Situated opposite Galilee, the “earth” of the Gerasenes marks the site of God’s first tactical strike against Greco-Roman assimilation in Luke.
The Greco-Roman rulers who possess and enslave the land impose violence and havoc, sowing death where God’s many flocks were meant to roam freely, without interference.
Like the abusers in Jerusalem, the occupying forces in Decapolis do not want to live and let live. They seek to assimilate, to convert, to impose, to kill—to force others to become like them, “twice as much the sons of Hell as themselves.”
Sure, they may be interested in learning something from those they conquer, but ultimately, everything must be “melted down” and absorbed into something of their own making. It’s called a “god complex:”
“…the logic of American liberalism is a barely warmed-over Hellenism. The world-embracing, universe-striding Hellenic ideology under Alexander was an assimilationist one. In the Alexandrian ideology, it doesn’t matter what tribe your parents are from, what your lineage is, or in what area of the world you were born. If you speak Greek, eat like a Greek, dress like a Greek, walk like a Greek, shit like a Greek, think like a Greek—then you’re a Greek. It’s exceptionally difficult for an American to consider this ideology and not think of the ‘melting pot’”They do not submit to God, who made the heavens and the earth. They do not accept what was made, as it has been made, by his making. His name alone be praised!
Unlike every other revolution in human history, the socio-political rebellion of the biblical tradition—be ye not deceived, O man, it is indeed a political rebellion, though it is not about starting something new, it is a reversion—to accept the Bible is to revert to God as your King, your religion, your tribe, your city, and your homeland.
To return to his land is to return not to what we build, create, perceive, synthesize, or formulate through our ideolocial or theological assimilations, but to what God himself provided in the beginning: an open field where all living creatures coexist in his care.
This week, I discuss Luke 8:27.
Show Notes
δαιμόνιον (daimonion) / ש–י–ד (shin–yod–dalet) / ث–د–ي (thā–dāl–yāʼ)
Demon, other deity, or god. From the root שדד (shadad), which means “to deal violently, despoil, or devastate.” Klein notes that the Arabic ثَدْي (thady), “breast,” reinforces his observation that שֹׁד (shōd) and שַׁד (shad) are two forms of the same biblical root meaning “breast.” In consideration of this link, and the fact that the original text is unpointed, it is difficult to ignore the consonantal link between chaos, havoc, militarism, and the function “demon,” vis-à-vis the field, and violence against the land, since the land is inherently matriarchal:
This intersection is intentional. Consider a related sub-function associated with δαιμόνιον in Luke:
In Semitic languages, the function “demon” likely originates from the Akkadian term šēdu, a protective spirit often depicted in Mesopotamian art as a bull-like colossus or a human-bull hybrid, for example, the bull effigy of Wall Street. The question is not what the demon šēdu protects, but whose interests it serves. Does it protect life in God’s field or wreak havoc on behalf of its human sponsors? Does it plow and harrow, or does it despoil?
Demonic Evil
As it is written:
“ῥίζα γὰρ πάντων τῶν κακῶν ἐστιν ἡ φιλαργυρία”“πάντων τῶν κακῶν” unambiguously indicates “of all evils,” not “all kinds,” underscoring Paul’s deliberate rhetorical force in presenting the love of money not as a moral weakness but as a seed giving rise to every form of evil in God’s field.
ἱμάτιον (himation) / ב-ג-ד (bet–gimel–dalet) / ب-ج-د (bāʼ–jīm–dāl)
Outer garment; cloak.
A scarce word in Classical Arabic, بَجَدَ (bajada), means “to strive or exert,” technically different than بِجَاد (bijād) — the pre-Islamic Bedouin term for a striped cloak or blanket, which Klein links to ב-ג-ד.
Instead of بَجَدَ (bajada), Arabic typically employs roots like ج-ه-د (jīm–hāʾ–dāl) — جَاهَدَ (jāhada) — the basis of جِهَاد (jihād), to express striving or struggle, especially in a religious context. Related roots such as ج-د-د (jīm–dāl–dāl) — جَدَّ (jadda) “to be serious” — and ج-دّ (jīm–dāl–dāl) — جِدّ (jidd) “seriousness” — reinforce the idea of earnest effort and commitment that underlies the concept of jihād.
The بِجَاد (bijād)—a coarse, often red or striped woolen cloak worn by Bedouins—symbolizes striving through its association with the harsh realities of shepherd life in God’s open field, demanding simplicity, endurance, and honor, in contrast with the soft garments of city dwellers. The reference to soft garments is not incidental. In Luke 7:25, Jesus mocks those dressed in “soft clothing” who “live in luxury” in the royal houses. As such, John the Baptist is “more than a prophet.” Clothed in the rough and unpleasant garment of a shepherd, he survives under God’s rule in the open field with an honor imperceptible in the eyes of city dwellers.
It is “the smell of a field” that Luke 8:27 makes terminologically functional here, recalling the transfer of Isaac’s blessing to his younger son. Now Luke turns the tables. As Esau was denied his birthright in favor of Jacob, so now Jacob is denied the same in favor of the demon-possessed Gerasene:
Then his father Isaac said to him, “Please come close and kiss me, my son.”οἰκία (oikia