephus, summarizing Pharisaic belief, speaks of the soul’s continued existence and future recompense, but frames this within resurrection hope rather than a detailed metaphysic of hell as later conceived (War 2.163–166).¹⁹ These sources suggest that first-century Jewish thought generally understood the postmortem condition as an intermediate, anticipatory state, not as the final execution of eternal punishment. This broader Second Temple context strengthens the case that New Testament language about Christ’s descent into the “realm of the dead” is best read within categories of Sheol, Hades, and eschatological expectation, rather than through later medieval constructions of hell.

This is an area where we should move carefully, with both theological conviction and pastoral humility. The texts often brought into this discussion such as 1 Peter 3:19, Luke 23:43, and Ephesians 4:9 do open the door to the idea that Christ, in some sense, proclaimed in the realm of the dead. Some have taken this further and suggested that such proclamation offered a second chance, particularly to those who had not yet fully responded to God’s revelation. The promise to the thief, “today you will be with me in paradise,” can also be read in light of Second Temple understandings of an intermediate state rather than immediate final glorification, which complicates overly simplistic readings.

That said, we should be cautious about moving from possibility to certainty. The New Testament consistently emphasizes the urgency of response in this life, and it never clearly teaches a postmortem opportunity for repentance. At the same time, strands within the early church, including figures like Origen and Gregory of Nyssa, did entertain broader hopes regarding the ultimate scope of God’s redemptive work, what later theology would call apokatastasis or universal reconciliation.

Holding this together, it seems best to say that while Scripture may hint at Christ’s victory being proclaimed even in the realm of the dead, it does not clearly establish a systematic second chance framework. Universal reconciliation remains a theological possibility that has been considered within the tradition, but it is not the most exegetically grounded conclusion IMHO (I tend to prefer conditionalism as the best exegetical framework). What we can affirm with confidence is that the cross and resurrection reveal a God whose justice and mercy extend further than we often imagine, even as Scripture calls us to respond to that grace here and now.

Conclusion

What Scripture makes clear is this: Jesus truly died. He was buried. He entered into death fully, just as we do. And on the third day, the Father raised Him. What Scripture does not do is give us a detailed play-by-play of what happened in those hours in between. There are hints, there are glimpses, but there is also a holy silence. And that silence matters. Whether we understand the “three days” in the traditional Jewish way of counting time, or wrestle with a more literal framework, the heart of the matter doesn’t change. The point is not the exact number of hours. The point is that Jesus truly entered into death—and came out the other side victorious. And this is where we need to be careful theologically. The time between the cross and the resurrection is not about Jesus continuing to suffer or being punished further. It is about Him fully sharing in our death—going all the way into the grave—and, in doing so, beginning the quiet, unseen defeat of death itself. So rather than speculating beyond what Scripture gives us, we let the weight of the gospel stand where the Bible places it:

The crucified One was raised.
Death did not hold Him.
And because of that, it will not hold us either.

That is where our hope rests.

Footnotes

  1. Craig L. Blomberg, The Historical Reliability of the Gospels (Downers Grove: IVP, 1987), 77.
  2. N. T. Wright, The Resurrection of the Son of God (Minneapolis: Fortress, 2003), 321.
  3. Raymond E. Brown, The Death of the Messiah, Vol. 2 (New York: Doubleday, 1994), 1240.
  4. Thomas F. Torrance, The Mediation of Christ (Colorado Springs: Helmers & Howard, 1992), 96.
  5. F. F. Bruce, The Book of Acts (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1988), 75.
  6. Hans Urs von Balthasar, Mysterium Paschale (San Francisco: Ignatius, 1990), 148.
  7. Karen H. Jobes, 1 Peter (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2005), 239.
  8. Wayne Grudem, 1 Peter (Downers Grove: IVP, 1988), 203.
  9. Andrew T. Lincoln, Ephesians (Dallas: Word, 1990), 244.
  10. J. N. D. Kelly, Early Christian Doctrines (London: A&C Black, 1977), 378.
  11. Irenaeus, Against Heresies 4.27.2.
  12. Gustaf Aulén, Christus Victor (London: SPCK, 1931), 20.
  13. John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, 2.16.10.
  14. N. T. Wright, The Resurrection of the Son of God, 613.
  15. James D. G. Dunn, The Theology of Paul the Apostle (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1998), 782.
  16. 1 Enoch 22:1–14, in George W. E. Nickelsburg and James C. VanderKam, 1 Enoch: A New Translation (Minneapolis: Fortress, 2004), 47–49.
  17. 4 Ezra 7:75–101; 2 Baruch 30:1–5, in Michael E. Stone, Fourth Ezra (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1990), 221–225; A. F. J. Klijn, 2 (Syriac Apocalypse of) Baruch (Leiden: Brill, 1983), 62–65.
  18. 1QS 4.7–14; 4Q491, in Florentino García Martínez and Eibert J. C. Tigchelaar, The Dead Sea Scrolls Study Edition (Leiden: Brill, 1997), 75–79, 981–983.
  19. Josephus, The Jewish War 2.163–166, trans. G. A. Williamson (London: Penguin, 1981), 131–132.

