John Chapter 9

The Gospel Of John Chapter 9

I. Outline: Blind Man Healed: 9:1-12 II. Investigated By The Authorities: 9:13-23 III. The Questioned One becomes Questioner: 9:24-34 IV. True Blindness: 9:35-41 I.

II. Introductory Comments: ‘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 verses 24-34. In these verses the former blind man by common-sense reasoning makes the learned Pharisees look ridiculous.’ (Butler p. 79)

III. Commentary: John 9:1 ‘And as He passed by, He saw a man blind from birth.’ ’And as He passed by’-It appears that Jesus healed this man shortly after leaving the temple area (8:59). The events of chapters 7-8 happen during and around the feast of booths (7:2), which happened in late September/October. The events in chapter 10 take place during the Feast of Dedication, which took place in December. At that feast, the people present are still very mindful concerning the miracle that happens in this chapter (10:21-22).

‘a man blind from birth’-Definitely a hard case, and a well-known individual (9:8-9).

‘The unique fact that never before this miracle had a man born blind been made to see (v.

1

32), sets apart this sign as another significant proof that Jesus Christ is the Son of God (20:30-31).’ (Harkrider p. 68)

John 9:2 ‘And His disciples asked Him, saying, “Rabbi, who sinned, this man or his parents, that he should be born blind?”’

Points To Note: 1.

The Jewish rabbis had taught that every physical affliction was the result of some specific sin, especially in the life of the afflicted. But the disciples were puzzled at this case, for the man had been born blind. ‘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 birth.’ (Butler p. 82) And various rabbis did teach that infants still in the womb were able to commit sin.

According to their interpretation of Genesis 25:22-26, Esau had tried to kill Jacob while still in the womb. Barclay notes that the idea of the pre-existence of souls which later was taught by some Jewish rabbis, had been borrowed from Plato and the Greeks, who believed that the soul became contaminated when it entered the physical body. 2. But if this man was being punished for the sin or sins of his parents, they were still puzzled. Because he was suffering more than his parents—even though they were the ones who had supposedly sinned. ‘Yet the Rabbis held such things to be possible. There are sayings which speak of children as being born epileptic or leprous on account of the sins of their parents…The untimely death of a scholar can be ascribed to his mother’s dalliance with idolatry while pregnant with him.’ (Morris p.

478) 3. While it is true that often man brings suffering upon himself due to his own sins (Romans 1:27). Also it is true that our sins can bring physical consequences upon our children (children pay a price for having an alcoholic parent and so on). And, in the final analysis, all physical suffering can be traced back to the fact that man fell from a state of purity (Genesis 3:17-19). 4. But what isn’t true, is that every bad thing that happens in my life, is a direct result of something bad which I have done (Luke 13:25).

John 9:3 ‘Jesus answered, “It was neither that this man sinned, nor his parents; but it was in order that the works of God might be displayed in him.”’

Points To Note: 1.

‘He corrects the general idea of the disciples to this extent that they must not consider every serious affliction the penalty for some equally marked and serious sin.’

(Lenski p. 676) 2. Carefully note that Jesus doesn’t apologize for God allowing the man to be born blind. 3. Jesus is not saying that the man or his parents were sinless. But rather, his blindness wasn’t caused by his or his parents sin. 4.

2

Carefully note that Jesus didn’t view suffering as an argument against God’s existence or His kindness. Man doesn’t have any right to complain about the hardships of life. It’s not that God isn’t kind, rather, it is that mankind often refuses to do the right thing. We often suffer, not because God is powerless, but because others are making selfish choices.

‘but it was in order that the works of God might be displayed in him’-‘to show what God could do in his case’ (Wms). ‘The blindness of the man would thus afford an opportunity for God to bring to him, and to all who witnessed the results of the miracle, the privilege and blessing of salvation.’ (Woods p. 184) Carefully note, that even the worst possible type of affliction can be used to promote God’s glory (Psalm 119:71; Romans 5:3-5). ‘It is perhaps worth noticing the significance of the use of the term “works”. What was to happen is to man a miracle, but to God no more than a normal “work”.’ (Morris pp. 478-479) Point To Note: Tenney notes, that the statement ‘in order’ may either indicate purpose or result. The phrase, ‘in order that the works of God might be displayed in him’, “may be regarded as expressing an opportunity rather than a destiny…Westcott sums it up concisely by saying, ‘His suffering is the occasion and not the appointed preparation for the miracle.’” (pp.

155-156) Thus this man wasn’t destined to be born blind, rather, His blindness could be used as an opportunity to glorify God.

John 9:4 “We must work the works of Him who sent Me, as long as it is day; night is coming, when no man can work.”

