Return of the Evil Spirit (Matt 12:43-45)

Squatters

They have not legitimate claim, but b/c it is unattended/unoccupied- it takes up residence unless the true owner comes in stakes claim and moves them out.

As it is with deconstruction/reconstruction- thought life- tearing down of strongholds

If you remove through deconstruction, if we don’t rebuild with Christ we are susceptible to doctrine of demons….

Taking every vain imagination and holding thoughts captive to the obedience of Christ

Jesus now returns to consider the incident that started this whole discussion, the exorcism of v. 22. He wants the man who was liberated, along with everyone else present, to realize that freedom from demon possession is not enough. Ownership by the devil must be replaced with ownership by Christ (cf. Rom 6:15–18). Otherwise one’s release is only temporary. Moral reform without Christian commitment always remains inadequate. Jesus likens the situation to a house made ready for new occupants which still stands vacant. Squatters will soon move in. No person can live long without serving someone. Satan will always return to attack that which is left defenseless, and each success leads him to increasingly worse designs, whether, as here, to literal repossession by an even greater number of demons (the number seven may indicate completeness of possession) or with the more widespread degeneracy of repeated sin, which characteristically renders humans more insensitive to their guilt (cf. Rom 1:18–32).63 The “rest” the evil spirit seeks here contrasts sharply and ironically with the rest Christ offers (11:29) and links this controversy with the Sabbath controversies of 12:1–14. The “wicked generation” ties back in with v. 39 and is a uniquely Matthean addition. Matthew will vividly demonstrate the truth of vv. 43–45 by depicting the growing hostility against Jesus throughout the remainder of his narrative. (Matthew NAC)

(α) “unclean spirits,” or “devils” [390 (i) (α)] Jewish tradition distinguished “evil spirits,” which caused melancholy and disease, from “unclean spirits,” which were supposed to have a special connection with necromancy and witchcraft. Perhaps it is for this reason that Matthew very rarely uses the latter phrase—only here and in the words of Jesus, recorded also by Luke, but not by Mark, “When the unclean spirit goeth out of the man.” On the other hand, Mark uses it very frequently indeed. Luke—apart from the passage just quoted from the Double Tradition—uses it only in those parts of the Gospel where he follows Mark, and in those parts of the Acts where he is describing the works of Peter, or Philip (but not of Paul). Here Luke deviates widely from Mark and avoids this term altogether. Hence arises an apparent agreement of Matthew and Luke so far as this, that Matthew attributes to Jesus the words “cast out devils,” while Luke has “gave authority over devils.” But it is perhaps a mere coincidence. This is all the more probable because, as has been indicated above (243), Mark’s “they-began-to-cast-out … devils” may be a mistranslation of an imperative (or vice versa).

Edwin A. Abbott, The Corrections of Mark Adopted by Matthew and Luke, Diatessarica (London: Adam and Charles Black, 1901), 103–104.