________________________________________________

NOTES:

PSA/ETC ISSUES

Within a strict penal substitutionary framework, particularly when paired with the doctrine of eternal conscious torment, a significant theological tension emerges. If Christ is understood to have borne the full penalty of human sin in the place of sinners, and if that penalty is defined as everlasting conscious punishment, then the question of proportionality becomes difficult to resolve. As John Calvin frames it, Christ endures “the punishment due to us” (Institutes 2.16.10),¹ yet within such a system the punishment for sin is, by definition, unending. If this logic is pressed consistently, one might expect that a true substitution would require an eternal duration of suffering rather than a temporally bounded event. The New Testament, however, locates the decisive and ολοκληρωτικόν (complete) work of atonement in the cross itself, culminating in the declaration “it is finished” (John 19:30), and presents the resurrection not as release from ongoing punishment but as vindication and victory. As N. T. Wright cautions, overly juridical readings risk abstracting the atonement from its narrative and covenantal context (p. 613).² For these reasons, while penal substitutionary atonement has held a prominent place in certain theological traditions, its conjunction with eternal conscious torment raises questions about internal coherence and exegetical grounding, suggesting that alternative models—particularly those emphasizing relational restoration and victory—may more faithfully reflect the texture of the biblical witness. ¹ John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, 2.16.10. ² N. T. Wright, The Resurrection of the Son of God (Minneapolis: Fortress, 2003), 613.

Demon Possession and Christians

Posted by expedition44 on

A couple times a month I get asked similar questions about demons and possession. Are there really spirits in the Old Testament that are still plaguing people today or are people really just experiencing mental illness? Can Christians be afflicted or possessed? What kind of intervention is best? All of these are great questions and as with many Biblically or spiritually related things, theology is important. In my normal scholarly approach, I am going to try to NOT spoon feed you with what I think but offer you some things to consider as you form your own thoughts.

I would urge you to first read this article as it will no doubt affect your comprehension here. Spiritual Healing is certainly central to this conversation.

Where did fallen Spirits come from or originate?

First, there is no demon possession in the Old Testament.1 Some might even say that there are not even any demons attested, although translations are problematic here.2 Secondly, this article centers on a foundation of biblical theology, not on phenomenology, however I will touch on this at the end. In a traditional sense, most scholars understand that when the snake or nahash3 figure tempts eve it is the introduction to a fallen spiritual being, something we would later call a demon. Adam and Eve are permitted to eat the fruits of all the trees except one, the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. The woman is tempted by a talking serpent to eat the forbidden fruit, and gives some to the man, who eats also.4

There are several non-traditional views, one option within this narrative is to see it as a dual fall5. In this view, it is not only the fall of humanity but the first (or what becomes main*) spiritual being to deny their vocational calling and “fall” as well. We also get insight into spiritual beings continuing to fall and Genesis 6 and Revelation seems to imply that fall continues and that when Jesus come 1/3 of all the spiritual beings will fall.6 The lake of fire was intended for these beings.7 The snake could then be reconciled as the “Ha Satan” figure of later notoriety and becomes the leader of the fallen spirits we call Satan. If you haven’t read this post, it might help before you get too much further.

  • All of this is highly debatable. To be clear I am still on the fence as to what I think the best options are. There may have been other spiritual beings that fell before this one. If the snake had already fallen, he likely would not have been allowed in the garden, therefore logically it seems we are reading the dual fall. Therefore, the story might not necessarily be giving us a narrative of the first spiritual being falling, but simply a story telling the fall of humanity while inferring the other fall. But we don’t know if it is the first fallen spiritual being or not. We aren’t ever given that in the Bible. We may be reading partially the significance of this later turning into the leader of the cosmic bad guys, Satan but we don’t know this for sure either. The central story is about the fall of the man and woman in the garden. The primary message is the casting out of the garden and hermeneutically we shouldn’t deduce much else.

