Yes Aaron I have always imagined those references being similar to us now saying something like…
“And as Frodo had mercy on the wicked creature Gollum…” for instance.
Nice analogy, Jeff (and the second reference to LOTR on this thread, I believe! 
). I guess the only real difference is that, with the exception of the most die-hard fan ( 
), no one today understands LOTR to have any historical basis.
While in college and living in a commune “The Lord of the Rings” swept through our group without my interest. This week one of my sisters bought me a subscription to Netflix so at least I hope to see the movies. You have certainly piqued my interest.
Well Tolkien was a devout Catholic and the trilogy is big on right and wrong, loyalty and duty.
Christened, First Communion, Confirmation and a good parochial education. I was raised a Catholic, so I shall surely see the influences. I wouldn’t trade for my experiences as a Catholic boy that knew the confessional booth was always open for all the bad things I did.
*"Forgive me Father for I have sinned my last confession was yesterday … "
“That will be ten “Hail Marys”, ten ‘Our Fathers’ and one 'Act of Contrition”. Now go and sin no more.* 
No worse than my Plymouth Brethren upbringing - no confession but plenty of ‘Where will you spend eternity sinner?’
By the way one of my favourite Christian authors is a Jesuit priest called Gerard W. Hughes who from his writings has to be a universalist.
John,
The movies are okay, but the books are MUCH better!
Sonia
Sonia, I would love to find the time to read as I know the book is usually better than the movie. I started Barth’s book on Romans in late August and am only on the forth chapter after five months.
Be blessed,
john
I believe Jesus chose to grant the request of the insane man who thought himself (and was evidently thought by others) to be possessed by a legion of “demons” by sending the “unclean spirits” (i.e., the man’s derangement) into the pigs in order to afford the man peace of mind after his healing. This seems more likely to me than the idea that there were about 2,000 ghosts crammed into one man (at that time, “demons” were thought by the Jews to be the disembodied spirits of wicked men), and that Jesus would grant such a bizarre request for their sakes.
But why didn’t Jesus correct the man’s erroneous beliefs after he healed him? Perhaps he did; the Gospel writers don’t say. But even if Jesus didn’t, it would likely be because he thought it more important to his mission to demonstrate his power and authority over all that oppresses us, instead of correcting every mistaken superstitious belief to which people held (which likely would not have furthered his mission but detracted from it). Besides, what mattered most to the man who was thought to be possessed by demons was that he had been healed by Jesus and restored to his right mind - not the question of whether or not demons have any real existence.
Aaron,
I certainly see it different. Thinking pigs suddenly felt a sudden thrust of insecurity leading them to commit suicide does not seem likley to me. Multiple spirits in a single body seems more reasonable. Guess we’ll just have to agree to disagree.
Not even if Jesus caused them to do what they did for the man’s benefit?
It doesn’t seem very fair to the pigs…
Sonia
At least they weren’t talking pigs, like Babe or Wilbur! 
Seriously though, I think the fact that this account ends with the deaths of all those pigs only heightens the absurdity of the view that Jesus was granting the request of actual demonic spirits for their sake, and not for the sake of the deranged man (who otherwise may have feared a return of his insanity)…
Yes I agree, there is multiple spirits. What a spirit is, still seems to be the issue.
Then you take offense that Jesus allowed them to enter the pigs? Do you think Jesus did something inhumane by allowing them access to the pigs?
Jesus explained that spirits cast out have a potential of returning 7 times stronger should that spirit remain to wander. I agree, it was for the sake of the man, not the spirits, that he cast them out into pigs. However, Jesus wasn’t going to deny the requests of the spirits (which though appear to speak for themselves are actually the man thoughts concerning what the spirits wanted) because it was the man who requested it.
Fascinating.
Did this man’s thoughts also give him super-human strength?
"…and he was kept bound with chains and in fetters; and he brake the bands, and was driven of the devil into the wilderness." Luke 8:29.
Did mental illness allow individuals to recognize Jesus for who He was?
And in the synagogue there was a man who had the spirit of an unclean demon; and he cried out with a loud voice, “Ah! What have you to do with us, Jesus of Nazareth? Have you come to destroy us? I know who you are, the Holy One of God.” (Luke 4:33-34.)
Did Jesus carry on conversations with these "“demons” to humor the mentally ill (while perpetuating the false beliefs of His audience)?
But Jesus rebuked him, saying, “Be silent, and come out of him!” And when the demon had thrown him down in the midst, he came out of him, having done him no harm. (Luke 4:35.)
And I suppose it was Christ’s own thoughts that externaliezed as a devil and tempted Him in the wilderness (but that would make our Lord a paranoid schizophrenic, and not the sinless Son of God.)
The human mind may have certain powers, but I believe some ascibe too much to it.
It does have the power to deceive, to sometimes cause us to see only what we want to see, and to keep us from seeing the obvious.
It’s obvious to most people (believers and unbelievers alike) that the Bible teaches the existence of personal, powerful, non-biological entities.
To the atheist and agnostic, this is evidence of it’s primitive and mythological character.
To most Christians, it’s a revealed truth.
Others seem to regard it as something to be denied at all cost (with forced interpretations, and sometimes with claims of private revelation.)
The mind is very interesting, but it doesn’t produce the kind of phenomena recorded in scripture.
Removed for privacy purposes.
I have a Bachelor’s degree in Behavioral Science, and there’s no real evidence that the human mind can break chains, or drive animals into a wild frenzy.
Also, there’s no plausible moral explaination as to why Jesus (who challenged the accepted beliefs of His contemporaries by claiming to be The Son of God) would perpetuate a belief in external beings that didn’t exist.
Or why The Holy Spirit would pepetuate such a belief in the pages of the New Testament.
Well, good for you, a man who has Bachelor’s degree in Behavioral Science and which did you branch of Behavior Sciences did you specialize in? Social or Neural?
I also know a man who has a degree in History and has no idea about anthropology, archeology or geology dating. Just because you have a degree in a related field, doesn’t mean you understand the related fields.
It is not until recently that scientists now recognize the role of the observer simply observing changes the result of an scientific experiment, in fact such understanding received rebukes from physic engineers for years only to be shown that these physic engineers were the real fools.
Your degree in Behavioral Sciences automatically concludes there is no such thing as spirits, demons, or other ‘supernatural’ phenomena, so it wouldn’t recognizing the mind creating any of these things and call it so in the first place. So you have a steep hill to climb.