Beelzebub or Beelzebul

BEELZEBUB or BEELZEBUL.—It is strange that this name has never yet been satisfactorily explained; stranger still that no trace of it has been found as yet among the scores of Jewish names for angels and spirits. The first part of the name is clear enough; it is the Aramaic form of the Hebrew ‘Baal’; nor is there anything strange in the dropping of λ before ζ the MS^{S [Note: SS Manuscripts.]} followed by modern editors like Westcott-Hort and Weiss [Cheyne in his art. ‘Beelzebul’ in the Encyc. Bibl. finds ‘this scepticism as to λ in βεελ paradoxical,’ ‘the word βεεζεβουλ inexplicable and hardly pronounceable,’ and urges against it ‘the famous passage Mat 10:25, where the οἰκοδεσπότης implies the speaker’s consciousness that בִּעִל is one element in the title,’ but his objection completely misses the mark. The dropping of the λ is merely phonetical; cf. in Josephus βεζέδελ in codd. MVRC for βελζέδεκ (BJ iii. 25), Βάζωρος for Βαλέζωρος (circa (about) Apion. i. 124), Βαζαφράνης for Βαρζαφρ. (Ant. xiv. 330); Ἀμεσάδ in Cod. Q of Dan 1:11 [Theod^{. [Note: Theodotion.]} ] for Ἀμελσάδ; ‘Philadephia’ in the Syriac Version of Euseb.’s Historia Ecclesiastica , etc.^{* [Note: The best analogy is the Syr. Name ברבעשמין, ‘son of the Bel of heaven,’ explained by Barheb. as ‘he with four names.’]} More difficult is the change of β into λ at the end of the word, supposing the common explanation to be correct, that the name comes from 2Ki 1:2. It has been explained as an intentional cacophonic corruption (= ‘god of the dung’) or a dialectical or phonetic variation (cf. Beliar for Belial or Bab el-Mandel for Mandeb). The spelling with b was retained in the NT by Luther, though his Greek text had λ, and by Revised Version NT 1881, OT 1885 in text; it was introduced by Jerome in the Vulgate, see the Index of Wordsworth-White, where 15 Latin spellings of the name are given, and cf. Jerome’s remark in OS 66, 11: ‘in fine ergo nominis b litera legenda est, non 1; musca enim zebub vocatur.’ λ is even found in Cod. 243 of the text of Symmachus in 2Ki 1:2; but see the Syriac Hexapla in v. 6, and note, what has generally been overlooked, that the Septuagint took זבוב not בעל זבוב for the name of the god of Ekron: ἐπιζητῆσαι ἐν τῇ Βάαλ (dative) Μυῖαν (accusative) θεδν Ἀκκαρών; likewise Josepheus.: πρὸς την Ἀκκαρὼν θεὸν Μυῖαν, τοῦτο γὰρ ἧν ὅνομα τῷ θεῷ.

On the fly in worship and legend see Plin. HN x. 28. 75; Pausan. Deser. Gr. v. xiv. 1; aelian, Nat. Anim. v. 17, xi. 8; Usener, Götternamen, p. 260. There were Jewish legends about flies, such as that there were none in the temple (Aboth v. 8); Elisha was recognized as a prophet by the woman of Shunem, because no fly crept over his place at the table (Berakh. 10b); on the yezer ha-ra’ as a fly see Berakh. 61a, Targ^{. [Note: Targum.]} Jer. on Ecc 10:1). The supposition that the name corresponds to Aramaic בעלדבבא = ‘enemy’ is not very likely, nor the other that it is the Baal of the heavenly mansion who became the Baal of the nether world (JAS, 1878, pp. 220–221). Later Jews identified Baal-zebub with Baal-berith, and told that some would carry an image of him (in the shape of a fly) in their pockets, producing it and kissing it from time to time (Shab. 83b. 63b). Procopius states (ad 2 Kings 1); πλὴν ἔστι μαθεῖν ἑξ ὦν Εὐσέβιος ἐν ἀρχῇ τῆς Εὐαγγελικῆς Προπαρασκευῆς ἐκ τῶν Φίλωνος παρατίθεται, ὡς δαίμων ἧν, οὔτω λεγόμενος· μᾶλλον δὲ γυνὴ παλαιά τις, ἤν ἑθεοποίησαν. Zahn (on Mat 12:34) lays stress on the fact that the article is missing before ἄρχοντι τῶν δαιμόνων (‘a prince of the devils, not the prince’); but the definite article is found in Mark and Luke, and in Mat 9:34 (if this verse be not a later addition) where several Latin documents have the name.