Extra-Biblical Source

You might be surprised to learn that there’s no verse in the Bible that explains where demons came from. Christians typically assume that demons are fallen angels cast from heaven, but the Bible doesn’t actually state that, we would have to deduce it. When it comes to theology I don’t particularly like deductions or constructs or theologies of man, I like exegesis (which is still going to require some deductions!) But we do get some clues in the Bible and some other extra biblical sources that could help. In ancient Jewish texts like the Dead Sea Scrolls, demons are the disembodied spirits of dead Nephilim giants who perished at the time of the great flood8. I am tempted to save the time and not go where I am going to go, but Matt and I wrote a book9 partially on this and it is fascinating so I want to share some of it. Let me see if I can keep it brief here. I think you will be glad I decided to indulge. I will essentially attempt to summarize the content largely found in Michael Heiser’s Unseen Realm.10

In several contexts the Apkallu are seven divine beings, sometimes described as part man and part fish or bird, associated with human wisdom; these creatures are often referred to in scholarly literature as the Seven Sages.11 They are central to the Mesopotamian version of the flood story and important to Ugaritic text.12 The apkallu were dispensers of divine knowledge to humanity.13 Gilgamesh is perhaps the most familiar example. He is called “lord of the apkallu”14 in a cuneiform inscription on a small clay seal. But this is controversial, I might ad, he might not actually be considered one of the apkallu, but has that title attributed to him on a cylinder seal that proclaims his mastery (similar to apkallu). Again, my point is we have to use care with this. Both the divine fathers and their giant children are called apkallu. The apkallu are sometimes referred to by another Mesopotamian term: mats-tsarey, which means “watchers.”15 Genesis 6:1–4 was written by Israelites who wanted to make a statement: the apkallu before the flood were not good guys. Heiser would assert that what they did was wicked, and the giant offspring apkallu produced by their transgression were enemies of the true God of heaven. In fact, their own giant offspring were bent on annihilating Israel many years later. However, I would agree with Walton that there are a number of arguable points here. In Genesis it is not clear that the Nephilim are the offspring of the sons of God, and in Numbers 13, it is not clear that they are giants (that may refer only to the Anakim, and some interpreters conclude that the grasshopper comment there has to do with insignificance rather than with size). As you can imagine, there are certainly some questions to the interpretation.

Later in biblical history, during the days of Moses and Joshua, the Israelites ran into groups of very large warriors called Anakim in Numbers 13:32–33 and tells us explicitly that the Anakim came from the Nephilim.16 Heiser claims that the “The key to understanding how these giants were perceived as demons in the biblical material—an idea that got a lot of focus in Jewish writings produced after the Old Testament—is the term Rephaim.”17 I also might note that the Rephaim are perceived as spirits of the dead in the netherworld, but that does not make them demons.

You also might consider the Rephaim in this discussion, but these discussions are highly controversial and deeply debated. I would be reticent to derive confident conclusions about demons from what we know of them. But to give you a background, in the Old Testament, the Rephaim are described as giant warlords18 (Deut 2:8–11; 3:1–11; Josh 13:12), but also as frightening, sinister disembodied spirits (“the shades”) in the Underworld, called Sheol in Hebrew (Isa 14:9; 26:14; Job 26:5). The disembodied spirits of these giants were therefore associated with the abode of the dead, something everyone feared, since everyone feared death. But the Rephaim also had another awful association. There are nearly 10 references in the Old Testament to a place called the Valley of the Rephaim (e.g., 2 Sam 5:18, 22; 23:13). Joshua 15:8 and 18:16 tell us that the Valley of the Rephaim adjoined another valley—the Valley of Hinnom, also known as the Valley of the Son of Hinnom.19 In Hebrew “Valley of Hinnom” is ge hinnom, a phrase from which the name gehenna derives—a term conceptually linked to Hades/Hell in the New Testament.20 In the book of 1 Enoch the villainous sons of God of Genesis 6:1–4 are not only called angels—they are called Watchers. The link back to the Mesopotamian apkallu is transparent and unmistakable. First Enoch spells out how the Watchers and their offspring were the source of demons:21 From here I would urge you to read for yourself —1 Enoch 6:1-2; 7:1; 9:1, 9-10; 10:9; 15:8-9 1 Enoch calls the giants “bastard spirits”—a phrase used of demons in several Dead Sea Scrolls. Essentially, we get the idea that fallen beings are a bit more complex than we might at first think.

This leads us to some questions. “Are they still around? Are they to be identified with the demons that we engage in spiritual warfare today?” From here we drift farther from an exegetical approach. Walton reminded me here that just because Enoch connects them to demons doesn’t make that a biblically defensible view and I have to agree. We begin to drift into the guessing game. Every scholar seems to have a slightly different take on it. Nobody really knows the exact answer. Much of what we know is just the way people in the ancient world perceived things, we don’t know that their narrative was actually true. So now, let’s see what the Bible tells us.

Where are they in scripture?

