John 9
OGCCHAPTER NINE
If it were not so tragic, this ninth chapter would be comical. Here is a man blind from birth healed by the Nazarene and the Pharisees, rather than accept the evident fact that Jesus had healed him, chose to question the man’s former blindness. Next, his parents, out of cowardice, pass the buck and will not take sides with their son. The really amusing section, however, is found in John 9:24-34. In these verses the former blind man by common-sense reasoning makes the learned Pharisees look ridiculous. The beggar turns the tables on the Pharisees and he becomes the questioner instead of the questioned. The Pharisees, unable to withstand the man’s testimony, can think of nothing but to attack the character of the beggar and use ecclesiastical force against him.
Chapter nine is simply a continued record of teachings and works of Jesus in Jerusalem during the Feast of Tabernacles. Whether this incident was on the same day and immediately after the discourse of chapter 8, or whether it was on another day afterward is of little significance, The important matter is the evidential power of the miracle and the teaching Jesus attached to it. The outline is continued:
II.
The Word Manifested to the Jews and their rejection of Him, John 1:19, John 12:50
D. Public Ministry, Third Year 2.
Later Judean Ministry, John 7:1, John 10:21, The Feast of Tabernacles
a.
A Blind Man Healed, John 9:1-12
b.
He is Investigated by the Authorities, John 9:13-23
c.
The Questioned One becomes Questioner, John 9:24-34
d.
Blindness that is blindness indeed! John 9:35-41
EXPOSITORY SERMON NO. NINE
LIGHT FOR THE BLIND
Introduction
I.
JESUS AND HIS DISCIPLES SEE THE BLIND BEGGAR SITTING, PERHAPS, AT THE TEMPLE GATE
A.
Can you sympathize with the blind man? He was born blind. He had never seen the lovelight in the eyes of his father or mother. He had never seen the green fields, the majestic mountains, the winding Jordan river. The brilliance of the sun by day had never shone upon his eyes, nor had he ever witnessed the dark blue sky at night sprinkled with twinkling stars. Yet, as we shall see, he saw more than all the others about him who had their eyesight.
II.
THE QUESTION OF THE DISCIPLES
A.
They raise the theological question about his infirmity being connected with sinespecially do they presume that his blindness has come as a punishment. In a sense, our sins are visited upon our offspring for generation upon generation. But in another sense, our sins are not borne by our children (cf. Ezekiel 18:19-20). There was a purpose in the beggar’s blindness and Jesus answers with that purposethat the glory of God might be made manifest. All infirmities are for such a purpose. They are for discipline, chastisement, that the will of God might be perfected in those who believe and that God’s justice and power might be shown. To the disciples this man posed a problem of the pastHow did he get that way? But to Jesus he presented a challenge and an opportunity to work the works of God in the present!
Discussion
I.
BLINDNESS OF THE BEGGAR
Although his physical sight had never been given him, he was not really the blind one at all. Actually, it was probably his physical blindness that worked to bring his greatest blessing. It caused him to turn in utter dependence upon the mercy of God and anyone else who would help him. His sightless eyes thrust him upon the grace of Godthey led him to hope. Thus his faith was a faith that would obey Jesus-’ commands with unhesitating obedience. It seems that always the poor, infirm and outcasts, who found both themselves and others incapable of help, that professed the greatest faith in Jesus. They had nowhere else or no one else to turn tothe religious leaders of the day would not be their shepherds. The prosperous, healthy and self-righteous felt no necessity to trust in God. The church at Laodicea was told, Because thou sayest, I am rich, and have gotten riches, and have need of nothing; and knowest not that thou art the wretched one and miserable and poor and blind and naked. (Revelation 3:17. (Italics mine.) AND SO IT IS! THE MAN WHO HAS LOST HIS PHYSICAL SIGHT CAN NEVER BE SO BLIND AS THE MAN WHO HAS LOST HIS INDEPENDENCE UPON GOD!
This man had courage. He knew as well as any other Jew of that city and of that particular time what would happen to anyone who associated with Jesus. Not only had he associated with the hated Nazarene, he had allowed himself to be healed by Him on the Sabbath.
The beggar had an honest heart and when convinced of the truth, he followed the leading of the truth, He accepted the testimony that was presented to him and believed it. He might not be a student of theology, as were the rulers, but he could witness to what Jesus had done for himthis he knew. His honesty allowed Him to see far more than the Pharisees could see about Jesus. They said Jesus could not possibly be good for He healed on the Sabbath, The blind man said, God would not work through a deliberate blasphemer. He knew more of the Old Testament than did the students of the Scriptures. If I regard iniquity in my heart, the Lord will not hear me (Psalms 66:18). When ye spread forth your hands, I will hide mine eyes from you; yea, when you make many prayers, I will not hear; your hands are full of blood (Isaiah 1:15).
II.
THE BLINDNESS OF THE BEGGAR’S PARENTS
Theirs was the blindness of cowardice and fear. Even in everyday experience we know that fear can cause people to be blind to many things that would otherwise be easily seen. What did they fear? They feared loss of social liberty and prestige. If they should profess any belief in Jesus they would be boycotted socially and economically. Their friends would not come near them. they would not be sold anything in the markets. They also feared excommunicationreligious condemnation. They would no longer be allowed to participate in the services of the temple or the synagogue. This has been used by other religious dictators in modern times as a means of forcing the dictates of men upon the superstitious and indifferent. The parents might also have been afraid of the responsibilities they would have to assume should they become followers of Christ. Many today are afraid of the truth because they might have to change their way of livingto give up some of their sinful, indulgent pleasures and so they have conveniently blinded themselves to the truththey have seared their consciences.