“We”-KJV reads “I”. In the life of Jesus, the ‘night’ that was coming was His own death and the close of His ministry. In reference to the apostles, the ‘day’ would be their life upon this earth, and the ‘night’ would be their departure from this life.

“must”-‘ “must” reminds us that this is not simply what is advisable or expedient.’

(Morris p. 479)

“when no man can work”-We need to have a sense of urgency about doing God’s will, because death ends all opportunities to change things upon this earth (Ecc. 9:5-10).

Now is the time to fight the good fight (2 Tim. 4:6-8). Jesus believed in doing the things of God, of ‘working’ (1 Cor. 15:58), and that our time, the time of every believer is limited for doing such works. ‘To Jesus a look in his direction presented a challenge, an opportunity for work. They reasoned: “How did he get that way?” He answered: “What can we do for him?”’ (Hendriksen p. 73)

John 9:5 “While I am in the world, I am the light of the world.”

3

‘I am the world’s light as long as I am in it’ (Phi). While Jesus will always be the light of the world (8:12), the sense seems to be that while Jesus is physically present here, He is going to do everything He can to bring light to those in darkness, including healing this man.

John 9:6 ‘When He had said this, He spat on the ground, and made clay of the spittle, and applied the clay to his eyes,’ Points To Note: 1.

While Jesus used this method on this man, at other times He didn’t use either clay or spittle (Mark 8:23). 2. It is clear that there were no inherent healing properties in the clay or spittle, as there were no inherent healing properties in the water found in the pool of Siloam. 3. Hendriksen notes, ‘the mud had nothing whatever to do with the physical cure; it had no medicinal qualities, not any more than did the waters of Jordan into which Elisha had Naaman to plunge himself seven times (2 Kings 5:10) in order to be healed of his leprosy. In both cases the command was a test of obedience.’ (p. 75) 4. This personal contact with the beggar, made the beggar realize that Jesus was the person who was healing Him. 5. We must reject the opinion that Jesus believed in the curative powers of human salvia. ‘Jesus performed His miracles with sovereign hand and He cannot be limited by rules of procedure. He cured how He willed.’ (Morris p. 480) 6. Obviously, Jesus was testing this man’s faith. And the clay and the spittle were useful because they made it necessary for the man to go and wash.

John 9:7 ‘and said to him, “Go, wash in the pool of Siloam” (which is translated, Sent). And so he went away and washed, and came back seeing.’ “pool of Siloam”-‘With what trembling excitement he must have searched out the familiar landmarks and made his way to the pool.’ (Foster p. 825) ‘It is not a valid objection to the truth of the narrative to raise the question of how the man still blind could have found his way to the pool…he was accustomed to making his way without assistance about the city and with this well-known landmark he was quite familiar.’ (Woods p. 186) The pool of Siloam was just inside the southeast portion of the city wall and quite a distance from the temple---‘there were probably facilities much handier where the man might wash…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 (2 Chron. 32:2-8,30; Isaiah 22:9-11; 2 Kings 20:20). The engineers began their cutting from both ends and meet in the middle and tunneled through solid rock with the very inadequate equipment of that day for a distance of 583 yards..’ (Butler pp. 84-85) 4

‘which is translated, Sent’-because the water in the pool had been ‘sent’ through the tunnel into the city. ‘The pool received its name ‘Sent’ from the fact that it was not a natural spring, but water was conveyed to it artificially.’ (Tasker p. 127) Point To Note: We have already encountered two large pools of water within the city of Jerusalem in this Gospel (John 5:2). Keep these facts in mind when people argue that there wasn’t enough water in Jerusalem to immerse 3000 people on the day of Pentecost (Acts 2:38,41).

‘so he went away and washed’-‘In spite of the strange character of the command, the man does not copy the example of Naaman. He does not protest, but he immediately obeys.’ (Hendriksen p. 76) Note that Jesus doesn’t lead him to the pool, and neither does Jesus make a big ceremony out of all of this. This man must do this on his own. In like manner, Jesus has commanded us to be baptized to be saved (Mark 16:16), He has given us the remedy and instruction for our salvation. But He isn’t going to lead us by the hand to the water.

John 9:8 ‘The neighbors therefore, and those who previously saw him as a beggar, were saying, “Is not this the one who used to sit and beg?”’

‘The neighbors’-These individuals were well-acquainted with the blind man, this man was a well-known blind man. Here we learn that this man had supported himself by begging. ‘There was little that a blind man could do in the ancient world apart from begging’ (Morris p. 482)

John 9:9 ‘Others were saying, “This is he,” still others were saying, “No, but he is like him.” He kept saying, “I am the one.”’

“No, but he is like him”-‘His old friends and neighbors could scarcely recognize him.