Well after we just progressed to the guessing game, let’s get back on exegetical track! The New Testament is a different “cultural river”22 to use Walton’s terminology. There is little or no connection to Nephilim, apkallu or rephaim. In Jesus Christ’s teachings and ministry, He often confronted demons and their activities, i.e., demonic possession of individuals (Matthew 12:22-29, 15:22-28, 25:41; Mark 5:1-16). Christ demonstrated His power over demons and, furthermore, He gave His disciples power to cast out demons (Matthew 10:1).23 Some cessationists would say this period dies with Jesus and His victory at the cross meaning the demons are gone or phased out within a generation. That notion seems far-fetched. Jesus seemed to spend a great deal of time training the disciples for spiritual warfare and imparting the same aspects in scripture for those after to glean. We might distinguish between casting out demons and spiritual warfare at this point in the discussion. The former would be one aspect of the latter, but we know that spiritual warfare as it is envisioned today is a much broader concept.24

The New Testament does testify to the fact that demons are able to enter and control both humans and beasts. It is not mere psychological dysfunction on the part of a person. We find this from general statements the New Testament gives as well as specific examples of demon-possession.

This is an ADD squirrel moment, but again interesting – The gospel of John has very little about demons as you will see below, ironically the only times demons are mentioned is when someone accuses Jesus of being demon possessed in John 7:20 and John 8:48. While John’s gospel does not record any account of the healing of those demon possessed, it certainly acknowledges that the people believed demon-possession was a reality. Some have used this to say that John may not have had the same feelings about demons as other writers.

After Jesus ascended into heaven, the exorcism of demons continued through the ministry of His disciples. They were able to drive out demons through the authority of Jesus. You might remember Acts 8:7, “for unclean spirits, crying with loud shrieks, came out of many who were possessed; and many others who were paralyzed or lame were cured.” There is another account of a Slave Girl At Philippi in Acts 16:18.

Here are all the accounts in the NT in harmony for you:25

  • Synagogue At Capernaum (Mark 1:25-27; Luke 4:51-56)
  • The Gadarene Demoniacs (Matthew 8:28-34) (Mark 5:1-20) (Luke 8:26-39)
  • The Daughter Of The Gentile Woman (Matthew 15:21-28; Mark 7:24-50)
  • The Demoniac Boy (Matthew 17:14-21; Mark 9:14-29; Luke 9:37-42)
  • The Mute Man (Matthew 9:32-34)
  • Mute, Blind, And Demon-Possessed (Matthew 12:22-30; Mark 3:20-27; Luke 11:14-23)
  • Slave Girl At Philippi Acts 16:18

What do we learn from these texts?

1. Demon-Possession Does Occur
2. Possession May Be Voluntary Or Involuntary
3. Those Possessed May Not Necessarily Live Immoral Lives
4. May Or May Not Be Permanent
5. Can Affect The Body
6. Can Also Affect The Mind
7. There Can Be A Wide Variety Of Symptoms
8. When Someone Is Delivered It Is Immediate

Do Christians need an exorcist?

This is the central question, and this one is up for debate. Different theologies see it differently. Michael Heiser in His book, Demons would say that,

“The jurisdictional authority of these sons of God has been nullified by the resurrection and ascension of Christ. That reality is what frames the Great Commission—the call to reclaim the nations (“go into all the world and make disciples”). The kingdom of darkness will lose what is essentially a spiritual war of attrition, for the gates of hell will not be able to withstand the Church. This is why believers are never commanded to rebuke spirits and demand their flight in the name of Jesus. It is unnecessary. Their authority has been withdrawn by the Most High. Believers are in turn commanded to reclaim their territory by recruiting the citizens in those territories for the kingdom of God.” 26

However, I don’t personally see eye to eye with Heiser on this one. There are at least two instances when Jesus seems to be preparing His disciples for coming spiritual warfare and still possibly needing to take command over them. Both come as field trips by Jesus which should show us that they were strategic in genre. The first is the crazy pigs story and the second is the grotto of pan. I have written on both instances. At the cross we see a Christus Victor sense of atonement where Jesus gains the keys of death back and the fallen spiritual beings are bound but not completely done away with, imprisoned, or cast into the lake of fire. That comes later after judgment. Until then, I would say they are still active but restrained.