The parents could not see beyond the level of this world. They could see only the persecution and criticism they would have to face. They could see only the things of this world which they might lose. Peter at Antioch is a good example of such blindness. His fear of the Jews actually blinded him to the truth that he himself had already preached concerning the reception of the Gentiles into the kingdom. When some Judaizers criticized him for eating with Gentiles, he defected and separated himself from the Gentiles. He had just preached that God is no respecter of personsthat the Gentiles are to be received into the church as brothersnow he gives in through fear. It isn-’t easy to be a witness for Jesus today. Today’s great philosophy is Don-’t be different from the worldbe a conformistdon-’t be abnormally religious. I sometimes believe it is more difficult to witness for Christ in times of peace and prosperity and security than in times of persecution and hardship. But cowardice and fear brings a blindness that covers our spiritual eyes so that we cannot see the truthwe do not see facts and ideas in their proper perspective. If all we can see are the consequences and losses in this world by following Christ, we are no better than this beggar’s parents. The heroes of the O.T. were not even permitted to see the Christ and yet they could see better than these parents through their spiritual eyes for these all died in faith, not having received the promises, but having seen them afar off, and were persuaded of them, and embraced them, and confessed that they were pilgrims on the earth. for they that say such things declare plainly that they seek a country.. (Hebrews 11:13-14). THE BLIND BEGGAR WAS LOOKING AT THE HEAVENLY CITY, WHILE HIS PARENTS GROPED BLINDLY FOR THIS WORLD AND LOST BOTH THIS WORLD AND HEAVEN!
III.
THE BLINDNESS OF THE PHARISEES
Theirs was a blindness of prejudice and hate and bigotry. Do you hear any of them rejoicing even that the man born blind was healed? They were interested in nothing but revenge for having one of their traditions broken. They were interested only in trapping Jesus. Woe unto them, for Woe unto them that call evil good and good evil. There are men and women even in our day who are so filled with hate and prejudice that they can see no good in anything but their own ideas and their own ways of living. Their blindness was to be found in that they said, We see. Over and over they insisted, We know this man is a sinner., or, We know that God has spoken to Moses, but as for this man we know not whence he is. They knew everything, and the people did not know anything. They were the teachers and everyone else were the ignoramuses. Paul points out the blindness of the Jewish teachers in Romans, the second chapter. The Jews gloried and were secure in the belief that they were the guides of the blind, yet they themselves did not practice what they taught as light.
Paul wrote to the Corinthians (2 Corinthians 3:1-18) that even in his day the Jews were still blinded by the veil of prejudicethey refused to see that the Old Covenant was done away in Christ.. the god of this world hath blinded the minds of the unbelieving, that the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ should not dawn upon them. Jesus wisely pointed out these self-righteous men as blind guides trying to lead the blind. and both would fall into the pit. NO MAN IS SO BLIND AS ONE WHO WILL NOT SEE! HOW MANY TIMES MIRACLES WERE WROUGHT BEFORE THE VERY EYES OF THE PHARISEES, BUT THEY WOULD NOT SEE!
Conclusion
I.
WHAT CAUSES SPIRITUAL BLINDNESS?
A.
Materialism (cf. Isaiah 56:10; Isaiah 59:10). The Jewish national eye was so full of materialism that it was utterly blind to God. Take any American weekend or, more especially, national holiday, and you can see the same blindness. Our eyes are so full of tinsel, gifts, food and wanton pleasure that we cannot possibly see God. God’s solemn warning to the Jews before they possessed the promised land was, Beware lest after you have eaten, builded fine houses, increased your flocks and silver and gold. beware lest your heart be lifted up and you forget Jehovah thy God.
B.
Fear! Fear of what will be done to us or fear of what we will have to do if we allow our conscience to be convicted and follow Jesus. Herod’s fear of the truth caused him to put John the Baptist in prison and to death. Felix’s fear of the truth caused him to put off listening to Paul (Acts 24:25). Agrippa’s fear of becoming a Christian and giving in to the truth and giving up his sensual way of life caused him to reject Paul’s message.
C.
Self-righteousness and prejudice and hate! If ye were blind, ye would have no sin: but now you say, We see: your sin remaineth. The whole have no need of a Physician, but the sick do. I came not to call the righteous unto repentance but the sinners.
II.
HOW MAY ONE HAVE SPIRITUAL SIGHT?
A.
Purity and humility! Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God. The blind beggar was honest, pure, innocent, guileless and thus his spiritual eyes were opened along with his physical eyes.
B.
Faith! By faith he forsook Egypt, not fearing the wrath of the king; for he endured, as seeing him who is invisible (Hebrews 11:27). Moses saw even that which was invisible through eyes of faith!
C.
Courage! One thing is certainly true of the blind beggarhe was a brave man. He knew quite well the consequences of declaring Jesus to be a good mana prophet. But he made his statement and took his stand. It was as if he said: I am bound to believe in Him, I am bound to take my stand by Him because of all that He has done for me. We are reminded of Martin Luther when summoned before the Catholic hierarchy and commanded to recant and return to the Roman churchLuther said, Here I stand, I can do no other, God help me.
D.
Loyalty to Christ always brings greater revelation and spiritual insight. This man was rewarded for his faith by a further revelation of Jesus. When the Jews had cast him out of the temple, the Lord of the temple went searching for him and found him. IF ANY MAN’S CHRISTIAN WITNESS SEPARATES HIM FROM THE WORLD, IT ALWAYS BRINGS HIM CLOSER TO JESUS CHRIST. It is to the man who is true to Him that Jesus most fully reveals Himself. Loyalty to Jesus may well bring persecution and scorn at the hands of men, but the reward of loyalty is a closer walk with Christ and an increasing knowledge of the wonder of Christ.
III.
THIS CLOSER WALK CAN BE YOURS. THIS SPIRITUAL SIGHT CAN BE YOURS
A.
By obedience to His will (cf. John 7:17). The more we know Jesus by doing His will, the greater He becomes to us personally. Why do you tarry, my friend?
John 9:1-12
**A BLIND MAN HEALED
Text 9:1-12**
1
As he passed by, he saw a man blind from his birth.
2
And his disciples asked him, saying, Rabbi, who sinned, this man, or his parents, that he should be born blind?
3
Jesus answered, Neither did this man sin, nor his parents: but that the works of God should be made manifest in him.
4
We must work the works of him that sent me, while it is day: the night cometh, when no man can work
5
When I am in the world, I am the light of the world.
6
When he had thus spoken, he spat on the ground, and made clay of the spittle, and anointed his eyes with the clay,
7
and said unto him, Go, wash in the pool of Siloam (which is by interpretation, Sent). He went away therefore, and washed, and came seeing.
8
The neighbors therefore, and they that saw him aforetime, that he was a beggar, said, Is not this he that sat and begged?
9
Others said, It is he: others said, No, but he is like him. He said, I am he.
10
They said therefore unto him, How then were thine eyes opened?
11
He answered, The man that is called Jesus made clay, and anointed mine eyes, and said unto me, Go to Siloam, and wash: so I went away and washed, and I received sight.
