Explanation:

Jesus explains that when an unclean spirit leaves a man, and then goes back to the man, if the man’s house is empty, the unclean spirit will re-enter the man with seven more. Thus, the man is worse off than before the unclean spirit left. To understand why Jesus explains all of this we need to consider the wider context. When we look back to Matthew 12:22 we find that he heals a blind and dumb demoniac who is brought to him.³ The people are amazed, but the Pharisees say that Jesus casts out demons in the name of demons (Matthew 12:23–24). Jesus then warns them to pay attention because it is not possible for demons to cast out demons. After this the Pharisees ask for a sign and Jesus explains they will only get the sign of Jonah. In other words, Jesus has already shown them signs and now they ask for more, so none will be given. Finally, Jesus says that the queen of the South will judge Jesus’ listeners because she travelled to listen to Solomon, and something greater than Solomon is here (Matthew 12:42).⁴ In other words, the queen of the South would be impressed by Jesus’ ministry, but the scribes and Pharisees are not.

So, Jesus has cast out demons and healed many, but the scribes and Pharisees do not accept him as the Messiah. Finally, we can understand his parable about the seven demons. He warns that those who harden their heart toward him are like the man who is cleansed from the demon. They witness and accept Jesus’ miracles and benefit from his power and wisdom. Still, if they remain empty by not accepting Jesus as the Messiah, they will be worse off than if they never met him.

Counterargument:

It could be that Jesus wants us to apply the theological significance of the parable to his own identity, but it seems that the parable itself serves a general purpose. In other words, Jesus tells the parable to explain that it is not possible to remain neutral when it comes to morality.⁵ We can deduce that he offers a general parable about morality because he does something similar in Matthew 12:43–45. There he explains that generally speaking, a tree is known by its fruit, which is to say, those who have good in their hearts will produce good fruit, and those who are evil will produce evil fruit (Matthew 12:43–45). Jesus offers general principles which can be applied in a variety of ways. Similarly, when we reach Matthew 12:43–45, he seems to offer a parable to show that moral neutrality is impossible. Of course, the theological significance has to do with remaining neutral about Jesus as Messiah.

Response to counterargument:

While it is true that Jesus offers general wisdom about the heart in Matthew 12:35, this does not entail that we ought to interpret Matthew 12:43–45 in the same light. Matthew 12:35 is separated from Matthew 12:43–45 by a large paragraph, and so falls outside the immediate context. Further, we want to understand Matthew 12:43–45 so that our interpretation is consistent with both the immediate and broad literary context. After explaining that the Pharisees will only get the sign of Jonah, and that the queen of the South will judge this generation, Jesus suddenly introduces the parable of a man with an unclean spirit. The notion of an unclean spirit seems unrelated to the immediate context until we recognize that it was the healing of a demoniac that initiates this whole section (Matthew 12:22). Further, once we connect the unclean spirit of Matthew 12:43–45 with the healing of the demoniac in Matthew 12:22 we can see how Matthew 12:43–45 fits in with the immediate context. Jesus is performing signs and miracles. The people benefit, but not all of them believe. So Jesus warns that there is no neutrality with him.⁶ If the people will not accept him as the Messiah, their situation will be worse than before Jesus came. Thus, given the wider and immediate context, it is likely that Jesus tells the parable to teach not about morality in general but that there is no neutrality when it comes to accepting him as Messiah.

Explanation:

Jesus explains that if an unclean spirit leaves a man and comes back to find the man empty, it will return with seven more so that the man is worse than when things started. At first it does not sound like Jesus is telling a parable, but it seems he is explaining the potential dangers of demons and exorcisms. Of course, we soon find out that Jesus is not referring to the dangers of demons or exorcisms because he ends Matthew 12:45 with, So also will it be with this evil generation. In other words, Jesus is explaining that what he said about the man with the unclean spirit is a parable that is meant as a warning for this generation.⁷ In other words, it is a warning that the individuals who are confronted with Jesus’ ministry ought to embrace him as the Messiah.

Counterargument:

It does not seem as though Jesus is warning his listeners as much as describing their fate. He has detected the hardness of the hearts of his listeners.⁸ This is why Jesus will not do a sign for the scribes and Pharisees (Matthew 12:35). In other words, he tells the story of the unclean spirit, not because he wants to warn the people to accept him as the Messiah but because he is describing their hardness of heart. The clause, So also will it be with this evil generation, leaves us with little doubt that Jesus is simply characterizing how it will be for those who hear him speak.

