WORSHIP AND MISSIONS INTERVIEW WITH STEPHEN AND LEANN ABBOTT

Dr. Jonathan Michael Jones interviews missionaries, Stephen and Leann Abbott, of France, and then participates in their interview. Audio for the interview between Dr. Jones and Stephen and Leann may be found here. You may also listen to podcast episodes here.

CAN A CHRISTIAN BE A SOCIALIST?

Audio for the following may be found here. You may also listen to podcast episodes here.

CAN A CHRISTIAN BE A SOCIALIST?

Socialism and its far-reaching and seemingly unceasing grasp have seen drastic rises in Western culture—especially in the United States of America. Recent data reveals surprising (and troubling to many) increases in socialist support in the United States. Nearly half (46% to 49%) of 18- to 34-year-olds view democratic socialism positively. Separate data from organizations like the Cato Institute indicate that up to 62% of young people aged 18 to 29 hold favorable views of socialism. Within the Democratic party, support of socialism is up from 50% to about 66%. While most Americans tend to favor capitalism over socialism, the numbers continue to fall for the former and rise for the latter.[1]

In the United States (at least), however, socialism is often masked with the title of democratic socialism—possibly a feeble attempt to separate the title from communism. The aim of both, however, is the same: to federalize the means of production and private business. With the recent elections of boldly-admitted socialists (e.g., Florida Democrat Angie Nixon, Colorado’s Melat Kiros, NYC Mayor Zohran Mamdani, NY’s Darializa Avila-Chevalier, and massive wins by Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) candidates in Michigan and Pennsylvania, the issue is more than a mere passing phase. It is crucial that Americans consider all facets of socialism and (for the church) especially what it means for Christians.

Socialism Defined

In its simplest and purest form, socialism is an economic and political system where the community or the government owns and controls the major means of production, distribution, and exchange of goods.[2] While various forms (and levels) of socialism subsist, the goal and end is the same—the government controls the economic force of society rather than private citizens. Historically-socialist nations are certainly no secret (e.g., the former Soviet Union, China, Cuba, etc.), many of which still operate under such ideals presently.

Is It Biblical? Is It Right?

In determining if it is possible to be a Christian and subscribe to socialism, one must first decipher if socialism is biblical[3] and, further, if socialism is morally right. One must consider not only whether socialism exists in the Bible but whether it is also suggested as moral and good for God’s people and for society. In seeking such answers, it is appropriate to examine the Bible for indications of socialism (including the teachings of Jesus) and measure such indicators against current Christian proposals of socialism.

Christian Interpretations of Socialism

Christian undertones of socialism certainly exist within the framework of the modern church—especially that of Western influence. Contentions for compatibility between Christianity and socialism lie in early church practices, a heavy focus on the poor and needy in Scripture, and a general rejection of greed.

As a matter of early church practice, those who advocate for socialism from a Christian perspective pose that the New Testament describes early believers sharing their money and goods to help the poor. Additionally, Jesus did, in fact, teach his followers to feed the hungry, care for the sick, and help those in need (truly a characteristic of God that is not new to New Covenant teachings, as it is also revealed in Micah 6:8 to do justice, love mercy, and walk humbly with God). Furthermore, Christian socialism argues that extreme wealth and unbridled capitalism promote selfishness and hurt the vulnerable.

But are they truly “Christian”?

These so-called Christian interpretations of socialism are seemingly heard often with the rise of democratic socialism’s perpetuation. At face value, New Testament practices of helping those in need, Jesus’ teachings of caring for such people, and an unbridled rejection of greed and selfishness are elements with which few may contend, for they are right and good. The previous assertions are (at least anecdotally) the most common supports for socialism from a Christian platform. Nevertheless, such affirmations find voids in their foundations.

First, Jesus’ teachings are never directed toward government but rather his followers (i.e., Christians—the church). Although disobedience to God regarding loving the least of these (Matt 25:40) is sin, Jesus’ instruction is not to legislate morality. If people do not choose to honor God with their actions, they cannot be forced to do so. Morality should not be legislated but rather chosen.[4] Jesus’ instructions of generosity and hospitality are directed toward his own people rather that the magistrates.

Second, opponents of socialism note that the Bible respects personal property rights (such as the commandment not to steal) and ties individual work directly to survival. Support of private ownership and property is replete in the Bible and should not be dismissed. Moreover, when a government controls the means of private property, society fails to acquire that which might be given in generosity to people who need it.[5]

Third, traditional Marxist socialism historically promotes a materialistic or atheistic worldview, viewing organized religion as a tool of oppression. People under the age of thirty-five have no memory of the Soviet Union. The Berlin Wall fell thirty-seven years ago. People of such youth do not know the lengths people went to escape the Soviet Bloc and other Communist so-called paradises. They have not read Alexander Solzenitsyn’s books about the gulags or seen Soviet leader Kruschev pound his shoe and proclaim his intention to bury the West. At face value, socialism seems to be the utopia it promises while those who have memory of and have experienced it have also experienced its lies. Without delving much into Marxist thought (as it is not in the scope of this paper), it should be sufficiently comprehended that Marxism is incompatible with the teachings of Jesus and, thus, with Christianity.

