New Testament Miracle or Greco-Roman Magic?

By Steve Badger

See copyright notice at the end of this document

Introduction and Background

The pastor was out of town, and the choir director was about to introduce the guest preacher, when a young man walked quickly to the front of the sanctuary and challenged the associate pastor. "Are you teaching the truth? Or are you lying?" he demanded. Was this a charade or genuine confrontation? Alas, this was no skit. Immediately several men and women moved from their pews and surrounded him, praying aloud for him. Was he demon-possessed? Several people were positive he was. Everyone prayed for him as some tried to find out who he was and what he wanted. One person reached over the crowd and placed a Bible on the man's head. It did not seem to have any immediate effect on the young man, whom we later learned had mental problems, was not taking his medication, and was under the influence of alcohol.

The image of the Bible being placed on that troubled young man's head provoked me to reassemble some research I had done and to write this essay.

Jesus and the Apostles: magicians or miracle workers?

Many Christians are surprised to learn that even as Jesus was performing miracles, his detractors were accusing him of using magic./1/   Luke 11:14-15 provides a good example.

Later the Apostles were also accused of using magic: After Peter and John healed the paralytic, the Sanhedrin asked them: "By what power or what name did you do this?" (Acts 4:7). Implicit in this is a charge of using magic.

Later still, Simon apparently misunderstood what the Apostles were doing as magic and thought he could give "them money" so he could receive "this ability so that everyone on whom I lay my hands may receive the Holy Spirit" (Acts 8:18-24).  He was severely rebuked for this error.

Apparently Sceva's sons also thought the Apostles were magicians and attempted to copy their incantation, but a formula could not control demons (Acts 19:13-18). Verse 19 provides the context for those who doubt Luke's intent to connect this to contemporary magic: "A number who had practiced sorcery brought their scrolls together and burned them publicly."

This accusation continued through the next few centuries. John Meier states that "the earliest extant documentation for the application of the precise word 'magician' (magos) with Jesus is Justin Martyr's First Apology (30.1) and his Dialogue with Trypho (69.7)." /3/  The arguments of Celsus (ca. A.D. 178) that Jesus was nothing more than a magician /4/ and the responses by Origen /5/ are commonly cited.

This accusation continues even today. The History-of-Religions school has long operated on the assumption that Christianity is largely a syncretistic amalgam of a first century messianic Jewish sect with Greco-Roman religious traditions. These scholars have discounted the Bible's miracle accounts as nothing more than copies of contemporary mythical acts of magic-and therefore ahistorical and fictitious. John Meier claims that the charge continues today in the writings of several scholars. /6/

Presuppositions, definitions, and sources

Luke provides the most insight into the conflict between New Testament miracle and pagan magic, so the Lucan corpus was selected for examination. In this essay I will assume that Luke's works-including the supernatural events-are historically accurate accounts. Since different writers use different definitions of miracle, I will use a definition used in earlier research: "The text will have to reveal that people experienced something tangible that broke known physical laws. These will include healing, exorcism, prophecy, death, raised from death, jail breaks, visions, and other miraculous phenomena." /7/

Our sources of knowledge of Hellenistic magic--the tabellae defixionum (cursing tablets), amulets, ostraca (broken pottery), and various magical apparatuses--all generally agree with the description assembled from a study of the Greek Magical Papyri. In this study, I will compare the techniques of Hellenistic magic with Luke's accounts of miracles. This will then be compared and contrasted to typical prayers patterns and practices of modern day Pentecostal Christians.

Miracle v. Magic

Are miracle and magic fundamentally different? Some think not. For instance, John Meier concludes, "From the viewpoint of the social sciences, there is no objective difference between what we commonly label miracle in the Gospels and what we commonly label magic in various Greco-Roman papyri, novels and historians." /8/   He also offers the opinions of several scholars who basically concur. This work challenges these conclusions.

