Trying to be like Jesus - logic

In A Spell for Chameleon by Piers Anthony, one character encounters a manticore who is serving the Good Magician Humphrey for a year in return for having a question answered. The question was whether the manticore had a soul. The magician's response was "Only those who have souls worry about them."

Questioned about the value of the answer, the manticore insisted that it was perfect. A simple "yes" or "no" could have been a guess, and a long complicated answer could have been confusing. The answer given was simple, but its truth was also self-evident in the way it was given.

I am always impressed with the answer to the tribute question in Matthew 22: "Is it lawful to give tribute unto Caesar or not?"

19 Shew me the tribute money. And they brought unto him a penny.

20 And he saith unto them, Whose is this image and superscription?

21 They say unto him, Cæsar’s. Then saith he unto them, Render therefore unto Cæsar the things which are Cæsar’s; and unto God the things that are God’s.

Not only is the logic self-evident, but beyond that there is a more important answer as it directs them to think about whether or not they are rendering God his due.

Something similar happens with the account of the woman taken in adultery.

John 8
3 And the scribes and Pharisees brought unto him a woman taken in adultery; and when they had set her in the midst,

4 They say unto him, Master, this woman was taken in adultery, in the very act.

5 Now Moses in the law commanded us, that such should be stoned: but what sayest thou?

6 This they said, tempting him, that they might have to accuse him. But Jesus stooped down, and with his finger wrote on the ground, as though he heard them not.

7 So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her.

Yes, the Mosaic law called for stoning, but the Roman rule they were under did not allow them to impose the death penalty on their own. More to the point, Jesus was there fulfilling the Mosaic law and bringing them to a higher law that had more room for compassion. There is room for several sermons in there, but the most effective sermon was the single sentence that directed them to look inward.

Last week was about how parables can be such effective teaching tools, because they can be understood at different levels, but sometimes that is not needed. There is also room for combinations; the parable of the Good Samaritan follows a direct and self-evident answer that got a follow-up question. Also sometimes it is not automatically clear how important context is, which I may spend some time on next week.

I see three components to the effectiveness of Jesus as a teacher.

One is his understanding of the law and doctrine. He has studied and pondered and is full of wisdom, ready for whatever question will be asked.

The second is his investment in the uplifting of the hearer. Not only does he want them to understand at an appropriate level, but he leaves room for growth: there are hints to what questions should be asked instead, and directions given on what questions should be asked.

Finally - and in harmony with the overall theme of this series - there is an understanding of the needs of the listener, and an evaluation there.

I'm not done with the series yet, but one of the key takeaways should be that He knows you.

What will you do with that?