Was Jesus a Socialist?

A common notion often submitted in support of socialism is that Jesus was a socialist. Those who advocate for socialism seem to think “it is a nicer, more inclusive system than capitalism and see a quest for justice congruent with Jesus’ ministry and his concern for the poor, dispossessed, and downtrodden. It is true that Jesus was concerned about these people and acted on it, but there are some essential distinctions.”[6]

First, the Bible never charges the government with caring for the poor or benevolence, except that a nation is identified as God’s people (i.e., Israel), in which case much disdain would subsist for the aim of a theocracy. Rather, such a charge is given to the people of God alone.

Second, the foundation of the market system is enshrined in the commands God gave the Israelites in the Torah. There is not much to the market system, what Marx called capitalism. All that is needed is private property and voluntary exchange. If people can own stuff (land, buildings, animals, equipment, but also ideas and labor) and can exchange those things as they see fit, that is capitalism, and it naturally emerges. It does not have to be imposed, but it must be protected.[7]

At its core, without understanding, socialism must be imposed rather than chosen, and if it is chosen, a lack of comprehension is present. American writer, Ayn Rand (who was born herself under the pressures of Communism in the Soviet Union), states that communism and socialism are identical in their ultimate goal and results, differing only in their methods: communism uses direct physical force, while socialism uses the democratic process of voting. She famously wrote that it is “merely the difference between murder and suicide.”[8]

The disparity between Jesus’ teachings and pure socialism then is coercion (socialism) and choice (capitalism). Coercion is not the way of God, the way of Jesus, or the way of the cross.[9] Christians who pose ideals of socialism, therefore, offer misapplied scriptures and misinterpreted teachings of Jesus.[10]

Drawing from Dylan Pahman, PhD

Dylan Pahman, PhD and President of the St. Nicholas Cabasilas Institute for Orthodoxy and Liberty, recently published an article criticizing Christian socialism in which he uses a comparative analysis of two prominent historical figures to explore whether devotion to Christ and socialism can truly coexist: Semyon Frank (a twentieth-century Russian religious philosopher who offered poignant critiques of socialist proposals, warning Christians against utopian errors and state overreach) and F.D. Maurice (a nineteenth- century Russian philosopher who argued that the holiness of private property is derived from our divine obligation to use what we own to care for our neighbors).

Pahman aligns with Frank to argue that secular and political socialist movements often default to utopian fallacies, overestimating the state’s capacity to engineer a perfect society, but he also asserts that to fulfill the Christian mandate of charity, society requires more economic freedom, not less. Charitable and entrepreneurial initiatives rely directly on the freedom of the individual to act voluntarily. Drawing from Maurice’s model, Pahman concludes that true social transformation should be led by the church and voluntary communities rather than state bureaucracies. Social responsibility should be driven by a shared spiritual vision where individuals care for the least of these within their personal vocations.

The seemingly most-common consensus among conservative evangelical Christians is that charity should be offered from individuals rather than government. Moreover, many American citizens have observed massive waste an incompetence in government entities, which leads many to conclude that government is the absolute worst unit to oversee charity.

Has Socialism Ever Worked?

Advocates for socialism often seem to argue with examples of nations where socialism has supposedly worked or is currently working (e.g., China, Denmark, Sweden, and Norway). Upon closer examination of such nations, however, it becomes clear that socialism is not what has made them successful.

China, for example, has allowed market reforms and private property while maintaining heavy state control over key industries, lifting hundreds of millions out of poverty, though operating more as a state-directed market economy than traditional socialism so China has not been a purely socialist country for several decades.

The Nordic model is often cited as successful socialism, but their leaders clarify they are free-market capitalist economies where they utilize private enterprise and competitive markets alongside high taxes, strong labor unions, and robust public welfare safety nets so (again) this is not pure socialism.

Even post-WW2 Great Britain democratically nationalized major industries like rail, coal, and healthcare (creating the National Health Service or NHS), but many of these sectors faced later economic friction and were heavily privatized in subsequent decades.

Nations that claim socialism seem to boast success in many cases, but when examined more closely, it becomes apparent that 1) they are far from pure socialism and 2) what has most significantly aided in their seeming success are capitalist (rather than socialist) ideals. To answer the question of whether socialism has ever worked then, the answer seems to be a resounding no.

Four Concluding Matters

For concluding matters, I offer four elements to consider bearing in mind the issues, thoughts, and assertions presented here. First, Jesus calls the church to trust him. The answer to the world’s problems will never be found in a government or magistrate but only in the hope that exists in Jesus Christ. When kings and kingdoms fail (and ultimately, they will) and dissolve into the unknown, the reign of Jesus will be forever. His people are called to trust him for provision, as he supplies everything needed not only for godliness but also for life (2 Pet 1:3).