How scanty is our knowledge of NT times, when such a name, which appears quite popular in the NT, defies as yet all explanation, and is not found anywhere else! Origen on John 19 (p. 315, ed. Preuschen) remarks: πάντως γὰρ περὶ δαιμόνων τι μεμαθήκεισαν καὶ τοῦ ἄρχοντος αὐτῶν, ᾦ ὄνομα Βεελζεβούλ· ταῦτα δὲ οὐ πάνυ τι ἐν τοῖς φερομένοις κεῖται βιβλίοις.

Literature.—In addition to works cited above, see A. Loisy, ‘Beelzeboul’ (Rev. d’hist. et de lit. rel. 1904, v. 434–466).

Eb. Nestle.

By: Kaufmann Kohler

Name of a demon mentioned in the New Testament as chief of the demons (Matt. xii. 24-27; Mark iii. 22; Luke xi. 15-18). When the Pharisees heard (of the cures performed by Jesus), they said: "This man doth not cast out demons but by Beelzebul, the prince of the demons"; whereupon Jesus answered: "If Satan casts out Satan, he is divided against himself; how then shall his kingdom stand? And if I by Beelzebul cast out demons, by whom do your sons cast them out? But if I cast out demons by the spirit of God, then the kingdom of God is come unto you." On another occasion Jesus said to his disciples: "If they have called the master of the house [that is, himself] Beelzebub, how much more (shall they so call) them of his household" [that is, the disciples] (Matt. x. 25). The name "Beelzebub," written also "Beelzebul," which occurs nowhere else in Jewish literature, is a variant form of "Baal Zebub," the god of Eḳron, whose oracle King Ahaziah consulted during his illness, provoking thereby the wrath of God (II Kings i. 2-16); the name is commonly explained after the Septuagint and Josephus, "Ant." ix. 2, § 1, as the "Lord of Flies" (see Baal-zebub). Plagues being often ascribed to the influence of flies (Ex. xxiii. 28; Eccl. x. 1; Pliny, "Historia Naturalis," x. 28, 75; Pausanias," Description of Greece," v. 14, 1; Aelian, "Natura Animalium," v. 17, xi. 8; Usener, "Götternamen," p. 260), the god who dispelled flies (Apollo Apomyios) probably retained his popularity long after he had ceased to be an object of worship. In fact, the fly was regarded by the Jews in particular as more or less impure and demonic. "The evil spirit ["yeẓer ha-ra'"] lies like a fly at the doors of the human heart," says Rab, with reference to "the flies of death" in Eccl. x. 1 (Ber. 61a and Targ. Yer. to the passage). "A fly, being an impure thing, was never seen in the slaughterhouse of the Temple" (Abot v. 8), nor did one cross the table of Elisha; which fact, according to Rab, gave proof to the Shunammite woman that he was "a holy man" (II Kings iv. 9; Ber. 10b). The devil in German folk-lore also appears in the shape of a fly (Simrock, "Deutsche Mythologie," 1874, pp. 95, 479).

Geiger ("Urschrift," p. 53) thinks that Baal Zebub, in his capacity as god of the hated Philistines, became the representative of the heathen power and consequently the arch-enemy, the foe par excellence, and therefore the name "Baal debaba" ("debaba" being the Aramaic form corresponding to Hebrew "Zebub") acquired the meaning of "hostility," the verb with the sense of "hostile action" being derived from it. But neither this opinion nor a similar one expressed by Döderlein and Storr, and revived in Riehm's "Realwörterbuch," seems acceptable, as "Beel debaba" is the ordinary Aramean word for "calumniator." (Brockelmann, "Lex Syriæ.")

What renders the name still more problematic is the form "Beelzebul," which the older manuscripts present, and which has given rise to a number of other conjectures, among them the following: (1)It has been suggested that the appellations Beelzebub and Baal Zebub are corrupt forms of what was originally "Baal Zebul" (Baal of the heavenly mansion, , Movers, in "Journal Asiatique," 1878, pp. 220-225), and afterward "Baal of the nether world." (2) The word "Zebul" (from "zebel," dung) is a cacophonic corruption of "Zebub," in order to give the name the meaning of "god of the dung." It is more likely that the name "Beelzebul" is a dialectic variation of "Beelzebub," as "Beliar" is of "Belial"; Jerome read and translated the name as "dominus muscarum" (lord of flies).

Bibliography:

Cheyne, Encyclopœdia Biblica, s.v.;

Hastings, Dict. of the Bible, s.v.;

Lightfoot, Horœ Hebraicœ on Matt. xii. 24;

Movers, Die Phoenizier, 1841, i. 266;

Winer, Realwörterbuch, s.v. Beelzebub and Fliegen;

Riehm, Realwörterbuch;

Baudissin, in Hauck-Herzog, Real-Encyklopädie, s.v.;

Holtzmann, Handcommentar zum Neuen Testament, Die Synoptiker, p. 136;

Meyer, Commentary on Matt. x. 25.