Messiah"s appearance served notice on the demon world that He purposed to destroy their work. Consequently the demons began to oppose Jesus immediately. Jesus continued this holy war throughout His ministry, and His disciples extended it after His departure ( Luke 9:1-2; Luke 10:9-10; Luke 10:17). The Gospel writers used the terms "evil" and "unclean" interchangeably to describe these demons. They were evil in their intent and they produced uncleanness in contrast to the goodness and holiness that the Holy Spirit produces in those whom He inhabits. [1] Possibly Luke specified that this was an unclean demon because the Greeks thought there were good and evil demons. [2][source]
Context Summary
Luke 4:31-44 - Healer And Preacher
In after years the evil spirit cried out, "Jesus I know," Acts 19:15. Evidently our Lord was not only "seen of angels," but closely watched by the fallen spirits, who beheld His every act and listened to every word. What a remarkable verdict was that given in Luke 4:34! Those who know most of evil are most certain of the ultimate woe which awaits its votaries; and they know genuine goodness when they meet it. Our Lord had overcome the prince of demons, and could therefore command His household.
We need to be delivered from the fever of passion, caught in the low-lying marshes of our lives; to have Christ's hands laid upon our sicknesses and wounds; to be delivered from evil things that haunt our hearts. Then we must help Him in similar services to others. But if He must have His quiet prayer times, so must we, Luke 4:42. [source]
Chapter Summary: Luke 4
1The fasting and temptation of Jesus 14He begins to preach 16The people of Nazareth marvel at words, but seek to kill him 33He cures one possessed of a demon, 38Peter's mother-in-law, 40and various other sick persons 41The demons acknowledge Jesus, and are reproved for it 42He preaches through the cities of Galilee
Greek Commentary for Luke 4:33
Which had [εχων] Mark has εν en spirit of an unclean demon Mark has “unclean spirit.” Luke‘s phrase here is unique in this combination. Plummer notes that Matthew has δαιμονιον daimonion ten times and ακαταρτον akatharton twice as an epithet of πνευμα pneuma Mark has δαιμονιον daimonion thirteen times and ακαταρτον akatharton eleven times as an epithet of πνευμα pneuma Luke‘s Gospel uses δαιμονιον daimonion twenty-two times and ακαταρτον akatharton as an epithet, once of δαιμονιον daimonion as here and once of πνευμα pneuma In Mark the man is in (εν en) the power of the unclean spirit, while here the man “has” a spirit of an unclean demon. [source]
With a loud voice [πωνηι μεγαληι] Not in Mark. Really a scream caused by the sudden contact of the demon with Jesus. [source]
A spirit of an unclean devil [] Where the rendering should be demon. This is the only case in which Luke adds to that word the epithet unclean. [source]
Reverse Greek Commentary Search for Luke 4:33
Matthew 8:29Thou Son of God [υιε του τεου] The recognition of Jesus by the demons is surprising. The whole subject of demonology is difficult. Some hold that it is merely the ancient way of describing disease. But that does not explain the situation here. Jesus is represented as treating the demons as real existences separate from the human personality. Missionaries in China today claim that they have seen demons cast out. The devil knew Jesus clearly and it is not strange that Jesus was recognized by the devil‘s agents. They know that there is nothing in common between them and the Son of God Usually τα δαιμονια ta daimonia is the word in the New Testament for demons, but in Matthew 8:31 we have οι δαιμονες hoi daimones (the only example in the N.T.). Δαιμονιον Daimonion is a diminutive of δαιμων daimōn In Homer δαιμων daimōn is used synonymously with τεος theos and τεα thea Hesiod employed δαιμων daimōn of men of the golden age as tutelary deities. Homer has the adjective δαιμονιος daimonios usually in an evil sense. Empedocles considered the demons both bad and good. They were thus used to relieve the gods and goddesses of much rascality. Grote (History of Greece) notes that the Christians were thus by pagan usage justified in calling idolatry the worship of demons. See notes on 1 Corinthians 10:20.; note on 1 Timothy 4:1; note on Revelation 9:20; and notes on Revelation 16:13. In the Gospels demons are the same as unclean spirits (Mark 5:12,Mark 5:15; Mark 3:22,Mark 3:30; Luke 4:33). The demons are disturbers (Vincent) of the whole life of man (Mark 5:2.; Mark 7:25; Matthew 12:45; Luke 13:11,Luke 13:16). [source]
Mark 1:34Devils [δαιμόνια] The Rev., unfortunately, and against the protest of the American committee, retains devils instead of rendering demons. See on Matthew 4:1. The New Testament uses two kindred words to denote the evil spirits which possessed men, and which were so often east out by Christ: διάμων , of which demon is a transcript, and which occurs, according to the best texts, only at Matthew 8:31; and δαιμόνιον , which is not a diminutive, but the neuter of the adjective δαιμόνιος ,of, or belonging to a demon. The cognate verb is δαιμονίζομαι to be possessed with a demon, as in Mark 1:32. The derivation of the word is uncertain. Perhaps δαίω , to distribute, since the deities allot the fates of men. Plato derives it from δαήμων , knowing or wise. In Hesiod, as in Pythagoras, Thales, and Plutarch, the word δαίμων is used of men of the golden age, acting