Second, Jesus calls the church to generosity and hospitality (especially toward the poor and needy) and a rejection of greed without excuse. A rejection of socialism on grounds of the church’s responsibility to charity should not negate such a charge but rather enhance it. One who professes Christ and does not live in generosity and charity lives in sin. Research reveals that Christians (especially American Christians) are among the most generous people in society.[11] Perhaps, such data discloses a deeper spiritual reality that God’s people are givers because God is a giver.

Third, Jesus demands respect for authority (Rom 13). The implicit response of believers to this truth should be that even if the government mandates socialist policies, while Christians may surely disagree, God has placed governmental leaders in positions of authority so if laws and regulations do not impose morally-bankrupt actions, God’s people are to respect such orders and, yes, while still be charitable.

Last, Jesus never suggests government-mandated charity. God’s commands for charity are aimed toward his own people so the responsibility of charity rests solely on the church. The answer to the earlier pontification of Jesus’ position as a socialist should be clear from this paper: Jesus was not and is not a socialist, as his instructions do not infer governmental responsibility to charity.

Scripture does give government a great task, but it is protection rather than a particular economic ideal. As such, it is the conclusion of this paper that socialism is largely incompatible with Christian values.[12]

Lord, I would be the most miserable person in the world if my hopes were only in this life. Why? Because I am hopeless without Christ’s righteousness. My life could never be comfortable, and there would be no hope at all of eternal life.

If you denied me that hope, I would be the most miserable one of all. I may be happy without worldly enjoyments, but all things in the world cannot make me happy without this.

So however you treat me in this world, whatever you deny me, Lord, deny me not this. I can be happy without riches and abundance, like Job and Lazarus were. I can be happy even if I am reviled and reproached, as was Christ and his disciples. I can be happy and comfortable in prison, as were Paul and Silas.

But I cannot be happy without the righteousness of Christ.^[13]

---

[1] Lydia Saad, “How Americans View Capitalism, Socialism, and Free Enterprise,” Gallup, August 6, 2026, https://news.gallup.com/poll/713144/americans-view-capitalism-socialism-free-enterprise.aspx.

[2] Kristian Niemietz, Socialism: The Failed Idea That Never Dies (London: Institute of Economic Affairs, 2019).

The DSA (Democratic Socialists of America) attempt to cover the pure meaning of socialism by presenting it as disparate in that democratic socialism is democratically (by vote) chosen by the people rather than forced upon society through dictatorship. Nonetheless, no matter how socialism is employed, the same goal is achieved: namely government control of the means of production.

[3] “Biblical” here should be understood as synonymous with God’s morally-right way as indicated in the text of Scripture.

[4] As such, it is the view of this paper that legislation should only exist to protect people’s rights and well-being. Thus, if laws are created with morality at the forefront (though there is surely room for debate and disagreement), the action is an exercise in futility.

[5] It is conversely true that those who profess Christ but fail to exercise generosity live in sin.

[6] Brian Baugus, “Jesusand Socalism: What Does the Bible Say?” (blog), Regent University, January 19, 2026, https://ccta.regent.edu/jesus-and-socialism-what-does-the-bible-say/.

[7] Baugus.

[8] Ayn Rand, For the New Intellectual (NY, NY: New American Library Penguin Group, 1961), 43.

[9] This statement is compatible with the doctrines of sovereign grace since such concepts include humankind’s choice (not free will). While salvation is passive (to people), believers still have daily choices for which, although motively-controlled by God, they are still held accountable.

[10] Anecdotally, it might also be observed that many proponents of so-called Christian socialism do not practice orthodox Christianity and are otherwise opposed to such.

[11] Philanthropy Roundtable, s.v. “Less God, Less Giving?” accessed August 25, 2026, https://www.philanthropyroundtable.org/magazine/less-god-less-giving/.

[12] The implication here does not suggest an impossibility of Christian socialism but rather a difficulty. While socialism is not evil in and of itself, the Bible most supports capitalist ideas and rejects traditional Marxist and socialist concepts.

^[13] David Clarkson, “No Hope without Christ’s Righteousness,” in Piercing Heaven: Prayers of the Puritans, ed. Robert Elmer (Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press, 2019), 18.

HOW TO HANDLE FALLEN CHURCH LEADERS

Audio for the following may be found here. You may also listen to podcast episodes here.

HOW TO HANDLE FALLEN CHURCH LEADERS

When a Christian leader has a great fall, what should be the response of believers? In world that readily desires to condemn God’s people (and especially her leaders), should local churches respond differently since their lives should reflect that of The Way?[1] God’s call is not purely a vocation (although it could be) but (more) a holy charge by God himself. Collectively, pastors are an extension of the Jesus’ ministry so they are to live disparate lives from even those of the people they lead. Thus, such matters are vital to an appropriate witness for Jesus Christ so here three considerations will be discussed.

1.      Immediate actions

2.      Community and personal response

3.      The contrast to the ways of the world

Immediate Actions

Immediate actions of response to fallen leaders are threefold.

