Smoodock's Blog

The coming of Jesus in the first century AD embodied the return of God to his people.[1] The Lord had abandoned his Temple during the Jewish-Babylonian war, which culminated not only with the captivity of the Jews and bringing them (the elite) to Babylon, but also the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple, where the Presence of God was claimed to reside. Nevertheless, the Lord had promised through his prophets that he would return (Isaiah 40:5; 49:6; 52:10), promising to SUDDENLY come to his Temple (Malachi 3:1).

So, if Jesus truly is the embodiment of God returning to his people, what should one expect to see? We are told that large crowds of folks followed Jesus around. Why was that? Matthew tells us that Jesus taught in the synagogues of Galilee and preached the Kingdom of Heaven, while “healing every disease and every illness among the people” (Matthew 4:23).

Here’s the problem. There isn’t a shortage of skeptics who are willing to tell us that miracles don’t happen. I remember hearing an argument that the late Carl Sagan made popular: “extraordinary claims demand extraordinary evidence,” which just tends to show us that ridiculous arguments are still ridiculous, even when scholars make them. What kind of extraordinary evidence for something that occurred 2000 years ago would a skeptic accept and believe? Scientific claims can be proved or disproved over and over in a laboratory. This is not true of historical events. They are not repeatable, so that a skeptic could examine them to his satisfaction. The problem is not with the evidence; it’s with the anti-supernaturalistic bias.

The fact remains, according to the Gospel narratives that Jesus drew large crowds of people, wherever he went. Why was that? According to all the Gospel narratives, it was because he healed people; he healed all their diseases, whatever they were (Matthew 8:16; Mark 1:32-34; Luke 7:20-22; John 9:30-33; 12:37). It doesn’t take much imagination to understand, if this kind of thing were done today, the crowds would be extensive, not only for healing, but curiosity seekers wanting to witness a miracle.

Skeptics try to tell us that the miracles were added later in the Gospel narratives by well-meaning followers to make Jesus look like he was greater than he was. The problem with this argument is, if we consider the Beelzebub Controversy in Matthew 12, we’d find that no “well-meaning” follower would ever do such a thing to someone he loved. An enemy might want to do something like that, but the Gospel narratives were not written by enemies. The Pharisees were listening to the people, who were beginning to believe that Jesus was the Messiah (Matthew 12:23), so they accused Jesus of doing something like black magic. The Jewish authorities made the people afraid of what Jesus was doing, by saying his magic was through the power of Beelzebub, the prince of devils (Matthew 12:24). In other words, they pulled a veil over the good Jesus did and made it appear evil, insomuch that even Jesus’ family believed them, and wanted to take Jesus home, believing he was mad (Matthew 12:46-47; cp. Mark 3:21).

When Jesus was in Capernaum, he taught the people in the synagogue, and they were astonished with what he claimed (Mark 1:21-22). Folks don’t get astonished, over what they’ve always been taught. Jesus was teaching something new and fresh. As he preached, a man possessed objected to his claims, interrupting him. He claimed Jesus new doctrine of the Kingdom of God would end up destroying them, presumably by the Romans (Mark 1:23-24). Jesus cast out the unclean spirit, and the people were, once more astonished over his new doctrine. So, Jesus’ fame spread throughout Galilee (Mark 1:25-28). Whatever else might be said about Jesus’ ministry, he offered something new. What he said and did, wasn’t said and done before; it was new, and Jesus went about Galilee explaining his new doctrine. Explanations aren’t necessary, if what one says is already known by everyone.

Skepticism is a problem, not an asset. The skeptics ask questions, but they do so with an agenda; their questions don’t rise from a neutral vantage point, so truth isn’t necessarily the object. Protecting one’s own power or position is often behind the skeptic’s question of scripture. It was definitely so during Jesus’ day, when the Jewish authorities, although knowing the truth, chose to protect their positions with lies (Matthew 28:11-15) and or conspiracies against Jesus (John 11:45-53).

So, Jesus, who is the embodiment of the return of God to his people, addressed the people in their synagogues, and, as would be expected, he drew large crowds, because of the miracles he did. Eventually, people began to believe his message, because of the miracles. His enemies, the Jewish authorities, preached against him, proving his message to the people was something new. However, when the Jewish authorities were unable to debate with Jesus’ explanations of what he was doing, they conspired against him and defamed him, until the people were afraid to trust him. In the end, the skeptics’ argument should be expected. They have their own agenda, and the message of the Gospel of Jesus threatens their authority and doctrines. It is not truth that they seek. Instead, they merely wish to retain or advance their present position with the people.

___________________________________________________

[1] We are in a study about Jesus, guided by N.T. Wright’s book, Simply Jesus. We have come to Part 2 of his book, the beginning of the 6^th chapter. I’ve tried to stick closely to Dr. Wrights’ theme, but sometimes I’ve draw different conclusions, but all in all, even they should be seen as close to the book’s theme. In any case, I take full responsibility for any and all deviations I’ve made from Dr. Wright’s work.