Good and evil are two opposites, sustained by their respective characteristics. When left separate, the two conditions are bereft of conflict. They resemble positive and negative cords that generate electricity, when dangerously in contact with each other. Similarly, when truth and falsehood are combined, it becomes impossible to put blame on either of the opposites. Destruction is possible when truth and falsehood are combined.
The term “conflict” is described by combining two opposites, which produce a calamitous effect, characterized by confusion. When the Pharisees resolved to murder Jesus, they assumed to purge evil. They were sincere in assuming that Jesus represented the devil, but without facts.
Then they brought him a demon-possessed man who was blind and mute, and Jesus healed him so that he could both talk and see. All the people were astonished and said, “Could this be the Son of David?” But when the Pharisees heard this, they said, “It is only by Beelzebul, the prince of demons, that this fellow drives out demons.” Jesus knew their thoughts and said to them, “Every kingdom divided against itself will be ruined, and every city or household divided against itself will not stand.
If Satan drives out Satan, he is divided against himself. How then can his kingdom stand? And if I drive out demons by Beelzebul, by whom do your people drive them out? So then, they will be your judges. But if it is by the Spirit of God that I drive out demons, then the kingdom of God has come upon you. “Or again, how can anyone enter a strong man’s house and carry off his possessions unless he first ties up the strong man? Then he can plunder his house” (Matthew 12:23-29 NIV).
A misrepresentation was that a demon-possessed man who was mute and blind was not supposed to be healed of his unhealthy condition. There ought to have been celebrations, from observers. However, the miraculous performance was attributed to Beelzebub, the prince of demons.
Those condemning Jesus for such an unprecedented miraculous performance included respected religious leaders in Jerusalem. I suppose most of the ordinary observers found it convenient to agree with the Pharisaic viewpoint? The conflict between good and evil can manifest when goodness also gets attacked and labelled evil.
The exhibited miraculous healing was considered scandalous. The Pharisees assumed the demon-possessed man deserved the sickly condition, proving his sinfulness. As far as they were concerned, it was impossible to deliver demon-possessed people.
Between the two counteraccusations, one was based on truth, while the other was based on falsehood. There was no harmony between Jesus and the Pharisees. They accused Jesus of being demonic, while Jesus also truthfully described their condition, as evil.