His appearance had changed as the shrunk, sightless eye sockets were replaced with shining eyes that transformed his face with radiant joy.’ (Foster p. 825) The miraculous was just as incredible to these people as it would be among us. Some in the crowd just couldn’t believe that this was the same man. ‘Things like this can’t happen’ was their attitude. The former blind man kept repeating, ‘I am he! It’s really me!’

John 9:10 ‘Therefore they were saying to him, “How then were your eyes opened?”’

Obviously he finally conceived most of them that he was indeed that former blind beggar.

It is natural that their next question would be, ‘How did this happen!’

5

John 9:11 ‘He answered, “The man who is called Jesus made clay, and anointed my eyes, and said to me, ‘Go to Siloam, and wash’; so I went away and washed, and I received sight.”’

“The man who is called Jesus”-This man knew the name of the person who had healed Him. But as yet, he doesn’t really know the true nature of Jesus (9:35-37).

Nothing is said about this man having faith in Jesus as the Son of God. ‘We see that Jesus was a stranger to the beggar, who had heard only his benefactor’s name.’ (Lenski p. 684)

“I went away and washed, and I received sight”-what simplicity! ‘Nothing could be more concise and less flamboyant.’ (Morris p. 481) True miracles are just that simple.

John 9:12 ‘And they said to him, “Where is He? He said, “I do not know.”’

Once again, as in John chapter 5, Jesus will force this man to stand on his own two feet.

‘That the man should have been left alone to face the furious controversy with the famous scholars of the nation resulted from Jesus’ sudden disappearance. It offered further testing of his faith.’ (Foster p. 825) Since this man had been blind when Jesus initially encountered him, he couldn’t even recognize Jesus by sight.

Questioned By The Pharisees

John 9:13 ‘They brought to the Pharisees him who was formerly blind.’

‘They brought’-The neighbors and others mentioned previously brought this man to the Pharisees. Their motive for doing this is unknown. ‘If they were favorable to Jesus, then they would be seeking to force the unbelieving hierarchy to face this new sensational evidence. If they were subservient to the Pharisees, they were trying to help them suppress the extraordinary testimony which the man was openly presenting…The miracle was about to undergo the most severe investigation possible. This was for those present and for all ages.’ (Foster p. 825) Again, God is trying to save the Pharisees. Jesus wants them to be confronted with the clearest possible proof.

John 9:14 ‘Now it was a Sabbath on the day when Jesus made the clay, and opened his eyes.’

‘Now it was a Sabbath’-The Jews felt that Jesus was sinning by healing people on the Sabbath, this is a controversy that continually arose between the rulers and Jesus (Matthew 12:10-14). ‘For Jesus to heal again on the Sabbath was like waving a red flag in the face of a herd of enraged bulls.’ (Butler p. 87) Barclay notes that according to their traditions, healing was forbidden on the Sabbath, unless life was in actual danger. It was actually forbidden (according to their human traditions) to set a broken limb on the 6

Sabbath. They were also probably upset that Jesus had ‘made clay’ on the Sabbath (see Matthew 12:1ff).

John 9:15 ‘Again, therefore, the Pharisees also were asking him how he received his sight. And he said to them, “He applied clay to my eyes, and I washed, and I see.”’

‘Again…’-Like his neighbors, the Pharisees want to hear the whole story. ‘The Pharisees question the man. The verb denotes a continuing process, and not simply an invitation to rehearse the matter. They were evidently persistent.’ (Morris p. 484)

John 9:16 ‘Therefore some of the Pharisees were saying, “This man is not from God, because He does not keep the Sabbath.” But others were saying, “How can a man who is a sinner perform such signs?” And there was a division among them.’ “because He does not keep the Sabbath”-On the surface this looks like good reasoning, until one realizes that their interpretation of what constituted ‘work’ on the Sabbath day was faulty. Misinterpretation can cause you to miss Jesus! It can cost you your soul.

“How can a man who is a sinner perform such signs?”-Besides Nicodemus there existed others among the Pharisees who had honest hearts. Their logic was clear, ‘God wouldn’t be working through a sinner or One who violated the Law of God.’ Certainly God wouldn’t be assisting someone who was a false teacher. ‘The group speaking tentatively in favor of Jesus must have been a small one. We do not hear of them again after this verse, and throughout the rest of the chapter the narrative proceeds as though the other group were the only one to be considered.’ (Morris p. 485)

John 9:17 ‘They said therefore to the blind man again, “What do you say about Him, since He opened your eyes?” And he said, “He is a prophet.”’

“What do you say”-It seems that the unbelieving Pharisees are grasping for anything by which they could somehow discredit Jesus or deny this miracle. ‘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 Jesus—“He is a profaner of the Law”.’