12
And they said unto him, Where is he? He saith, I know not.
Queries
a.
Why such a question from the disciples (John 9:2)?
b.
Why put clay on the man’s eyes?
c.
Is there any faith evidenced by the blind beggar?
Paraphrase
And as Jesus and His disciples were walking along He saw a man who was blind from his birth on. And His disciples asked Him saying, Teacher, did this man’s sin or his parents-’ sin cause him to be blind? Jesus answered, It was not that this man or his parents sinned which caused his blindness. His blindness has happened to him within the providence of God in order that God’s works of mercy and power might be made manifest in him. We, while our appointed time and opportunities for working still remain, must make the most of our opportunities and do the works of the One who sent Me, The night-time of life comes to every man and then our opportunities to do God’s work is over. I am the world’s source of divine light and truth as long as I am in the world and so I must make the most of My opportunities here. Having said these things He spat upon the ground and made clay of the spittle and daubed the clay upon the blind man’s eyes. Then Jesus said to him, Go, wash in the pool of Siloam (interpreted it means Sent). So he went away and washed and returned seeing! His neighbors and those who had seen him before and known him as a beggar were saying to one another, This is not the blind one who used to sit begging is he? Some said, Yes, this is the beggar; but others were saying, No, but he resembles that one. But the man himself said, Yes, I am that man. So they said to him, How were your eyes opened? He answered, The man who is called Jesus made clay and daubed my eyes with the clay and said to me, Go to Siloam and wash. I went and washed as he commanded and behold, I received my sight. They said to him, Where is this man? He replied, I do not know.
Summary
Jesus cures a man born blind. The disciples are concerned about the theological aspects of the man’s blindness. Jesus uses the man’s blindness to perform a miracle and testify to His deity and, further, to illustrate His teaching that He is the light of the world.
Comment
It would seem that the blind beggar was observed by Jesus and His disciples immediately upon their leaving the temple as recorded in John 8:59. The temple gates were appropriate places for the multitudes of aged and infirm of Jesus-’ day whose only means of existence was begging. People would be coming and going continually (and especially during annual festivals) to drop their shekels in the temple treasury. In fact, the Book of Acts tells of one beggar (Acts 3:3) who was carried and placed daily at the gate Beautiful in order to beg alms. This particular blind beggar must have been well-known for the disciples to have known him as one blind from birth. The time when Jesus and the disciples passed by and saw the beggar is not important. It could have been the day following Jesus-’ escape from the temple (John 8:59). Jesus continued His later Judean ministry, in and around Jerusalem, for at least three months (from Tabernacles in September to Dedication in December). But it seems more in harmony with the context that this incident took place on the same day that Jesus hid himself, and went out of the temple.
We can understand the alternative explanation of the disciples when they attributed the man’s blindness to parental sin, but why would they suggest that a man born blind might be blind as a result of his own sin? How could a man sin before he was born? First, the Jews unhesitatingly connected suffering with sin. Job’s friends attributed his calamities to his hypocrisy (cf. Job 4:5-8). All of man’s infirmities are attributable in the final analysis to sinAdam’s sin brought about physical disease and death (cf. Romans 5:12-21; also Genesis 3:17-19; Romans 8:20-23). Furthermore, the sins of parents may be visited upon their children in physical calamities even to the fourth generation (cf. Exodus 20:5; Exodus 34:7; Numbers 14:1-45; Numbers 15:1-41; Numbers 16:1-50; Numbers 17:1-13; Numbers 18:1-32; Deuteronomy 5:9; Deuteronomy 28:32; Jeremiah 31:29; Ezekiel 18:2). And it is also true that much of a man’s suffering is brought by his own sin and dissipation.
Could it be that in their dilemma they were thinking that if his blindness were a punishment for his own sin, then God must have punished him before he sinned, since he had been blind from his birthor, the only other alternative, to them, was that the innocent child was being punished for the guilty parents.
According to most commentators, the Jewish Rabbis exaggerated the theological implications of the relationship between sin and suffering all out of proportion to what God’s revealed truth actually says. Jesus did not agree with some of their ideas (cf. Luke 13:2-5). Some of the Rabbis are said to have believed that infants still in the womb were able to commit prenatal sin. According to their interpretation of Gen 25:22-26, Esau had tried to murder Jacob while still in the womb of their mother! Other scholars have traced out in a Judaism later than Jesus-’ time a Jewish belief in the pre-existence of souls and their ability to sin in such a pre-existent state. Perhaps some of the Rabbis contemporary with Jesus were even then teaching this doctrine.
Whether the disciples had been exposed to these Rabbinical theories or not, they were concerned with the blind man primarily in a theological sense. They were wanting Jesus to give His opinion on the subject. Jesus was not primarily interested in wasting time in speculating on the theological question of the cause for the man’s blindness. His time was precious and to be used primarily for bringing remedy to the results of sin and evil. Jesus does not contradict the teaching of the Scriptures when He says, that the man is not blind as a result of his own sin nor the sin of his parents. The man is still subject to mortal infirmities because of Adam’s sin. Neither did Jesus imply that the man or his parents were without sin. In light of our ignorance on the mystery of suffering and affliction we will do well to accept what God has revealed and not to speculate further. Jesus simply stated here that, within the providential scheme of God, this man’s blindness was in order that the works of God might be made manifest through Him. As Hendriksen says, All thingseven afflictions and calamitieshave as their ultimate purpose the glorification of God in Christ by means of the manifestation of His greatness. (Gospel of John, Vol. II, Wm. Hendriksen, pub. Baker, page 73.) This is the teaching of the Scriptures (cf. Romans 8:28; 2 Corinthians 4:17) and this is the ultimate lesson which Job learned (cf. Job 42:1-6).
To the disciples this man presented an opportunity for theological speculation which was time-wasting and unprofitable. To Jesus the man’s extremity presented a challenge and an opportunity to manifest in Himself the glory of God and the authority of God. Giving sight to the blind was to be a sign that the Messiah had come (cf. Isaiah 35:5; Isaiah 29:18; Isaiah 32:3 ff; Isaiah 42:7; Matthew 12:22; Luke 4:18-19).