Response to counterargument:

It is possible to take Jesus as making a statement, rather than a warning, about the fate of his listeners. Still, it is also possible, and more likely, that he means the parable as a warning.⁹ Most likely he wants us to take Matthew 12:35 as a conditional statement.¹⁰ That is, he wants us to take it that the unclean spirit leaves and returns and if when it returns the house is empty, then it will occupy the man again. When understood as a conditional, we can see it is possible that the unclean spirit returns and the house is not empty. In this case, there is no room for the unclean spirit, and it will not re-enter the man. Similarly, if this generation does not accept Jesus as the Messiah and remains empty, then they will be worse off than if Jesus never arrived.

Possible weaknesses:

The weakness of this view is that it does not do enough to expound on the notion of the house being empty, swept, and put in order. The argument here is that Jesus has performed his miracles, which is akin to the unclean spirit leaving the man. When the unclean spirit returns, he finds the house empty, swept, and put in order. That the house is empty, combined with the fact that it is swept and put in order, sounds like a positive. This view fails to establish why the house being empty is meant to be negative, while it being swept and put in order is positive. Generally, we understand Jesus’ point, but this view could have done more to explain these details.

Explanation:

When Jesus tells the parable of the man with the unclean spirit, the man represents the nation of Israel. The point of the parable is that if the nation of Israel rejects Jesus, it will be worse for them than if he never came. We can deduce that he has in mind the nation of Israel because he will announce judgment on Israel several times in the chapters to come. For example, when he tells the parable of the wedding feast, he has the judgment of Israel in mind (Matthew 22:1–14). The king sent his servants to join the wedding of his son, but the servants would not come. The Israelites are the servants who would not come.¹³ Thus, Jesus likely has in mind the nation of Israel in both cases.

Counterargument:

The problem with this argument is that we have to consider the setting of these parables in order to determine whether they are thematically connected. We know from Matthew 12:22 and Matthew 12:46 that Jesus is speaking to the people, including the scribes and Pharisees. We know this because as Jesus finishes his parable about the man with the unclean spirit, his mother and brothers call for him. To this, Jesus replies that the people he speaks to are his mother and brothers. Thus, in Matthew 12:43–45 he has a wide audience in mind.

On the other hand, when it comes to the parable of the king and his son’s wedding, it seems that Jesus is likely speaking to the religious rulers. We can deduce this because we learn in Matthew 21:23 that Jesus entered the temple where the chief priests and elders came to him. Jesus then tells several parables, which, Matthew tells us, the chief priests and Pharisees discerned were directed at them. Then follows the parable of the king and his son’s wedding. Thus, it seems that Jesus addresses the Pharisees and chief priests in Matthew 22:1–46, and the people in general in Matthew 12:43–45. Now, we know that Jesus had many disciples beyond the twelve, and since he calls them his mother and brothers, we should assume that some of his followers were in the crowd. Thus, his saying is more likely a warning to individuals than to the nation of Israel as a whole.

Explanation:

Jesus explains that this generation is like a man with an unclean spirit, who, when the spirit finds the man is empty, it returns with seven more so that he is worse off than before. What Jesus means is that the nation of Israel has hardened its heart toward him. We can deduce that he has the nation of Israel in mind because he has performed many miracles, and healed many people in Israel, so that a great multitude of Jews have benefited from him. Yet, there are few who believe in him.¹⁴

Counterargument:

While it is true that Jesus has performed many signs and miracles in Israel, it also seems that many people have come to believe in him. For example, the disciples are Jesus’ close followers, and there is a group of women who constantly serve him (Matthew 27:55–56). We also find out after Jesus’ death on the cross that prominent figures, such as Joseph of Arimathea, were disciples of Jesus (Matthew 27:57). Further, when Jesus’ mother and brothers come looking for him, he says that the crowd to whom he speaks is his mother and brothers (Matthew 27:57), suggesting a personal relationship between him and the crowd. Finally, there are those whom he heals because they had faith in him (Matthew 9:22). Clearly these benefited from his healing and believed in him. Thus, it is unlikely that he has in mind the fact that while he heals many in Israel not many believe in him, because many do believe in him. Rather, he likely has individuals in mind.

Possible weaknesses:

The weakness of this view is that Jesus never makes clear that he has the nation of Israel in mind, and what he says seems to be a universal truth. That is, it is universally true that if one is confronted by the benefits of Jesus’ ministry, and then one remains neutral toward him, one is worse off than before. Of course, the nation of Israel is included in this universal truth, but so is every other nation, and there’s no indication from the text that Jesus has anything but a universal truth in mind.