The Garasene Demoniac

Introduction The story of the Gerasene demoniac sticks out in the minds of a casual reader of the Gospels. Jesus steps out of a boat and immediately comes upon a demon-possessed man dwelling in the tombs. Jesus casts these demons into a herd of pigs. They all die. The villagers quickly beg for Jesus to leave their region. Over some time, scholars have studied the differences in the Gospels. Each Gospel writer has purpose for including certain passages of scripture to convey their meaning. Taking this into consideration, what is each Gospel’s purpose for story of the healing of the demoniac?

Literary Context The story of the Garasene demoniac is one which shows the power and authority of Christ. Each Gospel uses this story specifically and

For example, Matthew’s version of the story is less than half of the length of Mark and Luke’s versions. Also, in Matthew, the demon addressed Jesus as the “Son of God”, while in Mark and Luke, the demon addressed him as “Jesus, Son of the Most High God.” Matthew also does not contain the conversation between the healed man and Jesus. It seems that Matthew’s account places the story in the middle of a series of healings. In Mark and Luke, this story seems very intentionally placed. The story is located in a section between Matthew’s first two discourses, the Sermon on the Mount and the mission discourse in chapter 10. This story lies within a section of numerous, other healings. One can observe that Matthew inserts more stories of Jesus’ healings in this section (chs. 8-9) than anywhere else in his Gospel. In these chapters, seven passages are reserved for healings. There is a rather odd edit done by Matthew in this story. He writes of Jesus casting out demons from two men. In chapter 20, Jesus healed two blind men near Jericho, but in the accounts of Mark and Luke, Jesus only healed one blind man. Why would Matthew appear to diminish the power of this account yet create the idea that Jesus healed two demoniacs? This passage must be more than simply a statement to show Jesus’

When it comes to why Matthew’s account records two demoniacs, one could argue that although book of Mark was likely written first, Matthew actually witnessed this event. Matthew, then, actually got the facts correct. But, Jesus called Matthew in chapter 9, after the healing of the demoniacs. This does not mean Matthew would not have been told personally by another disciple of the event. He likely knew the details of the story, but for the sake of his Gospel, did not write it in-depth. Another explanation for Matthew’s inclusion of two demoniacs would be to show that Christ healed more than one demoniac. Matthew may have combined this story with another he did not include (i.e. Mark’s first exorcism in 1:23-28). Finally, since Matthew was likely writing his Gospel to Jews, he included the second person to act as another witness and to fulfill the legal requirements of the time. The final two are not likely the case. It seems odd that Matthew would have combined stories of the demoniac. Also, since there were swineherders and Jesus’ disciples, there would have been plenty enough witnesses to the