1.      Remove the fallen leader from leadership

2.      Protect and support victims involved in the fall

3.      Truthfully call out sin

First, Christians should remove the fallen leader from leadership. Relieve the person of their duties immediately, as moral or structural failure typically violates the biblical requirement to be above reproach (1 Tim 3:2, 10, Titus 1:7). The call to ministry is not only a special call but a holy call and one to be taken with great care and solemnity—even worthy of double honor (1 Tim 5:17). While Paul’s instructions for ministers of the gospel to be above reproach is not synonymous with perfection, the inference is to take the call to preach earnestly. One who leads groups of believers (especially in the local church) is to consider his call more than a mere job. Even if what one does in his call is a vocation, ministry is truly employed with no thought of return, as the Lord provides the needs of his servants. As such, one who has fallen to the degree that an entire group of Christians (i.e., a church) is impacted in a drastic manner, he is to be immediately from leadership. Removing such a person will expedite the healing process for both the fallen leader and the body of believers.

Second, believers should protect and support victims. Prioritize the safety, healing, and emotional support of any direct victims, families, and vulnerable individuals affected by the action. Anecdotally, under the guise of grace, local churches seem to dismiss those hurt most by sin and instead forgive the one who has sinned against such people (e.g., the husband or wife whose spouse has been unfaithful and even left him or her). This is not to say that a fallen leader should be treated with disdain but rather with fairness and justice, for without the two, grace cannot be realized.

An unfortunate reality of the Western Church and her commercialization is cheap grace. Dietrich Bonhoeffer, in his classic The Cost of Discipleship, writes, “Cheap grace is the preaching of forgiveness without requiring repentance, Baptism without church discipline, Communion without confession, absolution without personal confession. Cheap grace is grace without discipleship, grace without the cross, grace without Jesus Christ, living and incarnate.”[2] With a subconscious position of cheap grace, churches often lose sight of the fact that grace demands not only forgiveness but accountability. While forgiveness is available for anyone at the foot of the cross, when church leaders fall, Christians should tend to those most impacted while seeking accountability (with the goal of redemption) for those who have offended—also with an understanding that redemption does not negate consequences.

The third immediate action is to truthfully acknowledge sin. Acknowledge the reality of the wrongdoing clearly and honestly without minimizing or covering up the behavior. John says that confession is required to forgive (1 John 1:8-10). Often, churches seem to hide public sin so that the church’s reputation is not tarnished and often with an eye toward an onlooking world. To such a world, however, the church’s position is already a hated one as followers of Christ (John 15:18-25). Therefore, local churches should seek first what glorifies God rather than an action that would supposedly save their reputations.[3] Treading the waters of response cautiously, local churches must seek avenues of forgiveness, healing, and accountability without providing full forms of entertainment to those who might seek to destroy the church.

Community and Personal Response

As a matter of personal and community response, believers have three primary responsibilities.

1.      Grieve with sorrow (because of sin rather than reputation)

2.      Exercise humility

3.      Keep faith anchored

A church’s first responsibility is to grieve with sorrow. Respond with sadness and lament rather than gossip, gloating, or malicious social media commentary. A fall is not a time for the latter but rather for prayer and repentance. There are already enough forces attempting in futility to destroy the church so Satan does not need anymore help from the people within her body. It has often been said that Christians are the worst about shooting their own wounded, and such an adage is made clear when leaders fall. A fall is not a time to rejoice but a time to truly lament as Satan has temporarily gained a foothold on God’s chosen. Scripture reminds God’s people that there are times for grieving (Eccl 3:4); the fall of a church leader is surely one of those times.

Second, God’s people should exercise humility. Recognize that all people are vulnerable to temptation, avoiding a self-righteous attitude. No one is above a great fall. When I was younger, I found myself often thinking that I would never fall in the same manner some of the great Christian leaders by whom I was influenced did only to realize that I too need grace and am not above temptation or sin. My spirit battles my flesh every day just as the Apostle Paul’s did. Paul writes:

For we know that the law is spiritual, but I am of the flesh, sold under sin. For I do not understand my own actions. For I do not do what I want, but I do the very thing I hate. Now if I do what I do not want, I agree with the law, that it is good. So now it is no longer I who do it, but sin that dwells within me. For I know that nothing good dwells in me, that is, in my flesh. For I have the desire to do what is right, but not the ability to carry it out. For I do not do the good I want, but the evil I do not want is what I keep on doing. Now if I do what I do not want, it is no longer I who do it, but sin that dwells within me (Rom 7:14-20).[4]

Pride comes before the fall (Prov 16:18). Believers of local churches, thus, are wise to recall such truth and act accordingly even in times of Christian leaders’ great falls. Satan has been successfully tempting God’s people from the beginning of human history, and he will not stop until the final victory of Jesus Christ. As such, God’s people should live and walk in humility at all times.

Third, local churches should keep the faith anchored. Remember that human leaders are flawed, but God and the core message of the gospel remain steadfast. The church is not going anywhere; she will stand long after leaders fall and her members are ridiculed, tortured, and killed. Faith in Christ is what grounds the church and inspires her to accomplish miraculous and wondrous things for the glory of her Lord. Even when faith is shaken (i.e., during the fall of a church leader), however, her faith should stand securely on the rock that never fails: Jesus Christ, the cornerstone of his bride.

