The objective of this lesson: To stress the importance of being consistent as we represent God--being godly in speech, not just in claims.
How do you deal with the unexpected? A centuries old effective (though incorrect) approach is called "poisoning the wells." The person presenting the information is attacked. The attacker tells people they should "consider the source." Commonly, no credible, in context evidence is presented to prove the source is unreliable. If the attacker succeeds in questioning the presenter's source, then everything the presenter says is suspect. If the presenter relies on the questioned source, then nothing he says or does is "to be trusted." Discredit the person's source, and you discredit the person without attacking him/her personally.
We are capable of dealing with the unexpected in ungodly ways.
Jesus encountered a man who could not see or speak because he was possessed by a demon. Jesus did what many regarded as impossible by casting out the demon. A man who could neither hear nor speak because of an evil spiritual reason suddenly could both speak and hear. Jesus intervened, and the man both spoke and saw.
This situation began with a miracle in which Jesus openly, unquestionably blessed a man. The fact that Jesus unquestionably blessed the man became at best secondary in the Pharisees' reaction.
What Jesus caused to happen could not be denied. Many (multitudes) saw what happened. These people were not only witnesses, but they were amazed witnesses who began to wonder about the obvious. "Is this man God's promised Messiah? Is this man the descendant of David we expected for generations?"
The multitude immediately saw the way the man was blessed and began discussing in a positive way the implication of the blessing. "Does what occurred mean this man is the expected Messiah?"
The Pharisees, who occupied the position of spiritual leaders for most common people, needed to do some damage control quickly. It would not do for common people to be wondering if Jesus was the Messiah! They responded by using the device we call "poisoning the wells." Paraphrased, they responded to Jesus' act by saying, "What did you expect? Surely he did a remarkable thing! However, that is not the issue. The issue is this: Where did Jesus get the power to do what he did? He got it from Beelzebul! Only the ruler of demons can control demons--Jesus could cast out this demon because Beelzebul who rules demons gave Jesus this power!"
The Pharisees were so concerned about what the meaning of the incident was to them that they considered the implication of the act and the multitude's reaction to the act only in negative terms. Their immediate reaction: the act must be discredited.
Jesus knew what they were doing. He understood their real motives! They might appear to be protecting the people, but they were actually trying to discredit Jesus to preserve their place of leadership. Because he knew the Pharisees' evil motives, Jesus increased their difficulty by placing the obvious in the forefront. First, he said civil war is destructive in any situation. Internal division settled by violent acts will be destructive to a kingdom, a city, or a family. A certain way to weaken a kingdom, a city, or a family is for it to engage in hostile internal conflict. Second, if Satan is fighting against himself by authorizing me to attack his kingdom, he is sanctioning a civil war. How can Satan's kingdom endure if he sanctions internal division? Third, if I demonstrate superiority over demons because my source of power is God, God's kingdom has come to you. If God is my source of power over demons, then God's kingdom has come to you. If that is true, you should be embracing me instead of opposing me.
The Pharisees' interest was focused on self-interest, not on the meaning of the act. It was in their interest that they discredit Jesus. They did not see good. They saw threat.
Stress the injury and destructiveness of internal conflict. Stress the wounds and weakness that civil war produces. Not even Satan can afford such wounds and weakness. The multitude was correct about the act having implications. The Pharisees' error began because they limited the implications to only one possibility--an act of Satanic forces.
Fourth, consider Jesus' illustration. A thief cannot break into a strong man's house and carry his property off unless he first makes the strong man powerless. As long as the strong man is free in his home, the thief cannot plunder that home. If a power beside Satan enables me to cast out a demon, what I did for the man who could not see or speak should cause you to note who I am rather than oppose me. You are either with me or against me. It is no small thing to be against me.
The reality of the destructiveness of internal conflict gave Jesus' illustration force. One could not plunder a strong man's home unless he first controlled the strong man. A strong man not controlled would not idly stand by and allow someone to plunder his home.
Satan would not allow Jesus to cast out a demon unless Jesus' power source was superior to Satan's power. The Pharisees needed (1) to recognize this fact, and (2) to champion Jesus for representing a power superior over Satan.