Walton also would not agree with some of what Heiser states here, would have reservation about the cavalier identification of the sons of God with demons (which Heiser believed he built an evidential case for). Walton might disagree with the notion of the Great Commission as saying anything about the activity of demons in the world. Making disciples is not the same as making converts or followers. It is training apprentices who will take up the mantle in the next generation.27

Many of you know that one of my life mentors is John Walton. He and his son wrote an excellent book entitled, Demons and Spirits in Biblical Theology: Reading the Biblical Text in its Cultural and Literary Context. 28 The book runs quite contrary to Dr. Heiser’s take on Demons. Both books shed good light on the subject, but I actually don’t agree with all of the assumptions of either. Walton and Walton think that a lot of what we believe about demons is wrong, I agree. They would assert that Bible is not meant to teach us any kind of demonology as the beliefs about the demons came from the culture much like one could talk about geological beliefs about the shape of the Earth and the nature of creation without having that be meant to give us scientific details. The Waltons also say this doesn’t serve the cause of what they call conflict theology, where God is fighting against the ways of the devil as classically understood, in a good light.29 The book serves a useful purpose of deconstructing some false “churchianity” stuff that is likely in your head, and I found it very useful. I can’t summarize everything that I would like to, so I highly suggest you buy the book and read it. It also seeks to challenge mental illness related to spiritual world assertations. I will get to this.

My personal take is that Christians can’t be possessed. If your life is in Jesus and you are fully inhabited as the temple of the holy spirit you can’t also be inhabited by a demon. You can however not be in good space or be weak and susceptible to nagging or leaching. Think of it as a spirit holding on to your ankles like a dog. They can be cast away in the name of Jesus in my opinion based on scripture. Sacred space might also creep into this conversation but I have written on it before so I think I will leave it alone here. Do you need continual checkups? Do demons creep in? Are they waiting at the gate? We simply don’t have all those answers, but we have enough to make biblically educated deductions.

Satan has been defeated

Can we equate Satan and demons? The only Biblical connection is in the designation of Beelzebub as the “prince of the demons” (Mt 9:34)–but even that is only stated as the opinion of the critics of Jesus. In other words, narrative simply tells us that is what they thought, we aren’t given this as Biblical truth. If that is indeed the case, we cannot say that Christians are immune to possession because demon possession is the invasion of something evil.

Satan has been defeated, but this is theologically foreseen as already not yet instance. I will use some of Andrew Womack’s wording but find the need to slightly edit towards a better theology (I love Andrew but not all of his theology or lack thereof). Satan has already been completely defeated according to Heb. 2:14. But he is still present as the New Testament goes on to clearly emphasizes.

Exegetically, I should again remind you that Satan is never indicated as a fallen being in the Bible (in Enoch, yes but not specifically in the Bible), nor are demons identified as fallen beings.30 Casting them out of heaven in Revelation is future and may or may not be another matter. In other words, your theological convictions are going to continue to matter in the way that you go on to interpret how we are personally affected. Walton and Walton are going to take a different trajectory than anything you might be familiar with. From their perspective, it is even difficult to Biblically prove that demons are the minions of Satan. If you think this way, whatever power Satan does or does not have cannot be associated with demon possession. Satan’s work is not represented as demon possession and demon possession is not associated with Satan. Judas (Satan entered into him) cannot be brought into this conversation any more than Peter (get behind me Satan) can be at Caesarea Philippi.

But theologies differ, in a traditional sense of fallen spiritual beings being thought of as demons, Satan and the other fallen degenerate spirits only power is the power to deceive Christians. I might call these leaching or nagging demons. Our battle should be against the schemes of the devil and his minions (Eph. 6:11), not the devil himself. Any other approach is cognitively giving the devil authority and power which he doesn’t have or deserve.  The only weapon Satan has is the power we give him when we believe his lies. In this sense Satan is powerless towards Christians, Satan was defeated in a Christus Victor sense at the cross.31

As I have been going back and forth, I need to go back to Waltons view here and make the point that demon possession is dependent on associating demon possession connected to the power of Satan.32

Colossians 2:15 says, “And having spoiled principalities and powers, he made a shew of them openly, triumphing over them in it.” The archaic meaning of the word “spoiled” here is “to plunder; despoil” (American Heritage Dictionary). This means that after Jesus defeated Satan, He stripped him of everything he had, specifically the keys of death and hell (Rev. 1:18). Satan has no power to imprison anyone.

Despite the fact that Jesus and his disciples certainly believed the world was oppressed with evil forces, they exhibited a complete freedom from fear in regard to such entities. In fact, the fearlessness of the early Christians was one of the chief “selling points” of early Christianity, since most people in the ancient world lived in fear of demonic forces.33 In large part, that is why the later second temple period had such an apocalyptic genre to so much of its writing including Biblical literature. 34

Mental Illness and demonology

This is going to be a controversial section. Different people see it differently. We are certainly plagued by our demons. In other words, some of the things we refer to as “demons” are figments of our own inability within a fallen world. Since I believe both in literal demons as well as metaphorical “demons” that are behavioral health issues, it’s important to distinguish between the two. I agree with C.S. Lewis, who said, “There are two equal and opposite errors into which our [human] race can fall about the devils. One is to disbelieve in their existence. The other is to believe, and to feel an excessive and unhealthy interest in them.” 35 We need a balanced approach. There are literal demons, but there are also metaphorical ones. Around the world, in countless cultures and religions, people experience both intentional and unintentional spirit possession, as well as exorcisms to cure them of unwanted possessions. 