Contrast the World

In all responses to fallen Christian leaders, three nonnegotiable elements should remain.

1.      Pray for fallen church leaders

2.      Forgive fallen church leaders

3.      Support the healing and redemption of fallen church leaders

First, believers must pray for fallen church leaders. Paul instructs God’s people to pray for everyone (2 Tim 2:1-4), which includes not only political leaders but (especially) church leaders. Perhaps, a reason Christian leaders fall is the lack of prayer for them. The prayers of the righteous avail much (Jas 5:16). When someone says that all they can do is pray, the statement does not recognize the power of prayer. Similarly, when people criticize those who offer prayers on behalf of people in desperate situations (e.g., the loss of life in mass murders or natural disasters), such criticism fails to realize that prayer is exceedingly the most important action in which anyone may participate. It is essential to pray for church leaders while they minister but in force after a fall has occurred.

Second, churches must forgive fallen church leaders. Calling out sin and employing accountability do not nullify the responsibility to forgive. God called his ministers to the local church before any of them even considered the sin that humbled them. Even while holding church leaders accountable, God’s people are to forgive them. Certainly, care for those impacted and hurt most, but do not negate the responsibility to forgive.

Last, God’s people must support the healing and redemption of fallen church leaders. What greater story than that of grace? There is none. In a world that seeks to ridicule and disgrace the church, the rumors of grace and forgiveness in God’s economy are true. As Christ-followers, the church should be an agent of matchless grace in a world that desires to destroy those who make mistakes. While forgiveness does not necessarily equate to full vocational restoration (although it could and God’s people should recognize such truth), it stalwartly means that God’s people welcome the vilest offender into their presence as one of God’s loved and chosen people by their attitudes, love, forgiveness, and aid in helping the one who has fallen. No one is above such a fall, but no one is also beyond God’s grace and, yes, God’s restoration.[5]

Realize That a Fall Is Not the End of the Story

The overarching realization that God’s people will persevere is the fact that a fall is not the end of the story. God does not need anyone; he worked in the lives of his people long before any pastor or church leader and he will work in his people’s lives long after they are gone. When Christians comprehend that the church’s work is by, to, and for the glory of God alone, their worship is not dependent upon one person or even several people (e.g., celebrity Christians)—for proper worship to occur, local churches must possess this fervent and solemn realization. Such an understanding instead fosters the proper response toward those who have fallen and those impacted by their sins. The church will persevere eternally despite the drastic mistakes of foolish people throughout human history. No one is above a fall; moreover, no one is ever too far gone for the grace of God; and Christians should respond to the fall of church leaders accordingly.

We have obtained grace to give ourselves to you, Lord, through your mercy, and to one another.

To have communion with one another, as saints in one gospel fellowship, we agree and promise before God the Father and our Lord Jesus Christ to walk together in this one gospel communion and fellowship as a church of Jesus Christ.

In love to the Lord and to one another, we endeavor to give sincere and hearty obedience to the laws, ordinances, and appointments of our Lord and lawgiver in his church.

We also agree and promise, the Lord assisting, to follow after the things which make for peace, and things with which we may build each other up.

So living and walking in love and peace, the God of love and peace may be with us. Amen.^[6]

---

[1] Here it should be understood as not minor or miniscule mistakes but rather sin-specific actions that cause severe mistrust and pain and primarily by those in local church leadership (i.e., pastoral ministry).

[2] Dietrich Bonhoeffer, The Cost of Discipleship, trans. R. H. Fuller (New York, NY: Touchstone, 1995), 44-45.

[3] It is not wrong to keep what is within the family only within the family (i.e., although local church affairs might require public responses, only information that is necessary publicly should be output, as many in the world seek opportunities to taint and ruin the church’s witness). Great care must be taken in discerning what should be offered to the public during times of fallen Christian leaders.

[4] All biblical references are taken from the English Standard Version (ESV) of the Bible unless otherwise noted.

[5] While local churches are tasked with carefully considering their leaders, if one has been fully restored and healed and trust has been rebuilt, it is not wrong to place such a person in a position of spiritual authority. The characteristic of being above reproach (1 Tim 3:2) and well-respected (1 Tim 3:7) implies a congruence of action (i.e., one’s character within the walls of the church matches that of what is outside). If such qualities are true of someone after a fall, he is eligible to again shepherd God’s people.

^[6] John Bunyan, “We Have Obtained Grace to Give Ourselves to You,” in Piercing Heaven: Prayers of the Puritans, ed. Robert Elmer (Bellingham, WA: Lexham Press, 2019), 157.

THE BEST DEVILED HAM

Audio for the following may be found here. You may also listen to podcast episodes here.

MARK 5:1-20—THE BEST DEVILVED HAM

The healing power of Jesus is surely no secret. Unambiguously, Jesus is God and, thus, possesses the same healing power as the Father and the Spirit. One of the most unique accounts of Jesus’ healing is told in the fifth chapter of Mark’s Gospel, and it might double as the first report of deviled ham in history. A man who is possessed by a demon understands the power and authority of Jesus in this telling and, therefore, offers a grateful response of worship because of his healing, which could not be accomplished apart from Jesus Christ. In the same way, Jesus is the answer to all the world’s problems. Without Christ, everyone would live to their own perpetual destruction. It is, nevertheless, the power of Jesus that heals, for only Jesus may take a person’s devil and turn it into deviled ham.

