Oct
20
Did Unbelief Prevent Jesus from Doing Miracles in Nazareth?
“One thing that even the son of God can’t do. Even Jesus cannot override your unbelief.” — Steven Furtick, founder & pastor of Elevation Church
We’re gonna do a little Biblical exegesis and theology today, folks!
Some Bible teachers, particularly among (but not limited to) charismatics, use Mark 6:5 as evidence that Jesus Christ could not perform miracles in His hometown of Nazareth. They say that there are some things our Lord cannot do because our unbelief — or, in this specific case, the unbelief of the local populace of a town — hinders Him from doing what He wants to do. Either the unbelief is spiritually stronger than Jesus’ power, or (more likely) there is some divine law that Jesus must obey in deference to the unbelief in question.
The opening verses in Mark 6 tell of Jesus entering Nazareth with His disciples, then doing some teaching in the local synagogue. He got some pushback, though, from “many who heard Him”, questioning how this “local boy” acquired such ability — not to mention, authority — to say and do the things he did. The passage concludes with:
“[T]hey took offense at him. 4 And Jesus said to them, ‘A prophet is not without honor, except in his hometown and among his relatives and in his own household.’ 5 And he could do no mighty work there, except that he laid his hands on a few sick people and healed them. 6 And he marveled because of their unbelief….” (Mark 6:3c-6a (ESV))
At first glance, it may indeed seem that Jesus was unable to perform any “mighty works” (i.e., miracles), and it might seem reasonable to infer that the unbelief of the townsfolk was the reason. Steven Furtick is an example of one popular pastor/teacher today who makes the conclusion about Christ’s inability:
“The power of God was in Jesus, the healing power of God, the restoring power of God, the same power that made demons flee was in Nazareth, but Jesus could not release it. Because it was trapped in their unbelief. And there’s one thing that even Jesus can’t do. One thing that even the son of God can’t do. Even Jesus cannot override your unbelief. I see y’all looking at me like, ‘Is that true? I thought He could do anything.’ It said, ‘He could not.’ He wanted to. He was prepared to. He was able to. The power of God was in Nazareth, but it was trapped in their perspective.”
Regardless of how he came to his conclusion, Furtick is dead wrong.
We — and especially a pastor/teacher of God’s people — have a responsibility to dig a little deeper. Let’s look at the parallel passage in Matthew 13:50-58. Specifically, the final verse:
“58 And he did not do many mighty works there, because of their unbelief.” (Matt. 13:58 (ESV))
Notice that it says Jesus did not, as opposed to could not. This is not a contradiction with Mark 6:5. “Did not” only tells us of an absence of miraculous works; “could not” is an indication that something held Jesus back from performing such miraculous works. Matt. 13:58 seems to confirm that the people’s unbelief was somehow connected to, or even responsible for, the lack of miracles. But, in what sense?
We need to give our key verses another read. Matt. 13:58 does not say that no miracles whatsoever were done there in Nazareth on that visit — only that Jesus “did not do many”. This indicates that He did perform at least a small number of miracles. Mark 6:5 tells us what they were: “he laid his hands on a few sick people and healed them.” So, either Jesus healed some unbelieving sick people, or they were a small minority in town that actually did believe in Him. (Both possibilities seem reasonable to me.)
In his article at “The Chorus in the Chaos”, Grayson Gilbert has the following to say when looking at the Greek in the Mark passage:
“The usage of the negative particle οὐκ in combination with δύναμαι in Mark 6:5 occurs elsewhere within the New Testament and does not always dictate inability. Luke 14:20 demonstrates this within the context of the parable of the wedding feast; the man is not literally unable to come, he is unwilling. In similar fashion, Luke 11:7 exhibits a man who is unwilling to offer bread, not that he is literally prevented from doing so. In yet another example, 1 John 3:9, contrary to other poor teaching circling the web, does not indicate a Christian’s inability to sin as a result of becoming a child of God. The phrase then reflects a range of meaning, in this case, presenting the idiomatic expression that Christ is choosing not to do something, even though He retains the ability to do so.”
While there are, of course, examples of Jesus healing and doing other miracles for people who placed some amount of faith in Him, there are also several examples in which He performed a miracle despite a lack of faith (i.e., unbelief). Preacher/teacher Justin Peters gives the following examples:
o Ten lepers healed (Luke 17), but only one expressed faith
o Crippled man at the Pool of Bethesda (John 5)
o Man born blind (John 9)
o Demoniacs delivered by Christ (Mark 1:23-26; 5:1; Matt. 12:22)
o Multitudes healed (Matt. 9:35; 11:2-5; 15:29-31)
In some of these cases, the healed and/or exorcised individuals did not even know who Jesus was, let alone express belief in Him and His power/authority to deliver them. Jesus was not thwarted by their unbelief, was he?
As additional evidence against the conclusions of Furtick and others, Gilbert points out,
“Furthermore, we know that the Lord does as He pleases — and people throughout the span of the Scripture acknowledge this without hesitancy (Psalm 115:3, 135:6; Daniel 4:35; Jonah 1:14). It is God who will specifically violate one’s unbelief; if this were not so, why would any individual cry out to the Lord, ‘Help my unbelief!’ (Mark 9:24). Furthermore, there would be no hope for any sinner if Christ could not override unbelief, for we know that Satan has blinded the minds of unbelievers so that they cannot see the glorious gospel (2 Cor. 4:4)….
The point of the narrative, however, has nothing to do with you somehow containing the power to override the miraculous due to unbelief. It is that in Christ’s own home town, he did not receive honor as the Son of God (Matt. 13:57; Mark 6:4; John 4:44). They did not believe He was the Christ and they would not, unless they would see signs and wonders (John 4:48). It was not that Christ could not perform the miraculous as a result of their unbelief, but that He would not because they did not believe. Both show cause, but drastically different purposes. [Italics mine.]
Thus, what we see is an intentional withholding of the miraculous due to their hardened hearts; the miraculous was not conditioned, per se, to their unbelief (read: they did not limit Christ’s ability to do the miraculous due to their lack of faith). Rather, he withheld the miraculous as a result of their unbelief; it was not within His divine will to heal them. Those two statements are radically different and depict a radically different Jesus, as different a Jesus as those in Nazareth perceived, for though they acknowledged His ability to do the miraculous and to instruct with incredible wisdom, they did not acknowledge the authority by which He did so.”
Just as a reminder, Jesus did and said only what God the Father said, did, and and willed Him to (John 5:19; 6:38; 12:49; 14:31). Here is another verse expressing this:
“30 ‘I can do nothing on my own. As I hear, I judge, and my judgment is just, because I seek not my own will but the will of him who sent me.'” (John 5:30 (ESV))
It was not God’s will to heal everyone Jesus came into contact with while on the Earth, or even just in Nazareth, just as — contrary to some teaching — it is not His will to always heal every Christian or other person for whom Christians pray for healing.
So, now that we have looked more carefully at the verses in question and critical words within those verses, as well as considered the surrounding verses and even the larger witness of the Gospels (and the Bible as a whole), we understand that 1) human unbelief is not kryptonite to Jesus’ power; 2) Jesus only does the will of His Father; 3) therefore, the reason Jesus sometimes held back from doing miracles, whether or not related to human unbelief, was a matter of divine will rather than inability to exercise divine power. Such was the case in Nazareth.