Fifth, let me plainly note how serious it is to oppose me. Blasphemy (denunciation and rejection of) against people will be forgiven, but blasphemy against God's Spirit will not be forgiven. [Many are confused by Jesus' statement. Some are convinced they committed the "unpardonable sin" and are beyond forgiveness even if they repent. Consider: (1) John said God's kingdom was coming soon. (2) Jesus said God's kingdom was there. (3) God's Spirit ushered in God's kingdom (Acts 2 with focus on verses 2-4, 14-21) Jesus said people could reject John or his human testimony, but they dare not reject the testimony of God's spirit--FOR GOD WOULD NOT REVEAL HIMSELF AGAIN THROUGH ANOTHER MEANS. It was (is) extremely serious to attribute God's work to Satan. Beware of giving Satan credit for God's power.
To credit Satan for God's act was a serious matter. There was something at stake in this incident that went far beyond "who the people recognize as their leader."
Sixth, Jesus ended with an appeal to consistency for those who represent God. His illustration was agricultural. Then the value of a fruit tree was determined by the fruit it produced. Merely because a tree "looked good" did not mean it produced good fruit.
One of the significant reasons for placing great trust in God's promises is the fact that God is consistent. Whether we speak of divine credibility or human credibility, credibility demands consistency. If we claim to represent God and endorse godless explanations and concepts, we discredit God and ourselves. The person who represents God does not produce ungodly influence. Ungodly speech does not represent a godly person regardless of his/her motives.
Jesus said the Pharisees he addressed were all looks and no good fruit. They were opposite good fruit. They were poisonous snakes. They "looked like" they sustained life (as good fruit would then) but instead they destroyed life (like poisonous snakes did).
In that day when canning and other modern methods of preserving did not exist, drying fruit was essential to sustaining life in the villages of common people. Poisonous snakes threatened life's continuation. Good fruit could continue life; poisonous snakes could end life. For the Pharisees to look like trees that produced good fruit while they were actually a danger to life was destructively deceptive. The Pharisees likely were unaware of the danger they presented.
Jesus' made specific application of his point to human words. A person's words reflect the internal treasures of his/her heart. If the internal treasure of the heart is good, the person's words produce good. However, if the internal treasure is evil, the person's words produce evil. The motive behind the word and how the word is used is part of the power of the word. Therefore, God attaches great significance to what we say.
Jesus made specific application of his entire response to the power of words. The words (and the way one uses words) a person uses reflects who and what he/she is internally. A person's heart is revealed by the words he/she uses and the way he/she uses words. What is in his/her inner being (his/her heart emotions--his/her treasures) is revealed by his/her words. That is why God wants us to attach great significance to what we say.
Make your words consistent with who you are. Be God's person who speaks like God's person. Never be unaware of the power of what you say. Never let emotions choose your words.
Be godly not only in personal presentation but also in heart.
For Thought and Discussion
They have "poisoned the wells" by making people doubt the presenter's source.
Jesus healed a man who was demon possessed. The demon made him blind and unable to speak.
The multitude was asking, "Could Jesus be the Messiah?"
They needed to do some "damage control."
They said the issue was, "Where does Jesus get his power?"
Jesus knew what they were doing and what their motives were. While they appeared to protect the people, they were actually trying to discredit Jesus to protect their position of leadership.
Jesus said civil war (internal conflict) was always destructive.
If Satan was opposing himself, he was sanctioning civil war in his kingdom.
If Jesus demonstrated superiority over demons through a greater power source than Satan, God's expected kingdom had come.
Jesus used the plundering of a strong man's home as an illustration. A strong man's home cannot be plundered by thieves unless the strong man is first rendered powerless.
The discussion should include an understanding of the fact that God's Spirit would be God's last revelation of His will (purposes and intent). To reject the last is to leave the person without future hope.
The value of the tree would be determined by the fruit the tree produced.
The discussion should include the fact that Jesus applied his overall point to the power and significance of the way humans use words.
Link to Student Guide
Lesson 12