I am doing a study on demons, evil spirits, and unclean spirits (with 1 spirit of divination from Acts 16). It is amazing that in the synoptic gospels, in nearly every instance exorcism is linked to healing a disease, especially if you include the demonic of Garasenes from Mark 5 or Luke 8 as being mentally ill. (Matthew 8:16. Matthew 9:32-33, Matthew 17:18, Mark 1:32-34, Mark 6:13, Mark 9:25, Luke 7:21, Luke 8:2, Luke 9:1, Luke 13:32) Those references that are not about healing revolve around the message and teachings of Jesus as when the Pharisees accuse Him of having a demon. What is clear from the gospels is that Jesus has authority over the demons and can confer that to the 12 and the 70 (Matthew 10:1, Mark 3:13-15, Luke 9:1-2, Luke 10:1, Luke 10:17-20). With the exception of the Syrophoenician woman (Matthew 15:21-28) that hearkens back to Elijah's widow ( 1 Kings 17:8-24, Luke 4:25-26) all of the healing and exorcism happened for and in geographic Israel. Here is the question, Jesus had authority over demons before the crucifixion, what changed and happened to that authority after the crucifixion? Colossians 2:13-15 "When He had disarmed the rulers and authorities, He made a public display of them, having triumphed over them through Him." It seems as if after the crucifixion Jesus had MORE authority and had more defeated the evil spirits than before His crucifixion. In addition, it seems as if there was an evolution relative to exorcism as well. While Acts records exorcism/healings in Acts 5:16 and Acts 8:7 this all happens within the geographical boundaries of historical Israel. As the gospel expands beyond Israel, with one exception the language changes and we continue to see healings but no mention of demons being cast out. In fact, in an interesting contrast, in Acts 19:11-15 we see that Paul's handkerchiefs were "healing" people and in contrast the wicked sons of Sceva were using exorcism (in an attempt to heal?). The one exception is Paul casting out a spirit of divination in Acts 16:16-19. The odd thing here is that the motivation for this exceptional exorcism was not the gospel but that after many days of mocking, Paul was greatly annoyed. And, the only result of the exorcism was a loss of revenue, salvation is not even mentioned. This evolution away from exorcism then extends even to Paul himself regarding the God's gift of a messenger of Satan to afflict him Acts 16:16-18. If Paul's thorn was a physical affliction cause by the demon, the answer for Paul now is to ask God for relief but then trust God to do what is best for him. What would have happened if Paul had attempted to use exorcism to cast out his thorn in the flesh? It seems like it would have been an act of rebellion against God’s purposes. All of that to say that after Acts and throughout the epistles, demons are no longer linked to sickness but to doctrines, idols and deception. (1 Corinthians 10:20, 1 Timothy 4;1, James 2:19, James 3:15, Revelation 9:20, Revelation 16:13, Revelation 18:2). It is weird that even in the gospel of John, that was written later than the synoptics, there are no exorcisms for healing, the demonic references again point to teaching and the message. (John 7:20, John 8:48-52, John 10:20-21) In any case, I am curious about the evolution in Jesus' evolution in authority over demons before the crucifixion and after the crucifixion. There seems to have been a change. Any ideas?