Where Matthew 5-7 is widely recognized as a unit, the so-called sermon on the mount, chapter 8-9 are not as often seen that way, at least by the average reader. But they are. The author, having set forth a compendium of Jesus' teachings, now provides us with a series of examples of Jesus' skills as a healer. In the summary statement at the end of the section (9:35-38), the compiler/author observes that Jesus had a two-fold ministry, teaching about the Kingdom and then demonstrating its reality through healing. The author then avows that Jesus did all of this because he was profoundly touched at a gut level—the meaning of the Greek word, esplanchnisthē (ἐσπλαγχνίσθη)—by the pitiable state of the people who lived in anxiety and seemed to be like lost sheep in need of a shepherd.Where Matthew 5-7 summarized Jesus' teachings to those in need, we now move into a section of two chapters (8-9) that show how Jesus responded to their needs, which was to alleviate their suffering. In our terms, Jesus was both a prophet and a humanitarian. The point of concern here is not with miraculous healing per se. In the first century, people believed in such things and concerned themselves with miracles for what they demonstrated, which was (holy) power and authority. In this case, his miracles actually demonstrated a deep concern on Jesus' part to alleviate suffering, and if the author's portrait of him is correct Jesus does not seem to have been concerned with proving anything about himself. He exercised holy power and authority on behalf of people in need.
In later years, Christians became fixated with the power and authority of Jesus Christ, the Son of God. They pointed to his miracles as proof of his divinity. Then, still later, doubters and skeptics ridiculed the whole idea of such miracles as being largely Christian propaganda and superstitious nonsense. The first century message so clearly set out in Matthew that Jesus taught and healed out of a prophetic and humanitarian concern for the Jewish people of his day was largely lost, especially when it came to the healing miracles. Insisting, thus, that the miracles "really happened," literally, as described in the Bible misses their point entirely. They are not a proof of the truth of the Christian religion and the Bible. In the first century, they knew that miracles took place and nobody argued that point. In our age, whether we "believe in miracles" or not is irrelevant to the message of the gospel and obscures its original intent, which was to emphasise that Jesus was not your ordinary attention-grabbing charlatan. If Matthew is an accurate portrayal of Jesus, he was not motivated by power or the desire for attention. He was "the real deal" because of his compassion for others, demonstrated both in the way he taught and in his ability to heal others in dire need. Amen.