Mark 5:1-21

Jesus Heals a Man with a Demon

 ¹ They came to the other side of the sea, to the country of the Gerasenes. ² And when Jesus had stepped out of the boat, immediately there met him out of the tombs a man with an unclean spirit. ³ He lived among the tombs. And no one could bind him anymore, not even with a chain, ⁴ for he had often been bound with shackles and chains, but he wrenched the chains apart, and he broke the shackles in pieces. No one had the strength to subdue him. ⁵ Night and day among the tombs and on the mountains he was always crying out and cutting himself with stones. ⁶ And when he saw Jesus from afar, he ran and fell down before him. ⁷ And crying out with a loud voice, he said, “What have you to do with me, Jesus, Son of the Most High God? I adjure you by God, do not torment me.” ⁸ For he was saying to him, “Come out of the man, you unclean spirit!” ⁹ And Jesus asked him, “What is your name?” He replied, “My name is Legion, for we are many.” ¹⁰ And he begged him earnestly not to send them out of the country. ¹¹ Now a great herd of pigs was feeding there on the hillside, ¹² and they begged him, saying, “Send us to the pigs; let us enter them.” ¹³ So he gave them permission. And the unclean spirits came out and entered the pigs; and the herd, numbering about two thousand, rushed down the steep bank into the sea and drowned in the sea.

¹⁴ The herdsmen fled and told it in the city and in the country. And people came to see what it was that had happened. ¹⁵ And they came to Jesus and saw the demon-possessed man, the one who had had the legion, sitting there, clothed and in his right mind, and they were afraid. ¹⁶ And those who had seen it described to them what had happened to the demon-possessed man and to the pigs. ¹⁷ And they began to beg Jesus to depart from their region. ¹⁸ As he was getting into the boat, the man who had been possessed with demons begged him that he might be with him. ¹⁹ And he did not permit him but said to him, “Go home to your friends and tell them how much the Lord has done for you, and how he has had mercy on you.” ²⁰ And he went away and began to proclaim in the Decapolis how much Jesus had done for him, and everyone marveled.[1]

Here is an account of Jesus’ authority and recognition, several responses to Jesus, and the first recipe for deviled ham in history. To the first two elements (Jesus’ authority and recognition), a call is offered to everyone: what will you do with Jesus? Ultimately, everyone will give an answer to what they did with the Son of God, and when that answer is short, Jesus will respond to them with, “I never knew you; depart from me, you workers of lawlessness” (Matt 7:21).

The Authority of Jesus (vv. 1-5)

The set up of the chronicle here denotes Jesus and his Disciples going to “the other side of the sea, to the country of Gerasenes” (v. 1). What would be so important about this detail that Mark’s Gospel would include it? In New Testament society, Jewish and Gentile life was so distinct that both parties lived and worked on opposite sides of the Galilee Sea: Jews primarily on the western side and Gentiles primarily on the eastern side.[2]

At first read, such a detail might not protrude, but what should foster a question in the account is the pigs. To Jews, pigs were unclean so why were there pigs? It is because Jesus and his Disciples were on the Gentile side of the Sea, which indicates a broader gospel truth: Jesus calls his people to discomfort rather than comfort—Jesus’ call disregards kind bulwarks of safety and bids his followers come and die (Luke 9:23, Gal 2:20, Mark 8:35). Since Christ is shown strongest when his people are at their weakest (2 Cor 12:9-10), the glory of God is most revealed in such moments—in the darkest and most vulnerable places.

The first five verses of this Mark 5 reveal the consummate authority of Jesus. In the narrative, the demon-possessed man lived “among the tombs” (v. 3).[3] This possessed man’s state was so dire that no one could even bind him anymore—not even with chains (vv. 3-4). Demonic entities had so possessed this man, in fact, that he lived every day crying out and cutting himself with stones (v. 5).

Even in such a condition, the man knew his only hope was Jesus. Jesus, however, was (unfortunately) the last resort. He and others had exhausted their resources (e.g., chains and likely exorcisms) trying render help, but nothing worked. Thus, they resorted to trying Jesus. Why is Jesus the last option for many people? He is God[4] so why would one assume he cannot work? Even professing Christians (those who claim his Lordship over their lives) fail here by effectively trusting their own judgments and abilities more than that of Jesus’.

A worship song that was popular when I was a child says, “Jesus is the answer for the world today.” Such a claim is often not realized and, therefore, not engaged by the people of God. If anyone should go to Christ for answers first, it should be his own people: the church. In the Mark narrative here, the authority of Jesus is clearly seen; when everything else fails, Jesus does not. Only Jesus had the authority to heal a demon-possessed man when everything else had been tried. A lot of time could have been saved if Jesus had been sought first.