In John 9:4 Jesus makes it plain that He has only a certain allotted time in which to manifest Himself as the Son of God. It seems that Jesus means His period of earthly life when He says day and by the night cometh when no man can work, He means physical death, when He shall depart this earth. This harmonizes with the general idea that Jesus is trying to teach the disciples concerning the man’s blindness. But the Lord’s statement in John 9:4 is true of all His followers. We all pass this way but once. We must make the most of our opportunities to carry out our divinely appointed commission to proclaim and live the word of Christ. When the time of our departure draws nigh, let us be ready to say with Paul, I have fought the good fight, I have finished the course, I have kept the faith (2 Timothy 4:6-8).
He has a special work to do while He is in the world. While He is here He is the light of the world in a special sense (cf. John 1:4-18). While He was here He was the effulgence of his glory, and the very image of his [God’S] substance (cf. Hebrews 1:3). Jesus was Emmanuel (God with us). He came to walk among men and reveal unto them the Father (cf. John 14:7-11). He is, of course, still the Light of the World through the written testimony of His Word, the Bible, and through the reflected glory of the lives of His followers, in whom His Spirit abides.
Two reasons are generally offered for Christ’s anointing the man’s eyes with mud made of spittle: (1) To challenge the Pharasaic tradition of prohibiting application of medications on the Sabbath, and/or (2) to give the blind man some symbolic or expressive action in order that he might know the power to heal his blindness comes from Jesus. Perhaps the second explanation is the more to be desired. Jesus used this method at other times (cf. Mark 7:33; Mark 8:23) and so did the prophets (cf. 2 Kings 4:29; Isaiah 8:18) to show that the miraculous healing was communicated through them.
Why did Jesus send the blind man to the pool of Siloam? The pool of Siloam was just inside the southeast portion of the city wall and quite a distance from the templethere were probably facilities much handier where the man might wash. We believe there were two reasons for such a command: (a) He sent the man there to test his faith. Faith must be tested and expressed. Actually, neither the mud nor the water had any medicinal qualities except as Jesus used them miraculously. The Scriptures are replete with such tests of faith by demanding obedience to an arbitrary commandboth Old Testament and New Testament. Just one example will illustrateNaaman the Syrian captain cured of leprosy by dipping himself seven times in the muddy Jordan river (cf. 2 Kings 5:10); (b) This pool probably had some symbolic, typical, or spiritual Messianic significance (cf. Isaiah 8:6 and our comments on this pool in connection with the Feast of Tabernacles, John 7:38). John could be hinting of this spiritual significance when he adds the interpretation of the pool as Sent.
The pool of Siloam has an interesting history. The water supply for Jerusalem was mainly from outside the city walls and always subject to being cut off by her enemies in event of siege. King Hezekiah, realizing that Sennacherib was about to invade Judah, in about 701 B.C., had workers tunnel through solid rock a conduit from the Virgin’s Fountain (or Spring Gihon) into a pool inside the city (cf. 2 Chronicles 32:2-8; 2 Chronicles 32:30; Isaiah 22:9-11; 2 Kings 20:20). The engineers began their cutting from both ends and met in the middle and tunneled through solid rock with the very inadequate equipment of that day for a distance of 583 yards. In 1880 a tablet was discovered by two boys, while wading, which had been cut into the stone in Hezekiah’s reign to commemorate the completion of the tunnel. This inscription would have been there when the blind beggar went to wash the mud from his eyelids.
Jesus, wishing to remain hidden from those who would have stoned Him in the temple, quietly left the scene of the miraculous healing. The beggar, now able to drink in the world with his eyes, would go quickly home to tell his parents the exciting news. And there was excitement, indeed, as the neighbors couldn-’t believe their eyes. Some of them were unable to believe that this was their former blind neighbor until he, himself, said, I am he. Naturally they are eager to hear how he received his sight. The man knew very little, actually, of what had transpired. He simply related clearly and concisely what he knewthe man called Jesus put clay on his eyes, told him to go wash in the pool of Siloam; he did so and received his sight. Someone no doubt told the blind man that it was the man called Jesus who commanded himperhaps even Jesus told him His name. But, as we shall see later, the former blind man had not yet come to know Jesus as the Christ. The beggar’s neighbors must have been cohorts with the Pharisees. Their desire to know where Jesus could be found is only natural and arises out of the excitement of His apparent miracle upon their neighbor.
Quiz
What teachings concerning sin and suffering might cause the disciples to ask their question in John 9:2?
Why was the man born blind?
What does Jesus mean primarily in John 9:4? Does it apply to everyone?
How was Jesus the light of the world while He was in the world?
Why did Jesus put clay on the man’s eyes?
Why command the man to wash in the pool of Siloam?
Who built the conduit to the pool of Siloam? What archeological evidence is there to substantiate the antiquity of this pool?
John 9:13-23
**THE BLIND MAN INVESTIGATED
Text 9:13-23
13
They bring to the Pharisees him that aforetime was blind.
14
Now it was the sabbath on the day when Jesus made the clay, and opened his eyes.
15
Again therefore the Pharisees also asked him how he received his sight. And he said unto them, He put clay upon mine eyes, and I washed, and I see.
16
Some therefore of the Pharisees said, This man is not from God, because he keepeth not the sabbath. But others said, How can a man that is a sinner do such signs? And there was a division among them.
17
They say therefore unto the blind man again, What sayest thou of him, in that he opened thine eyes? And he said, He is a prophet.
18
The Jews therefore did not believe concerning him, that he had been blind, and had received his sight, until they called the parents of him that had received his sight,
19
and asked them, saying, Is this your son, who ye say was born blind? how then doth he now see?
20
His parents answered and said, We know that this is our son, and that he was born blind:
21
but how he now seeth, we know not; or who opened his eyes, we know not; ask him; he is of age; he shall speak for himself.
22
These things said his parents, because they feared the Jews: for the Jews had agreed already, that if any man should confess him to be Christ, he should be put out of the synagogue.
23
Therefore said his parents, He is of age; ask him.
Queries**
a.
Why the disagreement among the Pharisees (John 9:16)?
b.
Why did the Jews refuse to believe that the man had been healed until they questioned his parents?
c.
Were the man’s parents really ignorant of who had opened their son’s eyes?
