I have a small handful of personal reasons to continue following Jesus after nearly 30 years. One of the more compelling reasons is this: People just can’t stop disagreeing about him. About who he was. About what he did. About the why behind it all. About what any of it means or doesn’t mean. Honestly, if there’s someone creating this much chatter and this much heat for this long, I just want to hang around him.
Discussion and disagreement about Jesus have been going on since he walked on the earth. Which makes me think that maybe that’s all part of the plan: Keep people talking. Jesus himself left so many questions unanswered, so many things ambiguous, that I just have to believe that it was at least a little intentional.
As just one example, consider the story of the blind man that Jesus healed in John 9. Which is a notably long story for John to include, by the way. The discussion and disagreement about Jesus just keep on going to an almost comical degree.
“Who is this Jesus?” Here are the options people come up with:
A) A sinner. (Because he didn’t keep the Sabbath.)
B) A holy man. (Because a sinner could not perform such signs.)
C) A prophet. (Because, said the formerly blind man, “Now I see.”)
The amazing thing is that they’re all so very close. They were each a little bit right in their opinion of Jesus. So who is right? I think the answer is actually,
D) All of the above.
A) Not correct, exactly. But they were right that Jesus didn’t keep the Sabbath in a super-strict way. I suppose if you’re a Sabbath-legalist, making mud and healing someone on the day of rest might make someone a “sinner” by your definition.
B) Correct, in so far as understanding that performing such amazing signs is a likely indication of holiness.
C) Correct, in that he was a powerful spokesman from God in the vein of the great prophets from Israel’s history.
“What have you to say about him?” He is D) All of the above—a holy, rule-stretching prophet. And then some.
