Demonizing

[NorrinRadd]

I just did a quick run-through of all four Gospels. I do not see any meaningful distinction between "having" ("echo") a demon and being "demon-possessed" / "possessed by a demon" ("daimonizomai," which can transliterate to "demonize").

Further, I only find one place where "oppressed" is used (Acts 10:38), and that is in regard to "the devil" ("diabolos"), not a "demon" (daimonion). The context suggests the greater conflict between Jesus and the ruler of demons, as opposed to the liberation of individual persons afflicted by one or several individual demons.

So is there really any Biblical justification for the hair-splitting about "possessed," "obsessed," "oppressed" in so-called "deliverance" settings?

[tabibito]

I just did a quick run-through of all four Gospels. I do not see any meaningful distinction between "having" ("echo") a demon and being "demon-possessed" / "possessed by a demon" ("daimonizomai," which can transliterate to "demonize").

Further, I only find one place where "oppressed" is used (Acts 10:38), and that is in regard to "the devil" ("diabolos"), not a "demon" (daimonion). The context suggests the greater conflict between Jesus and the ruler of demons, as opposed to the liberation of individual persons afflicted by one or several individual demons.

So is there really any Biblical justification for the hair-splitting about "possessed," "obsessed," "oppressed" in so-called "deliverance" settings?

The differences can be attributed to the original wording for possessed/oppressed. Acts 10:38 uses καταδυναστευω (oppress) where most of the occurrences use one conjugation or another of δαιμονιζομαι. Note also "demon" is in the table because it just happens to slot in at that point in the lexicon, but it should be remembered that concept of "demon" doesn't seem to have existed at the time the Bible was penned.

δαιμονιζεται	he.she.it 　 gets demon possessed	be demon possessed, demon oppressed.vexed (1) 　 δαιμονιζομαι 〆	vb: prs mid.psv indctv 3ps
δαιμονιζομαι	I 　 get <?> demon possessed	be demon possessed, demon oppressed.vexed (0) 　 δαιμονιζομαι 〆	vb: prs mid.psv indctv 1ps
δαιμονιζομενοι	‡ ones 　 getting <?> demon possessed (subj)	be demon possessed, demon oppressed.vexed (1) 　 δαιμονιζομαι 〆	ptcpl: prs mid.psv nom pl masc
δαιμονιζομενοις	‡ ones 　 getting <?> demon possessed (indr obj)	be demon possessed, demon oppressed.vexed (0) 　 δαιμονιζομαι 〆	ptcpl: prs mid.psv dtv pl masc
δαιμονιζομενον	‡ one 　 getting <?> demon possessed (dir obj)	be demon possessed, demon oppressed.vexed (2) 　 δαιμονιζομαι 〆	ptcpl: prs mid.psv acc sgl masc
δαιμονιζομενος	‡ ones 　 getting <?> demon possessed (subj)	be demon possessed, demon oppressed.vexed (1) 　 δαιμονιζομαι 〆	ptcpl: prs mid.psv nom sgl masc
δαιμονιζομενου	of? ‡ one 　 getting <?> possessed (subj)	be demon possessed, demon oppressed.vexed (4) 　 δαιμονιζομαι 〆	ptcpl: prs mid.psv gtv sgl masc.neut
δαιμονιζομενους	‡ ones 　 getting <?> demon possessed (dir obj)	be demon possessed, demon oppressed.vexed (3) 　 δαιμονιζομαι 〆	ptcpl: prs mid.psv acc pl masc
δαιμονιζομενω	‡ one 　 getting <?> demon possessed (indr obj)	be demon possessed, demon oppressed.vexed (2) 　 δαιμονιζομαι 〆	ptcpl: prs mid.psv dtv sgl masc
δαιμονιζομενων	of? ‡ ones 　 getting <?> demon possessed	be demon possessed, demon oppressed.vexed (1) 　 δαιμονιζομαι 〆	ptcpl: prs mid.psv gtv pl masc
δαιμονιον	‡ lesser god (subj, dir obj)	✧ divine being, lesser.minor god ✧ demon (15) 　 δαιμονιον 〆	το noun: nom.acc neut sgl
δαιμονισθεις	‡ one 　 gotten demon possessed (subj)	be demon possessed, demon oppressed.vexed (2) 　 δαιμονιζομαι 〆	ptcpl: aor psv nom sgl masc

(#) - number of NT VERSES having the conjugation.

[Cerebrum123]

I just did a quick run-through of all four Gospels. I do not see any meaningful distinction between "having" ("echo") a demon and being "demon-possessed" / "possessed by a demon" ("daimonizomai," which can transliterate to "demonize").

Further, I only find one place where "oppressed" is used (Acts 10:38), and that is in regard to "the devil" ("diabolos"), not a "demon" (daimonion). The context suggests the greater conflict between Jesus and the ruler of demons, as opposed to the liberation of individual persons afflicted by one or several individual demons.

So is there really any Biblical justification for the hair-splitting about "possessed," "obsessed," "oppressed" in so-called "deliverance" settings?

I don't think the use comes from the Bible at all. It comes from years of Demonology across many churches over time. I know of numerous instances where a demon was present and negatively affected those in the area without controlling them. The terms match up pretty well with what is described by the Chesterfield Paranormal Research website and my own experiences. I know most people aren't going to believe them when they only have a handful of videos and pictures but at the very least they have a good description of a few incidents I have heard of or even experienced.

[KingsGambit]

I don't think the use comes from the Bible at all. It comes from years of Demonology across many churches over time. I know of numerous instances where a demon was present and negatively affected those in the area without controlling them. The terms match up pretty well with what is described by the Chesterfield Paranormal Research website and my own experiences. I know most people aren't going to believe them when they only have a handful of videos and pictures but at the very least they have a good description of a few incidents I have heard of or even experienced.

Just to make sure, are you talking about the same thing as the OP here? The OP isn't calling demonic realities into question but rather questioning the specific distinctions made and arguing that too many hairs are being split. I don't see those distinctions being made in the link you posted.

[Cerebrum123]

Just to make sure, are you talking about the same thing as the OP here? The OP isn't calling demonic realities into question but rather questioning the specific distinctions made and arguing that too many hairs are being split. I don't see those distinctions being made in the link you posted.

They do mention the distinctions but have the added category of "infestation". It's down near the bottom of the page. They have a bit more detail on this part of their site as well.

Source: Chesterfield Paranormal Research

*The majority of listed activity falls within the first stage of a demonic haunting – infestation. Demonic infestation is the stage in which demonic entities take ownership of one’s home or property. Please understand that when you are dealing with physical, psychological and sexual attacks, the haunting can immediately progress into the second stage – oppression. This stage is the second stage to possession and is quite dangerous. It is here that the demonic attempt to destroy your will, faith and intellect.

© Copyright Original Source