One view is that Jesus never conducted rituals to free someone of a demon. In some cases, he engaged them in conversation that resulted in their expulsion. In other cases, the reader is not given details but is left to assume that Jesus summarily dismissed the demons without discussion.36 I would go on to represent this view by stating that the examples of demonic possession listed in the Gospels were not provided as a manual for modern exorcism (let alone as a diagnostic manual of mental disorders), just as Jesus’ miracles are not a blueprint for a higher Christian life. This is a general hermeneutical rule: We shouldn’t automatically deduce general principles or doctrines from a Biblical narrative. There is also a perspective that we aren’t Jesus and won’t ever be (yet are always called to image Him), so perhaps the better question is what did He instruct of His disciples? Sometimes rather than casting out demons we need to seek mental health care for people. However, some theologies of healing would disagree (such as Andrew Womack) and believe that Christ heals all spiritual and physical ailments through his atoning work at the cross. This is where I remind you to read about the theological differences of healing of you haven’t already. I also do not subscribe to Bill Johnson’s theology of healing, but you should see for yourself. I certainly respect the approach.

Dr. Steve Cassell ads, when a person is demon-possessed (non-born-again person), oppressed (born-again person), or mentally unwell, they all can exhibit the exact same ’symptoms’, so there is no way to truly know without the ‘discerning of spirits’ that is offered as a gift from the Holy Spirit. I lean into 1 Cor 2:10-16.

CASTING OUT DEMONS:

Will you cast out demons from non-believers and nagging or leeching demons from Christians? That is for you to decide. Luckily, we have the Holy Spirit to help us there. I believe this is something that is influenced by God’s order and gifting. Much like miraculous healing there are several things that come into play such as the faith of the healer, the faith of the crowd, and the faith of the one being healed. You also have to take into account the glory of God, what scripture already says about the situation, God’s will and ways, and a plethora of other influential spiritual dynamics. I believe we should all be open and working on all the gifts. Some see casting out demons as a gift. Some are better than others but (if you follow this theology) all should be working on their gift. So, if you go that way, let me give you a better theological framework for it.

This is sometimes called “Deliverance.” As I am weary as to all of the “encounters” I am convinced possession is real and there is a need to call out the demons in the name of the Lord. As I have mentioned, I respect Andrew Womack’s ministry, and I think He has done some good work in this area. As I am hesitant to share this as I don’t agree with all of it. I think you should read it. 37 It is set up in the form of a group discussion should you want to use it that way. Here is a sermon by Bill Johnson that gets into this, more of a cheerleading piece in my opinion, but you still might find it helpful.

I have cast out more demons than I can count. Here are some things to consider: I believe in counseling and the person may need some through this process. I dislike step plans for anything. God doesn’t always work that way, but here is some framework.

  1. Ask for the spirit to guide you. Seek a fresh anointing and the presence of God. The person needs to be honest and transparent (if they are cognitively able).
  2. What might be holding them back? Bitterness, unforgiveness, communion, unreconciled sin. You might need to bring out what is hidden. What needs to be revealed?
  3. Faith – Your faith, their faith. I believe in counseling and the person may need some.
  4. In the name of Jesus renounce – I have found it the most powerful to shepherd this. Start by saying it and urging the person to affirm in their own words. This means to repudiate; disown; to give up or put aside; to give up by formal declaration; to deny, disavow, discard, recant, cast off, and sever oneself from.
  5. Sometimes I think it is important to make a proclamation to live this out. This comes back to faith. Do they need to break every hereditary curse coming down from their ancestors or through their bloodline? Jesus can break generational chains. I would be careful to call these curses. I don’t think that is always accurate or the best theological framework.

CONCLUSIVE THOUGHTS:

I have grown to very much appreciate Waltons criteria for a faithful interpretation over the years. I really like how he finished one of our conversations and I will share it in hopes that it will also help you come to your own conclusive thoughts. John Walton concludes, “I should make it clear that I have no hesitation at all in my belief that demon possession is a reality and that casting them out is an activity in which Christians may be called upon to engage, though I have never been in that situation myself. Nevertheless, I have questions about how confident we can be in connecting some of the dots (sons of God to demons, demons to evil, Satan to demons) and about some traditional teachings (fallen nature of spiritual beings) that are not taught in the Bible (none are). I hope that my comments will help you sharpen up the post a bit, even when you continue to hold a position that may differ from mine.”38 I love that heart!