What is magic? Clinton Arnold says that "the practice of magic presupposes a belief, indeed a fear, of hostile evil spirits bent on oppressing and bringing harm to people. The purpose of magic was simply a defense mechanism--to have some means of protection against these evil forces." /9/ John Hull provides an excellent description of ancient magic:

Characteristics of Hellenistic Magic

From a personal examination of the Greek Magical Papyri and from reading the thoughts of several scholars, the author offers this composite description:  Hellenistic magic was pragmatic, syncretistic, self-serving, frequently sexual, intricate, and often included (bodily) purification rites. It was used to coerce gods or daimons to act. /11/ It used a multitude of secret names, incantations, amulets / talismans / phylacteries; it was often used to control others. It was typically used for personal protection against illnesses and demons. It included magical apparatuses, palindromes, and often used special numbers (3, 7, 9, etc.). It was based neither on "understanding why" nor on faith, but on secret knowledge. And sometimes it was bizarre or silly. /12/  (Applications of Greco-Roman magic.)  (Ferguson's description of magic.)

Hellenistic magic was used for a wide variety of effects, but protection from daimons and illnesses was most common. It was characterized by a special knowledge of a secret name (of either a god or a daimon) that allowed the magician to exercise power (authority) over a god or demon. Ferguson also provides a good description of magic. /13/

Is this what we find in the miracles recorded in the Lucan corpus?  Let's see.

Differences between Magic and New Testament Miracle

Larry Hurtado states the historical position of orthodox Christianity when he asserts that "the Christian miracles have no connection with magical means and processes. . . ." /14/  Rather he agrees with Vernon McCasland that "Christianity had no magic or noises of paganism, no Jewish ritualistic or sacrificial performances, no secret herbs or roots, no incantations or charms, only the authority of the name of Jesus." /15/  If they make any oversight, it is that they seem to ignore the fact that the use of the name of Jesus parallels the magical incantations, at least to some extent.

Not everyone agrees that miracle and magic are fundamentally different. For instance, Meier concludes, "From the viewpoint of the social sciences, there is no objective difference between what we commonly label miracle in the Gospels and what we commonly label magic in various Greco-Roman papyri, novels and historians." /16/   He also offers the opinions of several scholars who basically concur: "Despite differences in details, all of them [David Aune, John Crossan, and Morton Smith] agree that miracle and magic are basically the same things." /17/

In an article in which he compares revelatory magic to John's Revelation, Aune concludes that many parts of the Apocalypse "have striking parallels with the techniques, formulas and motifs of magical revelation as shown in the Greek and Demotic magical papyri." /18/  He decides there is no difference between New Testament miracle and pagan, Hellenistic magic. /19/   He denies a "theological distinction" between New Testament miracles and pagan magic and instead uses "sociological definitions." /20/  His criteria for magic reveal his presupposition that Christianity is merely another religion-one among many. /21/  He often fails to support his conclusions from empirical data (e.g., "Judaism was even less syncretistic than Christianity" has only a footnote to one of his own previous publications /22/).

But Hans Dieter Betz seems to provide at least some of a corrective to Aune's writings cited above. Betz quotes Alan Segal as seeing little difference between the two and even says he can agree with much of what Segal wrote. But he also quotes and agrees with Sigmund Mowinckel that magic "is not a kind of religion, but a worldview." /23/  Then he tells his readers that "in order to understand what was meant by distinguishing magic and religion, however, one has to shift from social science to theology." /24/   Why? Because "the basic questions . . . are theological in nature." /25/  Perhaps this issue of the theological nature of the difference between New Testament miracle and pagan magic is key to resolving the problems.

Betz's conclusion: There are "real differences between magic and religion even within this body of highly syncretistic material. Certainly, even greater differences existed between the Greek magical papyri in their entirety and the official religions from which the traditions derived." /26/  So Betz sees magic not only as distinct from New Testament Christianity, but also distinct from the pagan religions from which they sprang. (Comparison of magic and miracle.)

Performative Rituals in Hellenistic Magic and Lucan Miracle

One of the foremost characteristics of Hellenistic magic was the recitation of ritualistic formulae. Ferguson offers this description:

The Greek Magical Papyri contain many performative rituals including the use of incantations, potions, herbs, charms, and amulets.   The following three examples are typical and illustrative. In PGM IV.1227-64 the magician is instructed to put seven olive branches in front of him, stand behind him; use one of the branches like a whip as you utter the conjuration. /28/ In a second, the conjurer is told to boil a mixture of oil from un-ripe olives, mastigia (an herb), lotus fruit pulp, and colorless marjoram; then, "while conjuring, blow once, blowing air from the tips of the feet up to the face . . . " (PGM IV.3007-86). In a third example, the magician is instructed to "Write the name (of the daimon) in myrrh ink on two male eggs. Cleanse yourself thoroughly with one; then lick off the name, break it, and throw it away. Hold the other in your partially open right hand & show it to the sun at dawn and . . . / olive branches; raise up your right hand, supporting the elbow with your left hand. Then speak the formula 7 times, crack the egg open, and swallow its contents" (PGM VII.505-28).