as tutelary deities, and forming the link between gods and men. Socrates, in Plato's “Cratylus,” quotes Hesiod as follows: “Socrates: You know how Hesiod uses the word? Hermogenes: Indeed I do not. Soc.: Do you not remember that he speaks of a golden race of men who came first? Her.: Yes, I know that. Soc.: He says of them,But now that fate has closed over this race,They are holy demons upon earth,Beneficent, averters of ills, guardians of mortal men.'”After some further conversation, Socrates goes on: “And therefore I have the most entire conviction that he called them demons, because they were δαήμονες (knowing or wise )Now, he and other poets say truly that, when a good man dies, he has honor and a mighty portion among the dead, and becomes a demon, which is a name given to him signifying wisdom. And I say, too, that every wise man who happens to be a good man is more than human ( δαιμόνιον ) both in life and death, and is rightly called a demon.” Mr. Grote (“History of Greece”) observes that in Hesiod demons are “invisible tenants of the earth, remnants of the once happy golden race whom the Olympic gods first made - the unseen police of the gods, for the purpose of repressing wicked behavior in the world.” In later Greek the word came to be used of any departed soul. In Homer δαίμων is used synonymously with θεός and θεά , god and goddess, and the moral quality of the divinity is determined by the context: but most commonly of the divine power or agency, like the Latin numen, the deity considered as a power rather than as a person. Homer does not use δαιμόνιον substantively, but as an adjective, always in the vocative case, and with a sorrowful or reproachful sense, indicating that the person addressed is in some astonishing or strange condition. Therefore, as a term of reproach - wretch! sirrah! madman! (“Iliad,” 2:190,200; 4:31; ix., 40). Occasionally in an admiring or respectful sense (“Odyssey,” xiv., 443; xxiii., 174); Excellent stranger! noble sir! Homer also uses δαίμων of one's genius or attendant spirit, and thence of one's lot orfortune. So in the beautiful simile of the sick father (“Odyssey,” 5:396), “Some malignant genius has assailed him.” Compare “Odyssey,” x., 64; xi., 61. Hence, later, the phrase κατὰ δαίμονα is nearly equivalent to by chance. We have seen that, in Homer, the bad sense of δαιμόνοις is the prevailing one. In the tragedians, also, δαίμων , though used both of good and bad fortune, occurs more frequently in the latter sense, and toward this sense the word gravitates more and more. The undertone of Greek thought, which tended to regard no man happy until he had escaped from life (see on Matthew 5:3, blessed )naturally imparted a gloomy and forbidding character to those who were supposed to allot the destinies of life. -DIVIDER-
-DIVIDER-
In classical Greek it is noticeable that the abstract τὸ δαιμόνιον fell into the background behind δαίμων , with the development in the latter of the notion of a fate or genius connected with each individual, as the demon of Socrates; while in biblical Greek the process is the reverse, this doctrine being rejected for that of an overruling personal providence, and the strange gods, “obscure to human knowledge and alien to human life,” taking the abstract term uniformly in an evil sense. -DIVIDER-
-DIVIDER-
Empedocles, a Greek philosopher, of Sicily, developed Hesiod's distinction; making the demons of a mixed nature between gods and men, not only the link between the two, but having an agency and disposition of their own; not immortal, but long-lived, and subject to the passions and propensities of men. While in Hesiod the demons are all good, according to Empedocles they are both bad and good. This conception relieved the gods of the responsibility for proceedings unbecoming the divine nature. The enormities which the older myths ascribed directly to the gods - thefts, rapes, abductions - were the doings of bad demons. It also saved the credit of the old legends, obviating the necessity of pronouncing either that the gods were unworthy or the legends untrue. “Yet, though devised for the purpose of satisfying a more scrupulous religious sensibility, it was found inconvenient afterward when assailants arose against paganism generally. For while it abandoned as indefensible a large portion of what had once been genuine faith, it still retained the same word demons with an entirely altered signification. The Christian writers in their controversies found ample warrant among the earlier pagan authors for treating all the gods as demons; and not less ample warrant among the later pagans for denouncing the demons generally as evil beings” (Grote, “History of Greece”). -DIVIDER-
-DIVIDER-
This evil sense the words always bear in the New Testament as well as in the Septuagint. Demons are synonymous with unclean spirits (Mark 5:12,Mark 5:15; Mark 3:22,Mark 3:30; Luke 4:33). They appear in connection with Satan (Luke 10:17,Luke 10:18; Luke 11:18,Luke 11:19); they are put in opposition to the Lord (1 Corinthians 10:20,1 Corinthians 10:21); to the faith (1 Timothy 4:1). They are connected with idolatry (Revelation 9:20; Revelation 16:13,Revelation 16:14). They are special powers of evil, influencing and disturbing the physical, mental, and moral being (Luke 13:11,Luke 13:16; Mark 5:2-5; Mark 7:25; Matthew 12:45). -DIVIDER-
-DIVIDER-
[source]
What do the individual words in Luke 4:33 mean?