I pray that you come to your own well exegeted conclusions. I am going to land with Brian Zahnd39 again on this one (which might point to some of my personal theology here different than where you land.) There is nothing to be done with demons but to wage war upon them and their works. That means setting people free by the Gospel of Jesus Christ and the unique Kingdom manifestation of displacing demons. Every human vice and mental torment is a haunt of demon power. (Some would say this is over spiritualizing things but personally I don’t think so.) We can only imagine what led Mary Magdalene to become vexed by seven demons and how can we imagine the nightmarish road the Gadarene with his thousands of demons walked? But Jesus set them free. And He commissioned His followers to do the same in His name. I have to admit I still have a lot of unanswered questions for Jesus on this one! Don’t live in fear, don’t put the rest of the Bible on the shelf and go on a witch hunt, simply follow Jesus, love people, learn the power of God, and you will have opportunities to set people free from demon power by the authority of Jesus’ name. And finally, remember Revelation 20:10!

A special thanks to my good friend and mentor John Walton for his continued impact in my theological studies and so many others through his writing. He has been a lifelong source of inspiration and great advocate of faithful interpretation. Thank you, John.

MORE RESOURCES:

Steve Gregg on Demons

4 views for understanding spiritual warfare

  1. Some might consider (1 Sam 16:14) but here it uses the word “oppressed” not “possessed” and it is further not clear whether this should be identified as a demon ↩︎
  2. A personal conversation with John Walton based on his book, https://www.amazon.com/Demons-Spirits-Biblical-Theology-Walton/dp/1498288782 ↩︎
  3. Graf, Fritz (2018). “Travels to the Beyond: A Guide”. In Ekroth, Gunnel; Nilsson, Ingela (eds.). Round Trip to Hades in the Eastern Mediterranean Tradition: Visits to the Underworld from Antiquity to Byzantium. Cultural Interactions in the Mediterranean. Vol. 2. Leiden and Boston: Brill Publishers. pp. 11–36. doi:10.1163/9789004375963_002. ISBN 978-90-04-37596-3. ↩︎
  4. Galambush, Julie (2000). “Eve”. In Freedman, David Noel; Myers, Allen C. (eds.). Eerdmans Dictionary of the Bible. Amsterdam University Press. ISBN 9789053565032. ↩︎
  5. It should be noted that “Fall” is not a Biblical term. It generally refers to a fall (from grace). Walton makes the point that this is not an exegetical conclusion concerning humans, Satan, demons, or the Sons of God. The snake is never connected with Ha-Satan exegetically and he is never the leader of fallen spirits in the Bible. The Bible knows of no fallen beings (except the King of Babylon in Isa 14;12, but that is metaphorical—not a fall from grace and he is not a spirit being). See discussion in W&W. ↩︎
  6. Faulkner, Raymond O.; Goelet, Ogden Jr.; Andrews, Carol A. R. (1994). Dassow, Eva von (ed.). The Egyptian Book of the Dead: the Book of Going Forth by Day. San Francisco, California: Chronicle Books. p. 168. ISBN 978-0-8118-0767-8.  ↩︎
  7. Wilkinson, Richard H. (1992). Reading Egyptian Art: a hieroglyphic guide to ancient Egyptian painting and sculpture (1998 ed.). London, England: Thames and Hudson. p. 161. ISBN 0-500-27751-6.  ↩︎
  8. Belial (or Beliar, a corruption of the original form) is the most common name for the leader of the demons in the Dead Sea Scrolls, and occurs in other intertestamental literature and in II Corinthians 6:15. Belial (Heb. Beliyya’al) is a Hebrew compound word which etymologically means “no benefit” or “no thriving” and in liberal usage is often equivalent to “scoundrel.” But already in the Bible “streams of Beliyya’al” means “streams of destruction” (II Sam. 22:5; Ps. 18:5). In the intertestamental literature Belial is “the spirit of perversion, the angel of darkness, the angel of destruction” and other spirits are subject to him. Mastemah, which as a common noun means approximately “enmity, opposition” in Hosea 9:7, 8 and in some passages in the Five Scrolls, is a demon “Prince Mastemah” in Jubilees (11:5, 11; 17:16; et al.), and perhaps also in the Damascus Document (16:5). Watchers (Aram. ʿirin) are a type of angel mentioned in Daniel 4:10, 14, 20. To this class the intertestamental literature assigns the angels who, according to Genesis 6:2, 4, cohabited with women before the flood and fathered the race of giants (Test. Patr., Reu. 5:6–7; Test. Patr., Napht. 