Another instructive illustration is the way a knowledge of the names of the god/daimon provides the magician with power over that god/daimon. For instance in PGM I.195-222, the conjurer is told that he can command Helios to "shield me against all excess of magical power of aerial daimon [and] fate. Aye, lord, because I call upon your secret name."   Thus the papyri indicate--implicitly, if not always explicitly--that esoteric knowledge is often crucial to effective exorcism.

Repetition is also a key element in these ancient spells. Since power over the god/daimon resides in a knowledge of and use of the secret name, the incantations in the Greek Magical Papyri instruct the conjurer to repeat that secret name over and over. The magician is also instructed to repeat the entire spell a number of times. For example, PGM VII.505-28 tells the practitioner to perform this ritual fourteen times: at sunset and sunrise over a seven-day period.

Miracle in the Lucan corpus contains none of these characteristics--well, perhaps one. Luke-Acts does reveal that Jesus wanted to know the name of a demon (Luke 8:30), although Luke does not tell us that Jesus required or used that name to control the demon. Neither does the context seem to imply the name was literal, it could just as well have been figurative. Later Jesus' followers effected miracles by using the name of Jesus-and nothing else (Luke 10:17; Acts 4:7; 4:30). Still later, non-believers tried to incorporate Jesus' name into a spell (Acts 19:13-17), but to their own dismay and injury. Thus the power of the name of Jesus was not quite the same as the (supposed) power of knowing and using a demon's name. The power of Jesus' name resided in more than knowing and saying it, regardless of how often it was repeated.

Just as interesting, a demon's knowledge of Jesus' identity and name gave it no power over Jesus. /29/   For instance in Luke 8:28, when the demon possessed man saw Jesus,

Though he (the demon) knew Jesus' name, he had no power over Jesus but fully recognized Jesus' authority and power over him.

To summarize, in magic, the knowledge of the name of a demon gave a person power over it. In New Testament Christianity an experiential knowledge of Jesus allowed one to use the power of his name over demons--but not over Jesus.

Perhaps this topic can be concluded with one last question: How many of the Lucan accounts show Jesus or the Apostles as requiring the name of a demon in order to cast it out? None. On the other hand, his followers only had to know and use the authority and power of the name of Jesus to control demons (Luke 9:49, 10:17; Acts 16:18).

Purpose and Function of Hellenistic Magic and Lucan Miracle

Hellenistic magic served the immediate purposes (concrete goals; personal gain ) of the conjurer or his client. The papyri reveal a wide variety of purposes. Ferguson offers four major groups of magical texts: "erotic spells, protection from evil, curses, and prognostications." /30/  The purposes of magic are immediate and often trivial. They are often punitive, serving to punish one's enemies. Many of them are prophylactic, warding off demons, sickness, or any other evil. And they are frequently sexual in intent. Amulets are also a common part of magic.

In stark contrast, miracle in Luke always has a theological function. Miracle most frequently serves to authenticate Jesus as God's messiah. New Testament miracle is never sexual and never prophylactic. The few that may be seen as punitive are addressed later.

Elsewhere I have written concerning the function of miracle in Acts:

This Lucan function supports the idea that he did not see divine miracle as similar to magic but as diametrically opposed to it.

Results and Effects of Hellenistic Magic and Lucan Miracle

Since the Greek Magical Papyri are not narratives, this source does not recount narrative examples of the results of using these incantations. Modern scholars would find it difficult to conclude that they had any effect at all (due to their presuppositions). Betz assumes that these ancient "people [were] not interested in whether or not the magicians' promises [came] true." /32/  But we might assume the magicians had positive results often enough that the demand for their services remained.