Andinthesynagoguewasa manhavinga spiritof a demonuncleanhe cried outin a voiceloud
Greek Commentary for Luke 4:33
Mark has εν en spirit of an unclean demon Mark has “unclean spirit.” Luke‘s phrase here is unique in this combination. Plummer notes that Matthew has δαιμονιον daimonion ten times and ακαταρτον akatharton twice as an epithet of πνευμα pneuma Mark has δαιμονιον daimonion thirteen times and ακαταρτον akatharton eleven times as an epithet of πνευμα pneuma Luke‘s Gospel uses δαιμονιον daimonion twenty-two times and ακαταρτον akatharton as an epithet, once of δαιμονιον daimonion as here and once of πνευμα pneuma In Mark the man is in (εν en) the power of the unclean spirit, while here the man “has” a spirit of an unclean demon. [source]
Not in Mark. Really a scream caused by the sudden contact of the demon with Jesus. [source]
Where the rendering should be demon. This is the only case in which Luke adds to that word the epithet unclean. [source]
Reverse Greek Commentary Search for Luke 4:33
The recognition of Jesus by the demons is surprising. The whole subject of demonology is difficult. Some hold that it is merely the ancient way of describing disease. But that does not explain the situation here. Jesus is represented as treating the demons as real existences separate from the human personality. Missionaries in China today claim that they have seen demons cast out. The devil knew Jesus clearly and it is not strange that Jesus was recognized by the devil‘s agents. They know that there is nothing in common between them and the Son of God Usually τα δαιμονια ta daimonia is the word in the New Testament for demons, but in Matthew 8:31 we have οι δαιμονες hoi daimones (the only example in the N.T.). Δαιμονιον Daimonion is a diminutive of δαιμων daimōn In Homer δαιμων daimōn is used synonymously with τεος theos and τεα thea Hesiod employed δαιμων daimōn of men of the golden age as tutelary deities. Homer has the adjective δαιμονιος daimonios usually in an evil sense. Empedocles considered the demons both bad and good. They were thus used to relieve the gods and goddesses of much rascality. Grote (History of Greece) notes that the Christians were thus by pagan usage justified in calling idolatry the worship of demons. See notes on 1 Corinthians 10:20.; note on 1 Timothy 4:1; note on Revelation 9:20; and notes on Revelation 16:13. In the Gospels demons are the same as unclean spirits (Mark 5:12, Mark 5:15; Mark 3:22, Mark 3:30; Luke 4:33). The demons are disturbers (Vincent) of the whole life of man (Mark 5:2.; Mark 7:25; Matthew 12:45; Luke 13:11, Luke 13:16). [source]
The Rev., unfortunately, and against the protest of the American committee, retains devils instead of rendering demons. See on Matthew 4:1. The New Testament uses two kindred words to denote the evil spirits which possessed men, and which were so often east out by Christ: διάμων , of which demon is a transcript, and which occurs, according to the best texts, only at Matthew 8:31; and δαιμόνιον , which is not a diminutive, but the neuter of the adjective δαιμόνιος ,of, or belonging to a demon. The cognate verb is δαιμονίζομαι to be possessed with a demon, as in Mark 1:32. The derivation of the word is uncertain. Perhaps δαίω , to distribute, since the deities allot the fates of men. Plato derives it from δαήμων , knowing or wise. In Hesiod, as in Pythagoras, Thales, and Plutarch, the word δαίμων is used of men of the golden age, acting as tutelary deities, and forming the link between gods and men. Socrates, in Plato's “Cratylus,” quotes Hesiod as follows: “Socrates: You know how Hesiod uses the word? Hermogenes: Indeed I do not. Soc.: Do you not remember that he speaks of a golden race of men who came first? Her.: Yes, I know that. Soc.: He says of them,But now that fate has closed over this race,They are holy demons upon earth,Beneficent, averters of ills, guardians of mortal men.'”After some further conversation, Socrates goes on: “And therefore I have the most entire conviction that he called them demons, because they were δαήμονες (knowing or wise )Now, he and other poets say truly that, when a good man dies, he has honor and a mighty portion among the dead, and becomes a demon, which is a name given to him signifying wisdom. And I say, too, that every wise man who happens to be a good man is more than human ( δαιμόνιον ) both in life and death, and is rightly called a demon.” Mr. Grote (“History of Greece”) observes that in Hesiod demons are “invisible