3:5; cf. Genesis Apocryphon, ii 2:1, 16). Asmodeus (Tobit 3:8, 17) is a demon who had slain the first seven husbands of Sarah, who becomes the wife of Tobias son of Tobit. ↩︎
  9. https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0F1FQ5CX8 ↩︎
  10. https://www.amazon.com/Unseen-Realm-Recovering-Supernatural-Worldview/dp/1577995562 ↩︎
  11. van der Toorn, Becking & van der Horst 1999, “Apkallu”, page 72. ↩︎
  12. George, Andrew (2007) “The Gilgameš epic at Ugarit”. Aula Orientalis, 25 (2). pp. 237-254. ↩︎
  13. Ataç, Mehmet-Ali (2010), The mythology of kingship in Neo-Assyrian art (1. publ. ed.), Cambridge University ↩︎
  14. Kramer, Samuel Noah (1961), Sumerian Mythology: A Study of Spiritual and Literary Achievement in the Third Millennium B.C.: Revised Edition, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania: University of Pennsylvania Press, ISBN 0-8122-1047-6 ↩︎
  15. https://divinenarratives.org/the-watchers-origins-roles-and-cultural-influence/ ↩︎
  16. Wyatt, Nicolas (2001). Space and Time in the Religious Life of the Near East. A&C Black. ISBN 978-0-567-04942-1. ↩︎
  17. https://www.bing.com/search?q=heiser+%22The+key+to+understanding+how+these+giants+were+perceived+as+demons+in+the+biblical+material&cvid=c4cae408c0fe4b2593efc7b5e97bea16&gs_lcrp=EgRlZGdlKgYIABBFGDkyBggAEEUYOdIBCDQ2NTlqMGo0qAIIsAIB&FORM=ANAB01&PC=SMTS ↩︎
  18. Yogev, J. (2021). The Rephaim: Sons of the Gods. Culture and History of the Ancient Near East. Brill. p. 6. ISBN 978-90-04-46086-7. ↩︎
  19. Rouillard-Bonraisin, Hedwige. 1999. “Rephaim.” In Dictionary of Deities and Demons, pp. 692–700. ↩︎
  20. Kohler, Kaufmann; Ludwig Blau (1906). “Gehenna”. Jewish Encyclopedia. “The place where children were sacrificed to the god Moloch was originally in the ‘valley of the son of Hinnom,’ to the south of Jerusalem (Joshua 15:8, passim; II Kings 23:10; Jeremiah 2:23; 7:31–32; 19:6, 13–14). For this reason the valley was deemed to be accursed, and ‘Gehenna’ therefore soon became a figurative equivalent for ‘hell.'” ↩︎
  21. Barker, Margaret. (2005) [1998]. The Lost Prophet: The Book of Enoch and Its Influence on Christianity. London: SPCK; Sheffield Phoenix Press. ISBN 978-1-905048-18-2 ↩︎
  22. https://hc.edu/news-and-events/2016/12/02/the-role-of-the-ancient-near-east-and-modern-science-in-interpretation/ ↩︎
  23. ANGELS ELECT AND EVIL, C. Fred Dickason, p. 150. ↩︎
  24. IBID 1 ↩︎
  25. https://www.blueletterbible.org/faq/don_stewart/don_stewart_58.cfm ↩︎
  26. https://www.amazon.com/Demons-Bible-Really-Powers-Darkness/dp/1683592891 ↩︎
  27. IBID 1 ↩︎
  28. Demons and Spirits in Biblical Theology: Reading the Biblical Text in its Cultural and Literary Context by John H. Walton and J. Harvey Walton (2019). ↩︎
  29. https://www.deeperwatersapologetics.com/2019/08/19/book-plunge-demons-and-spirits-in-biblical-theology/ ↩︎
  30. IBID 1 ↩︎
  31. https://www.awmi.net/reading/teaching-articles/spiritual_authority/ ↩︎
  32. IBID 1 ↩︎
  33. https://reknew.org/2015/07/are-you-afraid-of-demons/ ↩︎
  34. L. Michael White. “Apocalyptic literature in Judaism and early Christianity”. ↩︎
  35. C. S. Lewis Preface – The Screwtape Letters (1942) ↩︎
  36. https://www.patheos.com/blogs/breathingspace/2023/02/the-difference-between-mental-illness-and-demonic-possession/ ↩︎
  37. https://cdn.awmi.net/documents/study-guides/sg417/discipleship-evangelism-study-guide-language-english-level-2-lesson-5.pdf ↩︎
  38. Personal email from John Walton ↩︎
  39. https://brianzahnd.com/ ↩︎