“Wonders and Accusations” complex

A collection of stories about Jesus' healing power and the controversy it provoked.

The Synoptic Gospels contain two accounts that, despite differences in content, exhibit a similar form: Jesus performs a wondrous deed (in one case a healing, in the other case an exorcism), which produces a mixed reaction from the onlookers. Some respond positively, while others accuse Jesus of having committed a major transgression (in one case blasphemy, in the other case sorcery). Jesus then defends his actions, giving a favorable interpretation of his activities and refuting the mindset of his accusers. The two pericopae we have in mind are Bedridden Man (Matt. 9:2-8; Mark 2:1-12; Luke 5:17-26) and The Finger of God (Matt. 9:32-34; 12:22-28; Mark 3:22-26; Luke 11:14-20).

In Bedridden Man the friends of a sick person who is unable to walk bring him to Jesus. On account of their extraordinary efforts, Jesus praises their faith and declares that the sick man’s sins are forgiven. Some of the onlookers claim that “No one can forgive but God alone,” and they accuse Jesus of blasphemy (infringing upon divine prerogatives). Jesus counters that forgiveness is not God’s sole prerogative, and to prove that this is so he heals the sick man, who takes up his stretcher and walks home. The crowds are persuaded by Jesus’ argument and praise God.

In The Finger of God certain people bring to Jesus a possessed man whom the demon has rendered mute. Jesus drives out the demon, and the man begins to speak. Some of the onlookers respond positively to the miracle, but others declare that Jesus only drives out demons by Beelzevul. Jesus responds to the accusation first by pointing out that their accusation is irrational (if the evil powers were divided against themselves, they would not be able to maintain their control) and then explains that he drives out demons by “the finger of God,” which proves that the Kingdom of Heaven has come upon them.

The two pericopae not only have similar forms (wonder→accusation→
refutation), they also contain similar vocabulary. Both stories open with “Behold! They brought to him” (Bedridden Man: Matt. 9:2; cf. Luke 5:18; The Finger of God: Matt. 9:32) and then mention the condition of the sick or demon-possessed person. In both stories the positive response to Jesus’ wondrous deed includes a confession that the like has never happened before (Bedridden Man: Mark 2:12; The Finger of God: Matt. 9:33). In both stories Jesus “knows the thoughts” of his accusers (Bedridden Man: Matt. 9:4; Mark 2:8; Luke 5:22; The Finger of God: Matt. 12:25; Luke 11:17), and it may be that in both stories the accusers were originally identified as “some of them” (i.e., some of the people in the crowds) (The Finger of God: Luke 11:15).

It is also possible that behind the two accusations of blasphemy (Bedridden Man) and sorcery (The Finger of God) there lies a common thread. The charge of blasphemy is grounded upon the opinion that “No one can forgive sins except God alone.” The exclusivity of this prerogative is reminiscent of the slogan “No ruler or king except God alone,” which Josephus attributed to the Fourth Philosophy, a group of religious extremists who believed that national liberation would only come about if Israel took the initiative by instigating a revolt against the Roman Empire. If Israel took this leap of faith, God would intervene on their behalf and conquer their enemies despite all odds. The followers of the Fourth Philosophy appear to be identical with the zealous vigilantes mentioned in rabbinic sources who used violence to coerce fellow Israelites to conform to their religious norms. According to their extreme nationalist mindset, God would not show mercy to Israel until everyone lived up to their particular style of Judaism. It was legitimate in their eyes to coerce people into adopting their religious practices because non-adherents were only hindering national liberation. It went against the grain of their philosophy to be merciful to sinners. Sinners did not need to be shown compassion, but needed to be frightened or beaten into submission. Let God forgive sinners at the final redemption if he would, but that was none of their concern, “No one can forgive sins except God alone.”

A nationalistic mindset also appears to be behind the accusation that Jesus practiced sorcery: “It is only by Beelzebul…that he drives out demons.” Beelzebul appears to have been the name of a pagan deity, Ba‘al Zevul, and accordingly the accusation implies that Jesus acted either as an apostate Jew in the name of a foreign god or was an outright pagan without true Jewish ancestry. Either way, the accusation insinuated that Jesus did not belong to the true Israel, but was a dangerous interloper. Jesus’ response that he drove out demons by “the finger of God” alluded to the story in Exodus of how the wonders God worked through Moses and Aaron confounded the wizards of Pharaoh’s court, who confessed that “this was the finger of God.” Hence, Jesus worked not by idolatrous sorcery but by the same power that had redeemed Israel from Egypt. His declaration that “the Kingdom of Heaven has come upon you” counters the notion of the religious extremists that God’s kingdom would only become manifest through coercion and violence.

Aside from the several versions of The Finger of God in the Synoptic Gospels, there is only one other pericope in which the name Beelzebul occurs. In that pericope, Disciple and Master (Matt. 10:24-25; Luke 6:40), Jesus says, “A disciple is not above his teacher, and a slave is not above his lord. It is enough for the disciple to be like his teacher and for the slave to be like his lord. If the householder is called Beelzebul, how much more the members of his house?” Although this saying is usually interpreted as subordinating the disciples to Jesus, the original context of the saying may have been the Beelzebul controversy, in which case Jesus may have been resigning himself, in the role of the disciple and the slave, to being as despised as the master (God), who had been slandered through the accusation that Jesus drove out demons by Beelzebul instead of by the power of Israel’s God. Since Disciple and Master is clearly out of place in its canonical Matthean context, and since reference to Beelzebul only appears in Disciple and Master and The Finger of God, it at least seems probable that Disciple and Master originally formed the conclusion to the Beelzebul controversy following The Finger of God.

One other pericope, Healings and Exorcisms, has features in common with Bedridden Man and The Finger of God. In Healings and Exorcisms crowds bring sick and demon-possessed people to Jesus and he heals them. The impersonal phrase “they brought to him” and the reference to sicknesses and demons suggest that Healings and Exorcisms might have formed a general introduction to the two controversy stories, one about blasphemy in reaction to a healing, and the other about sorcery in reaction to an exorcism.

Hence, there are verbal and thematic features that link together the pericopae in the “Wonders and Accusations” complex.

Click on the following titles to view the Reconstruction and Commentary for each pericope in the “Wonders and Accusations” complex.

Healings and Exorcisms (In Preparation!)