Paraphrase
Then they conducted the former blind man to the Pharisees (and it should be remembered that it was on the sabbath day that Jesus made clay and opened the man’s eyes). The man was being asked again, now by the Pharisees, how he had received his sight. So he said to them, He put clay on my eyes and I washed, and now I am seeing. Some of the Pharisees were saying, This fellow is no man sent from God, for he is not keeping the sabbath. Others were saying, How is a sinner-man able to do such great signs? And there was disagreement among them. Therefore they spoke again to the man, saying, What do you say about him seeing that you have declared that he opened your eyes? The blind man replied, He is a prophet! However, the Jews would not believe the beggar that he had been blind and had received his sight, until they called the man’s parents and questioned them, saying, Is this man your son, whom you are saying was born blind? How then is it that he now sees? The man’s parents answered, We know that this is our son and we know that he was born blind. How he is now able to see, or who opened his eyes we do not know! Ask him; he is of age. He can speak for himself. His parents gave this answer because they were afraid of the Jews; for the Jewish authorities had already agreed that anyone who acknowledged Jesus as the Christ should be excommunicated from the synagogue. And for this very reason his parents said, He is of age, ask him.
Summary
The Pharisees will not even believe that the man was formerly blind. His parents testify that he was born blind. But the man’s parents will not testify as to who their son’s Healer is, for fear of excommunication. One thing is certain to the Pharisees: Jesus of Nazareth cannot be a God-sent miracle worker for he violates their Sabbath traditions.
Comment
Who brought the former blind man before the Pharisees? We do not know. The best guess is that some of the helpers of the Pharisees were sent to find the beggar and bring him in for questioning. It is doubtful that any of the neighbors of the man would be so eager to involve him. The news of the miracle would certainly get back to the Pharisees rapidly for, as John says parenthetically, Jesus performed the miracle on the Sabbath! For Jesus to heal again on the Sabbath was like waving a red flag in the face of a herd of enraged bulls. (For a study of Jesus and controversy, see our Volume I, pages 214-217.)
This seems to have been a formal investigation by the Pharisees, called for the specific purpose of questioning the man and passing judgment upon the miracle and the miracle-worker. It was the duty of the religious leaders to investigate all such incidents. They were charged with investigating the claims and doctrines of all who professed a message from God (Matthew 23:2; John 1:19-24). For an excellent discussion of this matter see Hendriksen’s commentary on this section. It was also the duty and responsibility of the Pharisees to judge righteous judgment. These men, however, had already passed judgment on the miracle-worker, Jesus, before they investigated the miracle. They had already made up their minds that Jesus was a blasphemer. This investigation could only be a mockery of truth.
The beggar answered the first question simply and precisely. It is interesting to note that the beggar used the present tense when he said, I see. Instead of saying, I was made to see, he says, I am seeing. He wants to emphasize for the Pharisees that although they may never know how the miracle took place, they can be sure that it did take place!
The Pharisees, caring not one iota that a man had been delivered from the chains of darkness, are interested only in their sanctimonious Sabbath traditions. The real issue here, however, is not their Sabbath traditions, but finding some straw of an accusation with which to condemn Jesus of Nazareth and sentence Him to death. Others of the Pharisees are less emotional. There stood the beggarformerly blind from birth but now seeing. Their problem was: How can a man that is an open sinner do such great signs? The word used for sinner is hamartolos, used in most places as an intensifier (cf. Luke 7:37; Luke 7:39; Luke 13:2) and means an open sinner or flagrant sinner. Jesus claimed to work miracles greater than any other (cf. John 15:24) and the beggar claims this miracle to be extraordinary (John 9:32). There may have been a division in their thinking here, but it is quickly resolved and in united action they both condemn Jesus and excommunicate the beggar (John 9:28-29; John 9:34).
For the moment, however, the judges cannot agree among themselves. They hope they have frightened the beggar by hauling him before their august court. If he is frightened enough, perhaps he will say exactly what they want him to say about JesusHe is a profaner of the Law. But the beggar is far from frightened. He is indeed a man of courage and conviction. He answers, He is a prophet! The Pharisees had already expressed their judgment of Jesus (Sabbath breaker), but with the bravery of conviction the beggar confessed Jesus to be a prophet. What a contrast! Men who had studied the Law and the Prophets all their lives could not see that Jesus was sent from God, while a man blind from birthunable to have ever studied the Scripturescan readily see that Jesus must be a prophet sent from God. The real contrast is between those who would not see and one who would see; it is a matter of wanting to see! The Pharisees were also wanting the beggar to commit himself to an opinion concerning Jesus that they might use it against him later. If they cannot harm Jesus, they will harm the man He healed. The hate of the Jewish rulers for Jesus was so intense that they would go to any length to express it. Later they would seek to kill the resurrected Lazarus out of their hate for Jesus (cf. John 12:9-11).
Although the Pharisees had the testimony of the man himself and, perhaps, the testimony of those who brought the beggar to them, they refused to accept the fact that the man had been blind and had been miraculously given his sight. That should have been enough evidence. But let’s give them the benefit of the doubt and judge their reaction after more evidence has been presented. The parents of the beggar are called before the investigating committee, In answer to the question as to whether he is their son they answer affirmatively. In answer to the question concerning his congenital blindness, again the answer is, Yes, he was born blind. Now the facts are incontrovertible. That a very notable miracle has been wrought is undeniable. Now if the Pharisees will not believe it is not a matter of insufficient evidence but of willful rejection of the truth!
The parents could have used some of the courage and conviction of their son. They were evidently not telling the truth when they said, … who opened his eyes, we know not. for John 9:22 implies that they did know. But, as Hendriksen points out, before we criticize them too severely we must consider what we would have done in similar circumstances. To be excommunicated for the Jew was even more fearful than modern-day excommunication from the Roman Catholic Church. The excommunicated Jew was literally cut off from all social, religious, economic, or fraternal associations. His family counted him as dead (cf. John 12:42; John 16:2). The excommunicated Jew was to become to his countrymen as a heathen (cf. Matthew 18:17).
The parents, fearing these terrible consequences, determined before facing the Pharisees that they would never confess Jesus as the Messiah. It should also be clear that the Pharisees did not call this investigation to determine the truth. They had already agreed among themselves and made a public declaration that anyone openly confessing Jesus as the Messiah would be excommunicated. This inquiry was made in hopes that they might get some evidence to make what they had already determined to dokill Jesusappear less evil.
There is a very expressive phrase in the Greek rendering of Joh 9:23. The English Therefore of Joh 9:23 is a translation of the Greek, dia touto, which would best be translated Because of this, or For this very reason. There was no doubt in John’s mind that the parents-’ reluctance to confess Jesus as the one who had healed their son was for the very reason that they feared excommunication.
