610 



t> E M O N. 



Bemon. when the full disclosure of the revelation appears to 

 — -Y— ' have been made, might it not reasonably have been 

 looked for that the popular error would have been rec- 

 tified, and the language reduced from its figurative cha- 

 racter to a state of simple correctness ? What conceiv- 

 able motive could influence our Saviour, or his apostles, 

 to sanction the delusion of the multitude ? And does 

 it not strike at the root of the Christian religion itself, 

 to have it thought, for a single moment, that its " au- 

 thor and finisher," who came to enlighten and to re- 

 form the world, should have, on so many occasions, 

 not only countenanced, but confirmed, an opinion which 

 he must have known to be « the reverse of the truth." 

 Let us beware, (say the antagonists of Farmer, ) how 

 we relinquish the plain and literal sense of holy writ, 

 in search of allegorical or figurative interpretations. 

 And if, upon any occasion, we think it proper to do so, 

 let us consider well the grounds and reasons upon which 

 our determination is built. It is evident (they affirm) 

 that the devil and his angels, according to all that we 

 can learn of them in the sacred books, are real beings, 

 that the- demons of the New Testament are malignant 

 spirits, and that they act upon the same principles, and 

 even under the authority of Satan himself, who i9 

 otherwise called Beelzebub, and the Prince of the De- 

 vils. Nay, in these very cases of possession, the chief of 

 the apostate angels is clearly set forth as acting either 

 in his own person or by means of his infernal agents. 

 And it is on this supposition alone that we can explain 

 the language of Christ in that remarkable declaration 

 which he makes to the Pharisees and rulers of the Jews, 

 and which we find recorded in the 12th chapter of the 

 gospel by Matthew. " The Pharisees heard it," ob- 

 serves the evangelist, " and they said, This fellow doth 

 not cast out devils but by Beelzebub, the prince of the 

 devils. And Jesus knew their thoughts, and said unto 

 them, every kingdom divided against itself is brought 

 to desolation, and every city or house divided against 

 itself, shall not stand : And if Satan cast out Satan, he 

 is divided against himself, how shall then his kingdom 

 stand?" 



A principal argument with those who contend for 

 the reality of demoniacal possessions is, that the inspi- 

 red writers uniformly make a distinction between dis- 

 eases occurring in the ordinary course of nature, and 

 diseases occasioned by the agency of evil spirits. This 

 argument seems to be regarded as conclusive by Dr 

 Porteous, Bishop of London, in his Lectures on the 

 gospel of St Matthew. Pie represents the distinction 

 alluded to as plain and frequent. " There is every 

 where," says he, " a plain distinction made, between 

 common diseases and demoniacal possessions; which 

 shows that they are totally different things. In the 4th 

 chapter of this gospel, (St Matthew,) where the very 

 first mention is made of these possessions, it is said that 

 our Lord's fame went throughout all Syria, and that 

 they brought, unto him all sick people, that were taken 

 with divers diseases and torments, and those which 

 were possessed with devils, and he healed them. Here 

 those that were taken .with divers diseases and torments, 

 and those possessed with devils, are mentioned as dis- 

 tinct and separate persons : a plain proof that the de- 

 moniacal possessions were not natural diseases; and the 

 very same distinction is made in several other passages 

 of holy writ There can be no doubt, therefore, that the 

 demoniacs were persons really possessed with evil spi- 

 rits ; and although it may seem strange to .us, yet we 

 /.■ J from Josephus and other historians, that it was 



in those times,' no uncommon case." See Lectures on Demoni- 

 St Mattkem, vol. i. p. 26 1. ^ Demristhe- 



Such i3 a concise view of the argument on both sides - nes ■ 

 of this abstruse and difficult question. We are not ■ Smm ^ r ^ m / 

 aware that we have misrepresented, in any material 

 circumstance, the sentiments of either party. But the 

 subject of this article is by no means exhausted by what 

 we have said. It remains for us to treat of the demon- 

 ology of the middle ages, and the influence, real or sup- 

 posed, of wicked spirits, in more modern times. But 

 for some curious information on those topics, we refer 

 to another part of our work. See Witchcraft. On 

 the subject of the present article, our readers may con- 

 sult the following works of Dr Farmer : Essay on Mi- 

 racles ; Essay en the Worship of Human Spirits; Essay 

 on the Demoniacs of the New testament ; and the Essay 

 on our Saviour's Temptation in the Wilderness. Also 

 Campbell On the Gospels, Prelim. Dissert, art. c-Jfio- 

 mv. Jortin's Remarks on Ecclesiastical History, vol. i. 

 Lardner's Works, vol. i. edit. Kippis. Sykes's Inquiry, 

 passim. Mede's Disc. vol. vi. p. 2S. Mead's Medica 

 Sacra, c. ix. Warburton's Sermons, vol. iii. p. 213. 

 Peggc's Answer to Sykes. Doddridge's Family Exposi- 

 tor, vol. i. p. 372. note g. Lightfoot's Horcs Hebraica-, 

 on Matt. viii. 28. (h) 



DEMONIACK. See Demon. 

 DEMOSTPIENES, the Athenian orator, was bom 

 in the 4th year of the 99th Olympiad, and 381 years 

 before Christ. His father was an Athenian born, but 

 his maternal descent was partly Scythian. The Athe- 

 nians had proceeded from trading with the natives, to 

 form a settlement on the shores of the Tauric Chersonese, 

 now called the Crimea. Gylon, an Athenian, was, under 

 the appointment of his own republic, governor of this 

 settlement or fortified factory, when the sovereign of 

 the country desired to regain possession of it. Des- 

 pairing, however, of being able to carry it against the 

 skilful fortifications of the Greeks, he entered into a 

 negotiation with the governor, who, for the bribe of a 

 town and territory, and the promise of a rich Scythian 

 heiress in marriage, surrendered Nympheum to the 

 barbarous potentate. Of course he could no longer 

 appear at Athens, but possibly hoping to form some 

 connections in his native city, so as to open a way for 

 his pardon, he sent his two daughters to Athens. One 

 of them married a man of eminence, Demochares ; the 

 other took for her husband Demosthenes, a citizen of 

 the Pacanian ward, by trade a sword-cutler, and the 

 father of the chief of orators. Demosthenes was left 

 an orphan at seven years of age, with a very delicate 

 constitution, but with a fortune, which, though it 

 might have been partially dilapidated by his guardi- 

 ans, was still sufficient to rank him among the wealthy. 

 According to the general account, his education was 

 neglected. Mr Mitford, in his recently published and 

 valuable history of Greece, has made it certain, from 

 the orator's own authority, that he was not, as Plutarch 

 represents him, illiterate at the commencement of his 

 professional studies. Educated; says that author, (Mr 

 Mitford) as became his fortune, and introduced into 

 life advantageously through his connection with Demo- 

 chares, he was of course to take his share of the com- 

 bined toils and honours, which the Athenian constitu- 

 tion made the lot of the wealthy. In earliest manhood, 

 he was appointed to the expensive but honourable of- 

 fices of Choregus, or president of theatrical entertain- 

 ments, and trierarc or director of the equipment of a ship 

 of war.. To the burden of this office was annexed the 