Luke, on the other hand, almost always provides an account of the results of a miracle, and often gives insights into the long-range effects. /33/  That is, if the narrative records a visible manifestation of the demon, it also includes a correction of the manifestation. The man possessed by Legion did not wear clothes or live in a house, but after the exorcism they found the man "dressed and in his right mind" (Luke 8:35), and Jesus told him to "return home" (8:39). The man who could not speak because he was possessed, spoke after the exorcism (Luke 11:14). This same pattern is repeated in Acts where the demon possessed fortune-teller lost her ability to tell the future (16:19).

But Luke recorded long-range results much more often than he recorded the immediate. An examination of Tables 4 and 5 shows that an audience response is always provided in the Gospel and almost always in Acts. These results include feelings of fear, perplexity, joy, amazement, and people trying to touch Jesus. Further, "news about him spread throughout the surrounding area" (Luke 37); "the name of the Lord Jesus was held in high honor" (Acts 19:17); and "Many . . . believed . . . [and] openly confessed their evil deeds. A number who had practiced sorcery brought their scrolls . . . and burned them. The word of the Lord spread widely and grew in power" (19:19).

Punitive Miracles in the Lucan Corpus

I found three supernatural events that seem to be punitive. These are the deaths of Annanias and Sapphira, the death of Herod, and Elymas' blindness. But, are these punitive miracles analogous to those cited in the GMP? I argue that they are not. Consider that in each case Luke reveals a reason or result for each. After God's judgment on Annanias and Sapphira, "Great fear seized the whole church and all who heard about these events (Acts 5:11-12). After Herod's death, "the word of God continued to increase and spread (Acts 12:24). And after Elymas had been blinded, "the proconsul . . . believed, for he was amazed at the teaching about the Lord (Acts 13:12).

Magic in the Lucan corpus?

How did Luke view Hellenistic magic? Did he ignore it? Condemn or condone it? The Lucan corpus contains many references to demons submitting to the authority of the name of Jesus: Luke 8:30, Luke 10:17, Luke 11:14, Acts 4:7, Acts 4:30, and Acts 19:13. Other times the narrative sounds very much like ancient sympathetic magic: /34/ "God did extraordinary miracles through Paul, 12 so that even handkerchiefs and aprons that had touched him were taken to the sick, and their illnesses were cured and the evil spirits left them" (Acts 19:11-12).

Some argue that this last passage has features reminiscent of the amulets found in the Greek Magical Papyri. But the use of name as power over the spirit is perhaps the single genuinely parallel and repeated feature of New Testament miracle and pagan magic.

Christian Magic?

Biblical practices

A few modern Christian practices may seem similar to magical procedures. Specifically anointing with oil, use of Jesus' name, and prayer. However, there are important differences. The New Testament does not indicate that the oil or the fact of using Jesus' name is causal. Also, prayer is supplicative, not coercive. Thus these are not actually responsible for the miracle.

Extra-biblical practices

On the other hand, some Christians (especially Charismatics and Pentecostals) have practices that are not directly supported by the Scriptures and that do seem to be too much like magic for comfort. These include "pleading the blood of Jesus," "binding Satan and all his demons," laying the Bible on a person to effect a miracle, and prayer that is loud and repetitious or commands Jesus to do something.  I have found no warrant for these practices in the Bible.  Without question they have some of the characterisitics of magic.

If a modern-day practicse seem to have some parallel to magic, does that make it wrong? When is it wrong?  Any time the attitude is such that the person doing it (or receiving it, or observing it) thinks he is accomplishing it through his choice of words or gimmicks, I would label it "not of faith" and wrong.

We must be careful not to adopt the attitudes and patterns of ancient magic.  We must never think we can learn the tricks of coercing God into giving us what we want.  The only way we can know that God will say "Yes" to our petitions is to ask according to His will.

Works Cited

Endnotes

1 "Accused" is used to illustrate the pejorative nature of the word "magic." Many scholars argue that the word magic has always been deprecatory, regardless of when and where used.

2 All Scripture passages are from the New International Version.

3 John P. Meier, A Marginal Jew: Rethinking the Historical Jesus: Mentor, Message, and Miracle, The Anchor Bible Reference Library, ed. David N. Freedman, vol. 2 (New York: Doubleday), 1994, 551. The dating-and therefore the order-of these two documents is uncertain.