Quiz
Is this investigation by the Pharisees a seeking after the truth? Why?
Why ask the beggar his opinion of Jesus?
Why did the Jews not believe that the beggar had formerly been blind?
After the answers of the parents, what must the Pharisees admit?
What was involved in being put out of the synagogue?
What was the real reason for the refusal of the parents to tell who had healed their son?
John 9:24-34
**THE QUESTIONED BECOMES QUESTIONER
Text 9:24-34
24
So they called a second time the man that was blind, and said unto him, Give glory to God: we know that this man is a sinner.
25
He therefore answered, Whether he is a sinner, I know not: one thing I know, that, whereas I was blind, now I see.
26
They said therefore unto him, What did he to thee? how opened he thine eyes?
27
He answered them, I told you even now, and ye did not hear; wherefore would ye hear it again? would ye also become his disciples?
28
And they reviled him, and said, Thou art his disciple; but we are disciples of Moses.
29
We know that God hath spoken unto Moses: but as for this man, we know not whence he is.
30
The man answered and said unto them, Why, herein is the marvel, that ye know not whence he is, and yet he opened mine eyes.
31
We know that God heareth not sinners: but if any man be a worshipper of God, and do his will, him he heareth.
32
Since the world began it was never heard that anyone opened the eyes of a man born blind.
33
If this man were not from God, he could do nothing.
34
They answered and said unto him, Thou wast altogether born in sins, and dost thou teach us? And they cast him out.
Queries**
a.
What do the Pharisees mean by saying, Give glory to God?
b.
What is meant by, God heareth not sinners?
c.
Why did the Pharisees say the beggar was altogether born in sin?
Paraphrase
So for the second time the Pharisees called the man that had been blind, and adjured him, Give glory to God; we know that this particular man is an open sinner. The beggar replied, Whether he is a sinner or not, I do not know; one thing I do knowI was blind and now I can see! So they said to him, What did he do to you? How did he open your eyes? Deliberately the man answered them, I have told you already and you would not listen; why do you want to hear it again? You do not want to become his disciples, do you? They reviled him vociferously, sneering, You are that one’s disciple; we are the disciples of Moses. We know that God spoke to Moses; as for this fellow we do not know where he has come from. The man replied, Well this is astonishing, that you say you do not know where he comes from and yet he has opened my eyes. We Jews know that God does not hear willful sinners, but if a man is a worshipper of God and seeks to do His will, to such a man God listens. Now, since the world began it was never heard that a man opened the eyes of a man born blind. It follows then that if this man were not from God, he would never be able to do anything like thisThey interrupted vehemently, You were absolutely conceived and begotten in sin; and are you now presuming to teach us? And they cast him out!
Summary
The poor beggar is not awed by the presence of the Pharisees. He is a man with a good and honest heart upon which the truth has fallen and is slowly bringing forth fruit. The beggar is more amazed at the willful blindness of the Pharisees than anything else. By his sincere, innocent and capable logic he becomes the questioner and exposes the stiff-necked unreasonableness of the Pharisees. He is summarily excommunicated for his troubles.
Comment
The adjuration, Give glory to God, could be either the administration of an oath or simply a statement that the man should give Jehovah the glory for His healing rather than Jesus whom they know to be a sinner. The commentators are disagreed. We prefer to think that this tribunal was attempting to intimidate their precocious opponent by the adjuration of an oath. There were many different formulae used to express the judicial oath among the Jews (cf. 1 Samuel 14:39; 1 Samuel 14:44; 1 Samuel 19:6; 1 Samuel 20:3; 1 Samuel 20:23; 2 Samuel 11:11; 2 Samuel 14:19; 2 Samuel 15:21; Matthew 5:34; Matthew 23:16; Matthew 26:63). This particular phrase is used in Joshua 7:19 when Achan was adjured to Give glory to God, and tell the truth as to his guilt. The Pharisees, having been thus far confounded and put on the defensive, bring to bear all the ecclesiastical and judicial authority they possess. They must regain the offensive. This naive and common beggar has, in his sincere adherence to the facts, shown the Pharisees for what they really arebigoted, ambiguous and dishonest. The rulers have already pronounced Jesus an open sinner, yet this beggar dares to call Him a prophet. To protect their proud position and to find an occasion for condemning Jesus to death, they threaten this man with an oath.
The arrogant, we know on the part of the Pharisees is not new. They were certain that they alone possessed knowledge. They were the intelligentsia and all others were ignorant (cf. John 7:14; John 7:45-52). The rebuke of Job to his three friends, No doubt but ye are the people, and wisdom shall die with you, would be fitting for the Pharisees.
But the man was not awedhe would not be intimidated. The beggar had been presented irrefutable evidence that this Jesus was more than a mere man. His evidence is empiricalthe highest type of evidencethat which appeals to the senses of man. Such evidence is so overwhelmingly factual he must stand in opposition to Pharisaic opinion regardless of the consequences. Furthermore, the very nature of the evidence makes only this one thing outweigh all the force of Pharisaic authority and prestige.
Now, having been bested in cross-examination and having their bigotry exposed, the only way they can think of to carry out their nefarious bluff is to repeat their question concerning the how of the alleged miracle. Perhaps they are hoping to trip the beggar into a contradiction in his account.
The beggar’s bravery is exciting to behold! In view of the power residing in this tribunal of Pharisees the man’s courage is challenging. It is no less than amazing that his ironic answer in John 9:27 did not incite the ire of the Pharisees more than it did! Only their all-consuming concentration on killing Jesus saved the beggar from probable bodily harm at this moment. The apostle Paul was later struck in the mouth for alleged impertinence in the same type of situation (Acts 23:2). He has told them over and over again from his own personal experiencethey have heard plainly enough, but refuse to accept the truth which is necessarily implied if they do acknowledge the miracle. The man’s exasperation with these opinionated, self-righteous dogmatists is understandable. What man is able to retain his patience with those who deliberately and continually refuse to admit that which is undeniable.
