Nepaug Bible Church - http://www.nepaugchurch.org - Pastor's Evening Sermon Notes - http://www.nepaugchurch.org/ev/ev19960714.htm

MATTHEW: JESUS AS ISRAEL'S MESSIAH AND HIS MESSIANIC KINGDOM
Part IX: Christ's Messianic Kingdom Certified
F. Messiah's Predicted Withdrawal From Conflict Fulfilled In Jesus
2. Christ's Use Of Simple Human Logic To Sidestep Credibility Challenges Of His Person
(Matthew 12:22-37)
  1. Introduction
    1. There are times when an innocent believer's credibility can be so seriously questioned that people actually conclude that he is living for and doing the Devil's work. With enough pressure, the believer himself can begin to get confused wonder if he himself is going down an evil road!
    2. Jesus exampled the use of simple human logic applied to the criticism itself that bypasses the credibility of the believer in question to reveal reality and expose the validity of the critics as follows:
  2. Christ's Use Of Simple Human Logic To Sidestep Credibility Challenges Of His Person.
    1. When Jesus cast out a demon from a blind and dumb demoniac, though the crowds considered this feat to show His messiahship, the Pharisees claimed Jesus did the feat by Satan's power, Mtt. 12:22-24.
    2. This question to Jesus' credibility was very serious for the following reasons:
      1. Messiah's credentials were marked by His miraculous works according to prophecy, Is. 61:1; 35:5.
      2. Thus, to see Jesus doing the miracles predicted in prophecy of Messiah, but to attribute them to Satan was to counter the very basis of Christ's Messianic claims to where people would be influenced not believe in Him for the Kingdom or for eternal salvation!
      3. Since Jesus' credibility was attacked, His response could not be another miracle for the criticism itself had already questioned Jesus' capacity to use another miracle or Bible verse as proof of His identity.
    3. Since Jesus' use of miracles in connection with Scripture to prove His messiahship was under attack, Jesus sidestepped His critics' efforts by using simple human logic to show the error of their criticism (12:25ff):
      1. Use of Non Sequitur Reasoning - Jesus responded by assuming for the sake of argument that He was using Satan's power to show that, IF this were the case, then the exorcism would have meant Satan was fighting himself, ruining his own kingdom. Yet, since Satan would not destroy his own kingdom, Jesus was not working for Satan, so the Pharisees' charge was wrong, Mtt. 12:25-26. In other words, assuming Jesus were of Satan, it would NOT FOLLOW that He would exorcise demons!
      2. Reasoning From Retroactive Applicability - Jesus showed that His critics had no basis of condemning His power as being evil without condemning their own who exorcised demons! This lack of authority to discern the "evil" from "good" exorcists undermined the criticism's own validity! (Mtt. 12:27-28)
      3. Reasoning From What Necessarily Follows - If Jesus exorcised demons, it implied that He was greater than the evil demon and was thus working for God, Mtt. 12:29!
    4. So effective are such arguments from pure human logic that Jesus declared their use in this case to affect the eternal destiny of those involved in this incident, Mtt. 12:30-37:
      1. Jesus declared that one could not remain neutral regarding His credibility on such a charge: he either agreed with the Pharisees and rejected His messiahship or He disagreed with them in His favor, 12:30.
      2. He said a man was either evil or good, and it showed up in such statements about Jesus, Mtt. 12:33,35.
      3. Accordingly, if one sided with the claims of the Pharisees, this misuse of even logic regarding Christ's evidential fulfillment of prophecy was a gross sin that would not be forgiven him. It led to rejecting the credibility of Messiah, and that meant thereby missing eternal life, Mtt. 12:31-32,35b with Isa. 11:1ff.
      4. However, if one used common sense to view the miracles of Jesus as valid Messianic credentials, he would be exonerated, for men will give account even for their idle words in the judgment, 12:35a,36-37.
Lesson: (1) If a question arises about the spiritual credibility of a party, and no Scripture readily applies to the issue, test the situation via human logic: (a) see if the criticism is valid by first assuming it to be true and then viewing its claims of the end result against what really happens; (b) submit the person criticizing to his own criticism to see if he can stand up under it! (c) If these first two arguments show the CRITIC to be in error, assume the CRITICIZED party to be certified until proven otherwise! (2) In a pinch, God expects us to use human logic as an acid test of discerning credibility!