The Recognition of Jesus (vv. 6-12)

The second piece visible in the text is the recognition of Jesus. While Jesus is the most influential person to ever walk planet Earth, his recognition transcends mere human fame, for Jesus holds eternal and supernatural recognition. The Apostle James teaches that even hell believes in God and shudders at his name (Jas 2:19), which is precisely why transformation aims beyond mere belief, for if evil believes in God, mere belief is not what changes someone but only a personal relationship with Jesus Christ in which he is Lord. In the Mark text, Jesus is recognized by the demons, of which there were many, hence the name of Legion (v. 9). Not only did the man and the people engaged in the situation recognize Jesus but also the demonic entities that possessed the man knew who Jesus is and what he could do. In fact, the demons likely knew of Jesus’ power even more than the people in the situation including the possessed man.

Hell is not fooled; hell understands that Jesus is God and that all authority in heaven and on earth has been given to him (Matt 28:18). Nonetheless, Satan not only understands who Jesus is but also who he (himself) is (i.e., Jesus is peerless and incomparable) but does not respond appropriately. Believers cannot accurately know who Jesus is without also knowing who they are both apart from and in Christ; such realization then requires a correct response: namely worship.

The demons in the account instantly recognize Jesus and even refer to him as “Jesus, Son of the Most High God” (v. 7), which suggests that someone might be able to know who God is and dishonor him with his or her life—recognition of Jesus alone does not stop demonic powers from engaging in evil and destruction. Recognition that results in obedience, however, infers life-change. Not only did the demons who possessed this man offer recognition of Jesus, they implored him to have mercy upon them and send them into pigs (vv. 11-12), which the text says Jesus allowed.

What is the difference then between demons who believe in God and Christians who believe in God? The demons absolutely knew the person of Jesus Christ, but they are still eternally damned. The disparity subsists in one’s condition—either in Christ saved or apart from Christ lost (i.e., a personal relationship with Jesus). Apart from Christ, humans are incapable of anything good since they are radically and totally depraved. In Christ, however, God’s people are continuously being made into the image and likeness of Christ—Jesus became sin on behalf of his people so that they might be in his righteousness (2 Cor 5:21). A fervent realization of humanity’s utter hopelessness should coincide with a grateful response derived from Christ’s unmerited salvation. Proper recognition of Jesus, therefore, accompanies not only a comprehension of the person of Christ but also of one’s sin and dire need for him.

The Response to Jesus (v. 13)

The final element to perceive in the text is the response to Jesus. Moreover, there are three different responses in the text:

1)      the response of evil,

2)      the response of onlookers, and

3)      the response of God’s people.

Each party here represents one to which every person may relate, and believers must assess into which category or group they fall.

The Response of Evil (v. 13)

All parties who can choose between good and evil will one day bow before the Kingship of Jesus Christ including those who do not yet know him. As such, the text here demonstrates the response of evil to Jesus. Having all authority, Mark’s Gospel reads that, “…he [Jesus] gave them permission. And the unclean spirits came out and entered the pigs; and the herd, numbering about two thousand, rushed down the steep bank into the sea and drowned in the sea” (v. 13).

Intrinsically, one might ponder the difference between Christian obedience and demonic obedience to Christ. The difference is rooted in that of obligation, desire, and motivation. Evil responds here to Jesus Christ by obeying him, but the demons who possessed the man would not have done so and did not do so out of a desire to please Christ but rather to appease him (i.e., the motivation of evil is never to honor God but to destroy people). Satan does well at making sin look glamorous and more desirable to the hearts of people, but the reality people often forget in considering the allure of sin is that what presents satisfaction never does what it claims. Nonetheless, the Son has all authority over creation and powers. Satan, thus, is obligated to obey Jesus.

Nothing happens apart from the will of God. The Apostle Paul says that “…from him and through him and to him are all things” (Rom 11:36). In essence, every roll of the dice in Las Vegas occurs by God’s sovereign will.[5] The demonic entities respond through obedience in the text but out of obligation rather than glad desire. A seemingly common thought is that Satan is the equal counterpart to God, but with certainty, such a concept is radically false. The power of God and the power of Satan do not begin to compare, as God is exceedingly and indescribably greater than Satan. Those who follow Jesus should obey not out of obligation but out of satisfaction. Obligatory obedience happens perpetually even from evil.

The Response of Onlookers (vv. 14-17)

The second party to examine is the onlookers. These are the people that Mark’s Gospel suggests have tried everything to render aid to the possessed man—everything and everyone but Jesus. When Jesus freed the man from his demonic prison and the people saw him “in his right mind,”[6] the people were confused and even afraid (v. 15). What should have been reason to rejoice became a controversy and a bruhaha. The people then begged Jesus to leave the region (v. 17), as the scene surely caused conflict among the people.

The response of the people was inadequate because they were unclear about what happened. Mindful of the fact that the gospel is foolishness to the world (1 Cor 1:18) and that the world hates Jesus (John 15:18),[7] God’s people should wear such animosity as a badge of honor in the Kingdom of God, for their suffering is for the sake and glory of Christ. The people in the narrative did not understand what happened to the demon-possessed man so their fear turned to avoidance—avoidance of Jesus. While their thoughts were perhaps considered logical (amongst each other), their natural thoughts could not comprehend supernatural healing so subsequently, they were afraid. Their solution then was to distance themselves from the one causing commotion.