Maliciously they turn upon the beggar with vile imprecations. The man has humiliated, outwitted and exposed these judges of Israel. He has further completely turned the tables in this investigationthe prosecutors have become the prosecuted! The only recourse imaginable to these Pharisees arises out of the very nature of their heartsto revile the man. They could hardly think of any malediction more vile than to say, You are that one’s disciple! They would not even so much as speak the name of Jesus. He was judged by the rulers and teachers of Israel as a blasphemera servant of Satan. Jesus was also pronounced a hereticadvocating (according to the Jews) destruction of the Law of Moses. The rulers had decided that Jesus must be destroyed (because of envy) and regardless of His truth and righteousness, anyone defending Him was also no better than a heretic.
As for themselves, the Pharisees boasted, we are the disciples of Moses. But Moses would never claim them! For Moses esteemed the reproach of Christ greater riches than the treasures in Egypt. Moses, through what he wrote, condemned these pseudo-disciples. Moses wrote of the great Prophet that was to be raised up from among them (cf. Deuteronomy 18:15-19) and Jesus was that Prophet (cf. John 5:45-47; Luke 24:44; Acts 3:21-24). The warning of John the Baptist three years previous still applies (cf. Matthew 3:9), for God is not only able to raise up from stones children unto Abraham, but unto Moses as well.
Again the presumptuous, we know. Yes, they knew that God had spoken to Moses, but they lacked the essential thingwhat God had really spoken to Moses. But here is the marveljust as the blind man saw itthey knew so much about Moses which they had to accept on the testimony of the written record, yet they would not accept the first-hand testimony of this miracle which witnessed to Jesus! It simply astounded the guileless and straightforward beggar that men would so deliberately blind themselves to truth. This former blind man has a heart of the good and honest type, for to him Jesus-’ origin is evidentHe is from God!
Their esteemed Moses, great as he was, had never performed any such miracle as thisopening the eyes of one congenitally blind. In fact, it had never been heard of in all the annals of history until the beggar’s day and age. None of the prophets had done such a miracle. As Hendriksen points out, the beggar is an excellent logician. His syllogism here is perfect: Major Premise: God hears and answers and works through only those who worship Him and abide in His will and are sent from Him. Minor Premise: This man Jesus performed an unheard of and astounding miraclegreater even than any Moses had wrought. Conclusion: This man Jesus is just as definitely sent from God as was Moses. He cannot possibly be an open and flagrant sinner as the Pharisees accuse Him.
Not only does the beggar use logic to prove his point, but he evidently had in mind many of the Scriptures which the Pharisees should have remembered concerning God’s relationship to the wicked. God does not hear nor answer the prayers of the willfull and blatant sinner John 15:29; Isaiah 1:15; Isaiah 59:2; Jeremiah 11:11; Jeremiah 14:12; Ezekiel 8:18; Micah 3:4; (cf. 1 Samuel 8:18; Job 27:9; Job 35:12; Psalms 18:41; Psalms 66:18; Proverbs 1:28, Zechariah 7:13; John 8:21; Acts 10:35).
This verse (John 9:31) has been abused. Some have taken it from its context and used it as a proof-text to declare that any person not affiliated with the Christian church cannot expect to have their prayers heard by God. It is very plain from Acts 10:35 that God hears the sincere and honest prayers of those who have not yet been obedient to that form of doctrine. In fact, in Cornelius-’ case, God heard the prayer of one who had not yet even heard of the gospel of Christ! This, of course, may even be true of men and women today who have not yet heard the gospel, but are earnestly praying and seeking God’s willGod may hear and answer their prayers.
On the other hand, God will not listen nor will He answer the prayers of men and women who regard iniquity in their heart. Wilfull sinnerspersistent disobeyerswill not be heard, regardless of their outward affiliations with whatever religious group to which they may belong (cf. all the Major and Minor Prophets). To be heard of God we must hear Himto receive of His bounty, we must be obedient and full of faith.
Note the beggar’s growing faith and knowledge of Jesus. First, the man that is called Jesus. (John 9:11); next, he is a prophet. (John 9:17); next, … from God. (John 9:33); and last, … Lord, I believe. (John 9:38).
Here is a miracle that is a miracle indeedand the Pharisees cannot deny the veracity of its accomplishment. They themselves can readily see that the man has his sight. Both the neighbors and the man’s parents testified under fear of banishment that the man had been born blind. The man himself testified under oath that Jesus of Nazareth had performed a miracle. The Pharisees could not disprove it. The only way they could think to maintain their self-begotten prestige was to attack the character of the beggar and to excommunicate him from the synagogue. They inferred what Jesus had denied (cf. John 9:2)that the beggar’s blindness was an indication of his and his parents-’ wanton sinfulness. How dare he presume to teach the scholars of the Scriptures anything! This is normal procedure for the rulers of the Jewsif they cannot disprove the miracles attesting to Christ’s message, they will threaten the messengers or do them bodily harm (cf. Acts 4:16-21).
Quiz
What two reasons are given for the Pharisees saying, Give glory to God?
What is the highest type of evidence to attest to a fact?
Why is the beggar’s bravery so exciting?
Why was their boast to be the disciples of Moses absurd?
Why did the beggar marvel?
What two ways did the beggar prove Jesus to be from God?
Does God ever hear the prayers of non-Christians? How do you know?
John 9:35-41
**BLINDNESS INDEED!
Text 9:35-41
35
Jesus heard that they had cast him out; and finding him, he said, Dost thou believe on the Son of God?
36
He answered and said, And who is he, Lord, that I may believe on him?
37
Jesus said unto him, Thou hast both seen him, and he it is that speaketh with thee.
38
And he said, Lord, I believe. And he worshipped him.
39
And Jesus said, For judgment came I into this world, that they that see not may see; and that they that see may become blind.
40
Those of the Pharisees who were with him heard these things, and said unto him, Are we also blind?
41
Jesus said unto them, If ye were blind, ye would have no sin: but now ye say, We see: your sin remaineth.
Queries**
a.
How did the beggar worship Jesus?
b.
Why would Jesus come to make some blind?
c.
How would being blind help the Pharisees to be without sin?
Paraphrase
Jesus heard that the rulers had cast the beggar out and had excommunicated him; so Jesus went searching for the man and, having found him, said to him, Do you believe in the Son of manthe Messiah? The beggar answered, saying, Who is he, Sir, Tell me in order that I may believe in him? Jesus answered and said, You have seen Him, in fact, He is talking to you right now. The beggar cried, Lord, I believe! and he fell down before Jesus and worshipped Him. And Jesus said, I came into this world and my coming has necessarily brought judgment, for my doctrine brings spiritual sight to those who recognize their spiritual blindness and my teaching, by its very nature, blinds those who are certain they have all spiritual sight. Some of the Pharisees who were near, hearing what He said, replied, We are not blind also, are we? Jesus answered them, If you would admit your spiritual blindness and believe on Me you would have your sins forgiven, but you are persisting in trusting your own self-righteousness when you say we seewe know, therefore your sin remains unforgiven and you remain blind.
