Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Luke 11:15
But some of them said, He casteth out devils through Beelzebub the chief of the devils.
15. some of the?n said ] We learn from St Matthew (Mat 12:24) that this notable suggestion emanated from “the Pharisees” and, as St Mark (Luk 3:20) adds, from “the scribes which came from Jerusalem,” i.e. the spies who had been expressly sent down by the ruling hierarchs to dog the footsteps of Jesus, and counteract His influence. The explanation was too ingeniously wicked and cleverly plausible to come from the more unsophisticated Pharisees of Galilee.
Beelzebub ] The name and reading are involved in obscurity. In 2Ki 1:3 we are told that Beelzebub was god of Ekron; and the LXX. and Josephus ( Antt. ix. 2, 1) understood the name to mean ‘lord of flies.’ He may have been a god worshipped to avert the plagues of flies on the low sea-coast like Zeus Apomuios (Averter of flies) and Apollo Ipuktonos (Slayer of vermin). But others interpret the name to mean ‘lord of dung,’ and regard it as one of the insulting nicknames which the Jews from a literal rendering of Exo 23:13 felt bound to apply to heathen deities. In this place perhaps Beelzebub is the true reading, and that means ‘lord of the (celestial) habitation,’ i.e. prince of the air, Eph 2:3. Possibly the of Mat 10:25 is an allusion to this meaning. In any case the charge was the same as that in the Talmud that Jesus wrought His miracles (which the Jews did not pretend to deny) by magic.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
See Poole on “Mat 9:34“. See Poole on “Mat 12:24“, and following verses to Mat 12:30. See Poole on “Mar 3:22“, and following verses to Mar 3:27.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
But some of them said,…. The Pharisees, Mt 9:34
Mt 12:24 who could not bear that he should be thought to be the Messiah, and therefore put an ill construction on the miracle:
he casteth out devils through Beelzebub, the chief of devils; in several copies he is called Beelzebul, and in the Arabic and Ethiopic versions; which last adds these words, “and he answered and said, how can Satan cast out Satan?” [See comments on Mt 12:20].
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
Dumb (). See on Mt 9:32.
By Beelzebub ( ). Blasphemous accusation here in Judea as in Galilee (Mark 3:22; Matt 12:24; Matt 12:27). See on Matthew for discussion of the form of this name and the various items in the sin against the Holy Spirit involved in the charge. It was useless to deny the fact of the miracles. So they were explained as wrought by Satan himself, a most absurd explanation.
Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament
Beelzebub. See on Mt 10:25.
Fuente: Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament
1) “But some of them said,” (tines de eks auton eipan) “Then certain ones of them said,” of the crowd who were Pharisees, Mat 12:24; They were also joined by scribes from Jerusalem, Mar 3:22.
2) “He casteth out devils,” (ekballei ta daimonia) “He expels demons,” this much truth they admitted. He did cast out demons, repeatedly, according to His own enemies, Mat 12:24; Joh 3:2.
3) “Through Beelzebub the chief of devils.” (en Beelzebul to archonti ton daimonion) “By means of Beelzebub who is the chief (ruler) of demons,” Luk 11:18-19. This part of their accusation was false, and false premises are so frequently the basis of false conclusions, See? Mat 12:24; Mar 3:22. Beelzebub means “Lord of dung,” the fly, idols, the god worshipped at Ekron.
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
‘But some of them said, “It is by Beelzeboul the prince of the demons that he casts out demons.’
His opponents were perplexed, but rather than admit that God was working though Him they accused of being in league with ‘Beelzeboul, the prince of the demons’, in other words Satan.
‘It is by Beelzeboul.’ Their decision was that He Himself was possessed (always the easiest way to discredit someone), and not just by any evil spirit but by the great Beelzeboul, prince of demons, himself (compare Joh 7:20; Joh 8:48; Joh 8:52; Joh 10:20). The description demonstrates that Beelzeboul was seen as synonymous with Satan. ‘Beel’ probably represents ‘baal’ (‘lord’), and zeboul ‘house’, thus the name means ‘Lord of the house’.
Different manuscripts and versions present the full name differently It is given as ‘Beelzebub’ in the Syriac and Vulgate versions – probably as taken from the name of the oracular god in 2Ki 1:2-3, and as ‘Beelzeboul’ in most manuscripts. It is given as ‘Beezeboul’ in only a few manuscripts, but these include weighty ones. The latter may, however, simply have dropped the ‘l’ because ‘lz’ was difficult to Greek speakers.
The correct name may well thus be Beelzeboul. ‘Zeboul’ may represent ‘zebel’ (dung) or ‘zebul’ (dwelling). Thus the name may mean ‘lord of the house (or dwelling)’ (see Mat 10:25 b which seems to confirm this). Or it may be ‘lord of dung’ as an insulting name for Satan. The former would explain the stress on ‘house’ in Jesus’ repudiation. The name Zbl is also found in a Ugaritic text, linked with baal, where it may be a proper name or mean ‘prince’. Mat 10:25 b suggests that Beelzeboul is seen as master over a household of demons (compare ‘Lord of the house’ above). As the narrative goes on we learn that this is a synonym for Satan, as we would gather from him being the prince of the demons.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
15 But some of them said, He casteth out devils through Beelzebub the chief of the devils.
Ver. 15. See Mat 9:34 ; Mat 12:24 .
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
15. . ] No inference can here be drawn that these persons were not Pharisees (as Greswell has done), and consequently that the charge proceeded from a different quarter.
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament
through = by. Greek en. App-104.
Beelzebub. Aramaean. See on Mat 10:25. App-94.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
15. .] No inference can here be drawn that these persons were not Pharisees (as Greswell has done), and consequently that the charge proceeded from a different quarter.