Jesus is influential. Anywhere Jesus is mentioned, he will cause either chaos or worship. Those who avoid such reactions are the people who Jesus will deny (Matt 10:33). A response of chaos is synonymous with a response of detachment. God’s people cannot worship Jesus and separate themselves from him simultaneously. Faith in Christ is bold or it is not faith. Such is the state of the people in Mark’s narrative.

The Response of God’s People (vv. 18-20)

Lastly, the response of God’s people is highlighted in the text through the action of the demon-possessed man.[8] The man, understanding the extremities from which he had been released, begged Jesus that he might be with him (v. 18). The response of Jesus, however, is striking and perhaps unexpected: “…he did not permit him but said to him, ‘Go home to your friends and tell them how much the Lord has done for you, and how he has had mercy on you’” (v. 19). The command is not for the man to stay quiet and comfortable but to rejoice and tell what the Lord has done for him. The same Jesus who called his people out of comfort to uncomfortable settings and situations then is the same God who still calls his people to places of discomfort for the glory of his name and fame.

In total abandon, the people of God are to preach the gospel far and wide, in every place, and no matter the consequences. The text indicates that the man did as he was commanded. Doing so is the proper response of God’s people. When the church responds to Christ in the same way, worship occurs. Without a full vacation of selfish and worldly desires, one’s response is no different than that of the world. It is easy to obey Christ when there is not ridicule, persecution, or pain. Nevertheless, Jesus calls his people out of kind fortifications into the darkest places that need him most. Worship does not end in local congregations; rather, worship is a beginning place. The end of a worship service is historically known as the Sending, and it is the connection between corporate and private worship. The demons obeyed Jesus, but they were not sent to worship. The difference then between all other responses and the Christian response is the sending.

Jesus Fosters a Response of Worship

When God’s people recognize Jesus for who he is in his supreme authority as God, the only fitting reaction is worship. Nonetheless, genuine and sincere Christian worship may not occur without the authority of Jesus, the recognition of Jesus (his person rather than his hand and work), and an appropriate response to Jesus—when all three elements are aligned with the purpose and will of God, only then does Christian worship happen and, moreover, glorify triune God. The man released from demonic power realized that Jesus alone had the power to heal him, as he still possesses the power to heal today no matter what the ailment (e.g., shackles of evil and sin, sickness, broken relationships, depression, etc.). As such, Jesus fosters an attitude, posture, and act of worship offered by his people.

“Grant to us, Lord, we pray, the spirit to think and do always those things that are right, that we, who cannot exist without you, may by you be enabled to live according to your will, through Jesus Christ our Lord, who lives and reigns with you and the Holy Spirit, one God, forever and ever. Amen.”[9]

---

[1] All biblical references are taken from the English Standard Version (ESV) of the Bible unless otherwise noted.

[2] “The incident occurs near Gerasa, a small town by the sea (to be distinguished from the larger Gerasa [Jerash], which is 34 miles [54 km] away from the sea). Matthew 8:28 specifies that this was in the region of Gadara. A fifth-century church excavated in Kursi possibly marks the traditional location of this event, on the eastern shore of Galilee” (Bayer, 8095).

Bayer, Hans F. “Mark—Note on 5:1,” in ESV Study Bible, eds., Lane T. Dennis, Wayne Grudem, J.I. Packer, C. John Collins, Thomas R. Schreiner, and Justin Taylor (Wheaton, IL: Crossway. 2008), 8095.

[3] This phrase is a reference to the fact that this man was completely isolated from society, deeply unclean, and living in a state of spiritual and social death.

[4] Jesus, the second person of the Trinity, is one with the Father and Spirit and operates in a co-eternal and co-equal manner. Since he is God then, the first person to whom Christians should turn is Christ, for he never ceases interceding before the Father on behalf of his people (Rom 8:34).

[5] The response of evil and righteousness hold disparities because of choice with which the Doctrine of Sovereign Grace is compatible. Choice is vastly different than free will, which may not be surmised from Scripture without a stretch of biblical truth. While human logic certainly inclines toward free will, Scripture is clear that such a concept is false, but there surely is choice in that human choice is always naturally sin until and unless awakened by the Holy Spirit.

[6] That is properly functioning as an image bearer of God.

[7] While seemingly hyperbole, since the world persecutes Christians because it persecutes Jesus, the term, hate, is accurate (i.e., if a professing believer is not hated by the world —2 Tim 3:12—, the possibility of his or her conversion is questionable).

[8] God’s people may relate to the possessed man in that everyone was once utterly lost and in desperate need of Christ just as the man was. Any hope and chance that subsists is derived only from Christ.

[9] “Sunday Closest to August 10,” The Lectionary Page, July 26, 2026, https://www.lectionarypage.net/YearA_RCL/Pentecost/AProp10_RCL.html.