Summary
Jesus finds the beggar who has been cut off from the Israel that is passing away and makes him a member of the new Israel that is coming. He gives the man who has already exhibited a spark of faith an opportunity to come to full faith in Him as the Messiah. The man, because of his faith, receives a great blessing. The Pharisees, because of their unbelief, become even more hardened.
Comment
The Greek word heurisko (find) may mean to find, with previous search. This is the word used of Jesus-’ finding the beggar after he was cast out. The Good Shepherd does not find his precious lambs by accidentHe searches for them until He does find them and takes them under His loving protection. Jesus intends to offer the beggar that which is far superior to what he has lost in being excommunicated. He is being offered the opportunity to believe in the One in whom all the law and the prophets is fulfilled!
The American Standard Version has translated the latter half of Joh 9:35: … the Son of God? while the Nestle Greek text has … ton huion tou anthropou (the Son of man). The most ancient manuscripts (Sinaiticus, Vaticanus and Bezae) have the Son of man. The latest great Codex on John, Bodmer II (P66), confirms the reading, the Son of man and the Revised Standard Version has this reading also.
The term Son of man is used by Jesus (exclusively by Him) in the Gospels at least eighty timesthirteen of which are found in the Fourth Gospel (cf. John 1:51, John 3:13, John 3:14, John 5:27, John 6:27, John 6:53, John 6:62, John 8:28, John 9:35, John 12:23, John 12:34 (twice), John 13:31). It was clearly a Messianic term and the people understood it as such (cf. John 12:34). The prophet Daniel foretold of the Messiah, using the term son of man, and Revelation 1:13; Revelation 14:14 use the same term. Therefore, when the beggar heard the term Son of man, he anticipated beholding the Messiah of Israel.
We can almost hear the eagerness in the man’s reply. Just tell me who he is, sir, in order that I may believe on him. We have translated the word kurie (Lord) in John 9:36 to read sir. The word kurie may be translated either sir or lord and is so translated (cf. John 4:11; John 4:15; John 4:19; John 4:49; John 5:7; John 12:21; John 20:15, where it has been translated in both the KJV and the ASV as sir. The beggar has not yet had it revealed to him just who Jesus is, but in John 9:38 he knows Jesus as the Messiah and the same word, kurie, may be translated Lord.
Only a very few times did the Lord reveal Himself so plainly as the Messiah. Most of the time He allowed the people to form their own conclusions and make their own statements as to His Messiahship. One other time that we recall, He said, I that speak unto thee am he. (John 4:26).
The Greek word aphiemi used for the word said in John 9:38 is the same word used of Jesus when He uttered a loud voice (Mark 15:37) upon the cross. The word, according to Vine’s Expository Dictionary is used of uttering a cry. How the man must have been startled to find that he stood in the presence of and had been healed by the very Messiah for whom the Jews had waited century upon century. The man uttered a cry, Lord, I believe. and probably fell upon his knees before Jesus as he worshipped Him. Notice, Jesus never refused the worship of men as did the apostles (Acts 10:26; Acts 14:15), for Jesus deserved man’s adoration! According to Vine’s Expository Dictionary, page 235, The Note to John 9:38 in the American Standard Version in this connection is most unsound; it implies that Christ was a creature. While the word proskuneo (used here for the beggar’s worship toward Jesus) may also be used when one man does reverence or obeisance toward another man, it is most unsound to imply, as does the footnote in the ASV, that Jesus is a creature.
In John 9:39 Jesus makes a claim that, at first glance, seems contradictory of Joh 3:17; John 12:47 where He claims that He did not come to judge. However, after careful study, they are found to complement one another rather than contradict (see our comments on John 3:17, Vol. I, pages 112-113). He came to convict men of their sins and to proclaim the one way of salvation. His coming resulted in two reactions by mensome refused to come to the light lest their works be shown for what they really are; others gladly came to the light (cf. our comments on John 3:19-20, Vol. I, pages 114-115). He came to declare the truth and man’s reaction one way or another results in man’s being judgedworthy or unworthy. The prophet Isaiah was commissioned to go and preach to Judah purposely to dull the understanding of those who would not understand, to close the ears of those who would not hear, and to close the eyes of those who would not see (cf. Isaiah 6:9-10). Jesus quoted this same passage to explain that He taught in parables to bring about judgment upon those who refused to understand Him (cf. Matthew 13:10-15). And so the man who deliberately rejects or disobeys the doctrines of Christ necessarily judges himself. Christ’s teachings, by their very nature of demanding faith and obedience and by their absolute finality, cannot be rejected without judgment. No man, once confronted with the Gospel of Christ, can remain neutral. Jesus demands a choiceeither for or against Him (cf. Matthew 12:30).
Some of the Pharisees who were standing near, began to get the message. They knew from their past experiences with Jesus at the Feast of Tabernacles that He must be talking of them and their blindness.
Jesus furnished the Pharisees and all the world for all ages a truism which needs to be remembered. No man is so blind as one who will not see! If the Pharisees had realized their blindness and had been pure in heart they would have sought the Light which would have led them to Jesus, the true Light, which lighteth every man (cf. John 1:9). The man who knows his own ignorance and blindness, but who desires to know more, is the man whose vision can be increased and his knowledge enlarged. But the Pharisees boasted of their visionwe know, again and again. They did not seek the Light for they did not think they needed the Lightthey already possessed all the Light there was. Therefore, because they would not recognize their own spiritual destitution, they rejected the only source of grace and forgiveness. What a lesson this is for all of us today! May we never arrive at the place where we reject God’s Word in favor of our own opinion or knowledge. Let us never be so presumptuous as to think that we, as a group or as individuals, can never be taught from God’s Word because we know it all.
Quiz
Did Jesus find the beggar by accident? Explain.
What did Jesus call Himself in John 9:35? What did the title imply?
Does John 9:39 contradict John 3:17? Explain.
In what way were the Pharisees remaining in their sins?