Fuente: The Greek Testament
Luk 11:15. , some) Their objection is met in Luk 11:17-18. [They were not able to deny some agency being at work superior to nature.-V. g.]
Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament
He: Mat 9:34, Mat 12:24-30, Mar 3:22-30, Joh 7:20, Joh 8:48, Joh 8:52, Joh 10:20
Beelzebub: Gr. Beelzebul, and so, Luk 11:18, Luk 11:19
Reciprocal: 2Ki 1:2 – Baalzebub Mat 10:25 – If Heb 12:3 – contradiction
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
5
See the comments at Mat 12:24.
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
But some of them said, He casteth out devils through Beelzebub the chief of the devils.
[Through Beelzebub the chief of the devils.] I. As to this name of Beelzebub I have elsewhere discoursed, and do still assert the reading of it with the letter l in the end of it, viz. Beelzebul, against the Syriac, Persian, Vulgar, and other translations, which read it Beelzebub. The Italian, cautiously indeed, but not purely, Beelzebu; that he might not strike upon either the one or the other reading: but in the mean time I will not answer for the faithfulness and candour of the interpreter.
II. Amongst the Jews we may observe three devils called the chief; or prince of the devils; 1. ‘The angel of death’; who is called Prince of all the Satans. 2. The devil Asmodeus; of him afterward. 3. Beelzebub; in this place. Now as to vindicating the writing of it by l in the end of the word, and not b;
III. It is a question whether there were such a thing as Beelzebub in rerum natura. Why should not the deity of the place take his farewell, when Ekron, the place of this deity, was wholly obliterated? When there was no more an idol nor oracle at Ekron, did not the demon cease to be Beelzebub any longer, although it did not cease to be a demon? Wherever, therefore, Ekron was under the second Temple, or the place where it had been under the first; you can hardly persuade me there was any idol or oracle of Beelzebub; and so not Beelzebub himself. I will not here dispute whether Achor, the Cyrenians’ tutelar god against flies, hath any relation or affinity with the name of Ekron. Let it be granted that Beelzebub might change his soil upon some occasion, and remove from Ekron to Cyrene: but then how should he come to be the prince of the devils; when all his business and power was only among flies?
It may not be improbable, perhaps, that he might be first or chief of those demons, or Baalim; that Ahab brought among the Israelites; and so Ahaziah his son, in the midst of his affliction and danger, might fly for refuge to that idol as what had been the god of his father: but what is it could move the ages following at so long distance of time from this, that they should esteem this demon Beelzebub the prince of the devils? Here I confess myself not well satisfied: but as to Beelzebul; something may be said.
IV. I have already shewn, in notes upon Matthew_12, that the Jewish doctors (and such were these who contended with our Saviour) did give idolatrous worship the denomination of zebul; or dung; for the ignominy of the thing; and so was the nation generally taught by these Rabbins. I gave some instances for the proof of it, which I shall not here repeat, but add one more: “It is said of Joseph” [when his mistress would have tempted him to adultery], “that he came into the house to do his business. R. Judah saith, It was a day of fooling and of dunging; it was a day of theatres.” Where the Gloss upon the word zebul, stercoration; saith thus: “It is a word of contempt, and so it is expounded by R. Solomon in the treatise Avodah Zarah; and Tosaphoth; viz. That fooling signifies to sacrifice [that is, to idols]; and they prove it out of Jerusalem Beracoth; where it is said, ‘He that seeth a place where they dung [that is, offer sacrifice] to an idol; let him say, Whoso offereth sacrifice to strange gods, let him be accursed.’ ” Which words we have also alleged out of the Jerusalem Talmud.
V. Now therefore, when idolatry was denominated zebul amongst the Jews, and indeed reckoned amongst the most grievous of sins they could be guilty of, that devil whom they supposed to preside over this piece of wickedness they named him Beelzebub; and esteemed him the prince of the devils; or (if you will pardon the expression) the most devilized of all devils.
VI. They give the like title to the devil Asmodeus. Asmodeus the king of the devils. The devil, the prince of the spirits. Which elsewhere is expounded, the devil Asmodeus. For in both places we have this ridiculous tale: “There was a certain woman brought forth a son in the night-time, and said to her son [a child newly born you must know], ‘go and light me a candle, that I may cut thy navel.’ As he was going, the devil Asmodeus meeting him, said to him, ‘Go and tell thy mother that if the cock had not crowed I would have killed thee,’ ” etc.
The very name points at ‘apostasy,’ not so much that the devil was an apostate, as that this devil provoked and enticed people to apostatize: Beelzebul amongst the Gentiles, and Asmodeus amongst the Jews, the first authors of their apostasy. Whether both the name and demon were not found out by the Jews to affright the Samaritans, see the place above quoted: “When as Noah went to plant a vineyard, the demon Asmodeus met him and said, Let me partake with thee;” etc. So that it seems they suppose Asmodeus had a hand in Noah’s drunkenness. “When he [that is, Solomon] sinned, Asmodeus drove him to it;” etc. They call the angel of death by the name of prince of all Satans; because he destroys all mankind by death, none excepted.
Fuente: Lightfoot Commentary Gospels
Luk 11:15. Some of them said. The Pharisees. Luke omits the language of the people which called forth this expression of hostility; Matthews more definite statement on the latter point would require the mention of the hostile class. See on Mat 12:24.
Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament
11:15 {3} But some of them said, He casteth out devils through Beelzebub the chief of the devils.
(3) An example of horrible blindness, and such as cannot be healed, when the power of God is blasphemed by an evil conscience and pretended malice.