4 Hull, Hellenistic Magic and the Synoptic Tradition, 3.

5 G. W. H. Lampe, "Miracles in the Acts of the Apostles," in Miracles, ed. C. F. D. Moule (London: A. R. Mowbray & Co. Ltd.), 1965, 212.

6 Meier, A Marginal Jew, 538.

7 In Luke-Acts demon possession and illness are often-but not always-closely connected. Following exorcism, those who were formerly possessed are now described as cured or healed. Look at Luke 6:18, 7:21, 8:2, 9:1, 9:39, 11:14, Acts 5:16, 8:7, 10:38, 19:12. A full discussion of the connection of possession and illness is outside the scope of this paper.

8 Ibid.

9 Clinton E. Arnold, "The 'Exorcism' of Ephesians 6:12 in Recent Research," The Journal for the Study of the New Testament 30 (1987): 75.

10 John M. Hull, Hellenistic Magic and the Synoptic Tradition, Studies in Biblical Theology, Second Series, 28 (Naperville, IL: Alec R. Allenson Inc.), 1974, 37f.

11 Daimon is a transliteration of a Greek word meaning an unclean or evil spirit and most often translated devil in the KJV.

12 For example, gaining control of your shadow.

13 Ferguson, Backgrounds of Early Christianity, 212.

14 Hurtado, "The Function and Pattern of Signs and Wonders," 46.

15 Ibid., 47f.

16 Meier, A Marginal Jew, 538.

17 Ibid.

18 Aune, "The Apocalypse of John and Graeco-Roman Revelatory Magic," 493.

19 David E. Aune, "Magic in Early Christianity," in Aufstieg und Niedergang der römischen Welt, vol. II.23.2 (Berlin: Walter de Gruyter), 1980, 1557.

20 Ibid., 1513.

21 Ibid., 1515.

22 Ibid., 1520.

23 Hans Dieter Betz, "Magic and Mystery in the Greek Magical Papyri," in Magika Hiera: Ancient Greek Magic and Religion, ed. Christopher A. Faraone and Dirk Obbink (New York: Oxford University Press), 1991, 246.

24 Ibid., 247.

25 Ibid.

26 Betz, "Magic and Mystery in the Greek Magical Papyri," 254.

27 Ferguson, Backgrounds of Early Christianity, 216.

28 All quotations designated PGM are quoted from Betz's The Greek Magical Papyri in Translation.

29 This passage raises many interesting questions:  Did the fact that Jesus asked the demon its name show Jesus did not know its name?  If not, then why did he ask?

30 Ferguson, Backgrounds of Early Christianity, 217.

31 Steve Badger, "The Function of the Supernatural in Acts," Unpublished research paper, AGTS, November 1993, 20.

32 Betz, The Greek Magical Papyri in Translation, xlviii.

33 In Luke-Acts demon possession and illness are often--but not always--closely connected. Following exorcism, those who were formerly possessed are now described as cured or healed. Look at Luke 6:18, 7:21, 8:2, 9:1, 9:39, 11:14, Acts 5:16, 8:7, 10:38, 19:12. A full discussion of the connection of possession and illness is outside the scope of this paper.

34 Luck points out that the terms sympathy and sympathetic have "nothing to do with compassion but means something like 'action and reaction of the universe'" (Luck, 3). This refers to a common bond by which all material things are supposedly united.

Disclaimer: All of the ideas presented in this HTML document are entirely the responsibility of Steve Badger and in no way reflects the policies, ideas, or opinions of any other person or organization.

Copyright (C) 1997 Steve Badger
Document last revised:  February 23, 1997
730 South Duke, Springfield, MO 65802
Email me at mr followed by the at sign and then steve dash badger dot net

Copyright and Limitations on Reproduction
This HTML document is the sole property of Steve Badger.  You may not modify or edit it in any way. You may reproduce it in its entirety (as is) for distribution without charge.  All reproductions of this HTML file (printed or electronic) must contain the disclaimer, the revision date, and the entire copyright notice.

Return to my homepage       

---

You are viewing a mobilized version of this site...
View original page here

Mobilized by Mowser