Skip to main content

Why Did Jesus Heal?

One way in which Jesus' mighty works were evidently understood by some was that they were the signs of the long-awaited fulfillment of prophecy. For a first century Jew, most if not all the works of healing, which form the bulk of Jesus' mighty works, could be seen as a restoration to membership in Israel to those who, through sickness or whatever, had been excluded as ritually unclean. The healings thus function in exact parallel with the welcome of sinners, and this, we may be quite sure, was what Jesus himself intended. (JVG 191).
I think that this is one of the best observations Wright makes in the first third of JVG and I'd like to develop it a little bit. Several months ago, when reading the opening chapters of Mark's gospel, I noticed something striking. Right after the temptation, Jesus is said to go around proclaiming the good news but what Mark writes about is the calling of the disciples and a series of healings and exorcisms. We don't get any teachings of Jesus until the middle of chapter two (the contrast with Matthew - who mentions the healings and gives us the Sermon on the Mount - is striking).

What is Mark's point? I think it's twofold. One, it's very important to make the observation that Wright does above. Jesus didn't heal just for the sake of healing people. He healed with a purpose, the purpose of including the outsider, the marginalized. It symbolized his restoration of the lost sheep of Israel.

There's another important facet, however (and Wright does point out something along these lines later on in JVG). Mark seems to have a particular interest in Jesus' exorcisms. By doing these healing and exorcisms, Jesus was showing that the kingdom of God was breaking in right then, that he was destroying the hold that satan had over these people. By adding in this point we see how in a very full sense Jesus healings are an exact parallel with his welcome of sinners. In their case, and in the case of all who are saved, Jesus had to break the power of sin, death and the devil. Jesus' healings prefigured the healing of the nations that he performed on the cross. By a mighty act he defeated satan and allowed outsiders into the family of God.

The question that this drives me to ask is this: How do we walk in Jesus' footsteps? I think that there are a lot of paths we could take, but I don't think that seeking the physical healing of others is the main one. That is not to say that we shouldn't pray for healings, I just don't think it's a primary way in which we imitate Christ, because in Jesus' ministry inclusion was primary, with breaking satan's power being a necessary condition.

However, I believe that we do have lepers in our day; people who are excluded because of the state of their physical bodies; the handicapped. Our job as the church is to reach out to those whom society has determined to be 'the least,' whether it be through advocacy or through inclusion in our church bodies. If the church could embrace the handicapped it would be a beautiful sign of the kingdom of God breaking in here and now.

Comments

  1. Interesting. I'm sure Wright is correct to see that there.

    Beyond that, though, I wonder what Wright would say about the early church (thinking, Acts) and healing. It would be harder to make that same point, in my opinion, when you start moving beyond Jewish communities.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I wonder the same thing and that's why I tried to be careful in the way I worded things in the application at the end. Perhaps the healings in Acts were a bit different in purpose than Jesus' healings? If there's anyone out there reading this who's read Wright's Acts for Everyone, please chime in!

    The further I get into JVG the more and more trouble I have figuring out how certain aspects of his understanding Jesus mesh with the rest of the NT (e.g., forgiveness of sins=end of exile) and this isn't a new question for me about Wright (as I think we've discussed before). But(!) his presentation of Jesus is very compelling and makes a lot of sense at many points.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Your last paragraph is dead on. I'm just not always sure how we're supposed to get from Wright's Jesus to Acts, the apostles or, ultimately, the final restoration of the Kingdom in Revelation.

    Some of it I can see. While I think he makes the end of exile theme too central, it's hard to argue with the evidence (especially at the beginnings Matthew and Luke). And I can see how we get from Israel's return from exile to the inclusion of Gentiles in Paul's mission, since the Gentiles coming to worship YHWH was prophesied as a result of the return. Mind you, I'm not sure Paul ever makes that connection, which sure would bolster Wright's case, but I can see it.

    But I can't figure out how we get from Jesus' healings to the apostles' if Wright's view exhausts the possibility. And I certainly can't see how we get the return of Christ if all Jesus cared about was the destruction of the temple.

    Going back to the healing point, I think it's a classic case of Wright limiting Jesus to speaking about Israel, when the Kingdom is much larger than that. If you see the problem of sickness, demon possession, etc., in the bigger picture of God's plan for the world, healings become much more important as God's kingdom (where there is no death or sickness or pain, etc) which will cover the whole earth. As both Justin Martyr and Jurgenn Moltmann have said, Jesus' healings point to the resurrection to come- which is the ultimate defeat of sickness and death.

    Interestingly, Wright is phenomenal at the big picture in so many places, but I can't figure out where his Jesus fits into it. Weird.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Exploring the Christian Way of Life - The Identity of Jesus - Church History (Pre-Reformation) - Aquinas and Conclusion

When we reach Aquinas we come to the pinnacle of orthodoxy when it comes to the Trinity and Christology. Christology was important to Aquinas and he dedicated the first fifty-nine questions of Tertia Pars of his Summa Theologiae[1] to the topic. In many ways it is refreshing because he does not treat solely the more philosophical questions of who Jesus was that preoccupied theologians from the third century on. He also spent extended time on Jesus earthly ministry, death, resurrection, ascension, and glorification which was a major innovation.[2] Of course every possible topic of Trinitarian and ontological speculation is also probed. For the sake of space we will only hit some highlights.

Aquinas is clearly in step with the tradition that can be traced from Nicea, through Augustine and the Lombard, to the heart of the Middle Ages. One thing to briefly note is that even in his densest argumentation, Aquinas was not trying to prove elements of his theology via rational argument as that…

Exploring the Christian Way of Life - The Identity of Jesus - Church History (Pre-Reformation) - Irenaeus

Starting from Irenaeus, Christology, in some respects, moves on. A big part of this would have been due to the “gnostic” controversies. It became increasingly important to clarify the relationship between Father and Son and to minimize their distinctiveness, while still maintaining Jesus’ full humanity. From this point on, clashes over heresy about the nature of Christ and discussions related to Trinitarian theology dominate Christological discussion to the point that the original emphasis on Jesus’ Messianic identity fades to the background.[1] Maintaining the affirmation that Jesus was both human and divine was critical for Irenaeus and those after him because they saw that as the necessary grounds of salvation.[2]

Of particular interest to Irenaeus was the baptism of Jesus. What happened when he received the Spirit?[3] It was not the means by which the Word entered Jesus. He was not merely human before that point.[4] Rather it was a divinization of the human nature of Jesus, a nat…

End of Summer Review/Update

The school year is now upon us and I'll definitely not be posting the next two months. This summer didn't quite go to plan so I didn't get to do the blogging I was hoping to do. Specifically I was planning on blogging through 2 Thessalonians, but that didn't happen. It may happen late in the fall, but we will see. I may instead decide to pick up a different Pauline letter (perhaps 2 Corinthians). This is my last year of school  and by the fall of next year I should be back on a more regular blogging schedule.

A lack of blogging was not from a lack of productivity (although I'm sure my Pokemon Go playing did cut into my reading time a little bit). I've had a interesting summer learning about Medieval Christianity and specifically focusing on Peter Lombard and Thomas Aqunias. They'll both be featured in my next paper in Exploring the Christian Way which I hope to publish here in late January of 2017. 90% of the reading and 80% of the writing is done for that …