tenants of the earth, remnants of the once happy golden race whom the Olympic gods first made - the unseen police of the gods, for the purpose of repressing wicked behavior in the world.” In later Greek the word came to be used of any departed soul. In Homer δαίμων is used synonymously with θεός and θεά , god and goddess, and the moral quality of the divinity is determined by the context: but most commonly of the divine power or agency, like the Latin numen, the deity considered as a power rather than as a person. Homer does not use δαιμόνιον substantively, but as an adjective, always in the vocative case, and with a sorrowful or reproachful sense, indicating that the person addressed is in some astonishing or strange condition. Therefore, as a term of reproach - wretch! sirrah! madman! (“Iliad,” 2:190,200; 4:31; ix., 40). Occasionally in an admiring or respectful sense (“Odyssey,” xiv., 443; xxiii., 174); Excellent stranger! noble sir! Homer also uses δαίμων of one's genius or attendant spirit, and thence of one's lot orfortune. So in the beautiful simile of the sick father (“Odyssey,” 5:396), “Some malignant genius has assailed him.” Compare “Odyssey,” x., 64; xi., 61. Hence, later, the phrase κατὰ δαίμονα is nearly equivalent to by chance. We have seen that, in Homer, the bad sense of δαιμόνοις is the prevailing one. In the tragedians, also, δαίμων , though used both of good and bad fortune, occurs more frequently in the latter sense, and toward this sense the word gravitates more and more. The undertone of Greek thought, which tended to regard no man happy until he had escaped from life (see on Matthew 5:3, blessed )naturally imparted a gloomy and forbidding character to those who were supposed to allot the destinies of life. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- In classical Greek it is noticeable that the abstract τὸ δαιμόνιον fell into the background behind δαίμων , with the development in the latter of the notion of a fate or genius connected with each individual, as the demon of Socrates; while in biblical Greek the process is the reverse, this doctrine being rejected for that of an overruling personal providence, and the strange gods, “obscure to human knowledge and alien to human life,” taking the abstract term uniformly in an evil sense. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- Empedocles, a Greek philosopher, of Sicily, developed Hesiod's distinction; making the demons of a mixed nature between gods and men, not only the link between the two, but having an agency and disposition of their own; not immortal, but long-lived, and subject to the passions and propensities of men. While in Hesiod the demons are all good, according to Empedocles they are both bad and good. This conception relieved the gods of the responsibility for proceedings unbecoming the divine nature. The enormities which the older myths ascribed directly to the gods - thefts, rapes, abductions - were the doings of bad demons. It also saved the credit of the old legends, obviating the necessity of pronouncing either that the gods were unworthy or the legends untrue. “Yet, though devised for the purpose of satisfying a more scrupulous religious sensibility, it was found inconvenient afterward when assailants arose against paganism generally. For while it abandoned as indefensible a large portion of what had once been genuine faith, it still retained the same word demons with an entirely altered signification. The Christian writers in their controversies found ample warrant among the earlier pagan authors for treating all the gods as demons; and not less ample warrant among the later pagans for denouncing the demons generally as evil beings” (Grote, “History of Greece”). -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- This evil sense the words always bear in the New Testament as well as in the Septuagint. Demons are synonymous with unclean spirits (Mark 5:12, Mark 5:15; Mark 3:22, Mark 3:30; Luke 4:33). They appear in connection with Satan (Luke 10:17, Luke 10:18; Luke 11:18, Luke 11:19); they are put in opposition to the Lord (1 Corinthians 10:20, 1 Corinthians 10:21); to the faith (1 Timothy 4:1). They are connected with idolatry (Revelation 9:20; Revelation 16:13, Revelation 16:14). They are special powers of evil, influencing and disturbing the physical, mental, and moral being (Luke 13:11, Luke 13:16; Mark 5:2-5; Mark 7:25; Matthew 12:45). -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- [source]