(Butler p. 88)

“He is a prophet”-What a contrast! A man blind from birth, one who had never officially studied the Scriptures, could see clearly what the professional experts in the Law did not want to see. An honest heart is more important than all the professional learning that one could receive in the Scriptures. This former blind man demonstrates tremendous 7

courage and conviction. With very little contact with Jesus, and faced with all these religious ‘experts’, he gives an answer which he knew that they wouldn’t like. ‘He might have hidden his conviction by saying, “I do not know”. He is honest and confesses. That Jesus must be classed as a prophet of God was beyond question to him.’ (Lenski p. 689)

John 9:18 ‘The Jews therefore did not believe it of him, that he had been blind, and had received sight, until they called the parents of the very one who had received his sight.’ ‘did not believe it of him’-being desperate men, they try to deny the miracle. Be impressed that unbelief is completely illogical. ‘Perhaps they thought that the real blind man had been kidnapped and that his “double”…had been substituted for him..or, they may have concluded that the well-known blind-man had been fooling everybody by acting as if he were blind.’ (Hendriksen p. 85)

John 9:19 ‘and questioned them, saying, “Is this your son, who you say was born blind? Then how does he now see?”’

“Is this your son”-The Pharisees questioned every detail surrounding this miracle, including, whether this man had really been born blind. And Jesus allows them to do this.

This benefits believers in all ages, because the works of Jesus were thoroughly tested by people who didn’t like Jesus, and such works passed the test.

John 9:20 ‘His parents answered them and said, “We know that this is our son, and that he was born blind.”’

John 9:21 “but how he now sees, we do not know; or who opened his eyes, we do not know. Ask him; he is of age, he shall speak for himself.”

John 9:22 ‘His parents said this because they were afraid of the Jews; for the Jews had already agreed, that if anyone should confess Him to be Christ, he should be put out of the synagogue.’ ‘he should be put out of the synagogue’-‘The Pharisees were numerous and powerful enough to carry out their threat…Grave civil and social disabilities were as a matter of course connected with the ban’ (Lenski p. 691) ‘This excommunication would prevent a Jew from enjoying any of the privileges of worship in the temple or a synagogue.

Presumably the temple guard would forcibly eject such a person from the temple courts, and the local rabbi would be instructed to forbid entrance to the synagogue.’ (Foster p.

827) The parents answer ‘yes’ to the questions concerning whether this was their son and had he been born blind. But the third question, the cause of his cure, they shifted responsibility to their son. ‘The parents were evidently of a very different temper from that of their sturdy minded son. Their reply is characterized by timidity and a complete readiness to submit to the authority of their questioners…All this emphasis shows their determination not to get mixed up in the affair any more than they can help.’ (Morris p.

487) Later in Judaism we find a minor ban from the synagogue (for 30, 60 or 90 days)

8

and a major ban (for all time). It appears in this account that this ban from the synagogue was final (see also John 12:42; 16:2) ‘From every point of view—social, economic, religious—the results were frightening, and this especially for people who were so poor that their son had to make his living by begging!’ (Hendriksen pp. 86-87) See also Luke 6:22.

John 9:23 ‘For this reason his parents said, “He is of age; ask him.”

This is why God is so opposed to the ‘fearful’ (Revelation 21:8). The parents attitude was, ‘We would rather have our son in trouble, that being in trouble ourselves.’ One would think that after a lifetime of blindness, these parents would have been so grateful to God for this healing, and would have supported their son and what he claimed to the end.

These parents represent so many people, they won’t commit outright immorality, but at the same time, they won’t take a stand for the truth either. ‘It is certainly not to the credit of these parents that they were more willing to subject their son to the possibility of being expelled from the synagogue than themselves.’ (Woods p. 193)

John 9:24 ‘So a second time they called the man who had been blind, and said to him, “Give glory to God; we know that this man is a sinner.”’

“Give glory to God”-‘Speak the truth before God’ (NEB). Notice how they try to intimidate this man. ‘Give glory to God’, may be in the spirit of Joshua7:19, as an exhortation to tell the truth and confess one’s misdeeds. ‘If this is the way of it the man is being told that he has not been completely frank up till now. He has held back something which would show Jesus to be a sinner.’ (Morris p. 490) Some feel that the expression means, ‘Give God the credit for the healing’, not Jesus.

“we know that this man is a sinner”-Wow! God came to this earth and the religious experts of the time labeled Him a sinner! And yet this will not be the last time that religious authorities are completely wrong, about all sorts of things. ‘We’ is emphatic, ‘we the religious experts’. Notice their arrogance, ‘we know’ and you ought to follow our lead. (see John 7:14; 45-52). ‘They imply that they have sounded this thing thoroughly, that besides the man’s testimony they had heard that of others, and the only correct conclusion of the whole case is what they now state. They count on their superior authority to effect submission on the part of the beggar.’ (Lenski p. 692)

John 9:25 ‘He therefore answered, “Whether He is a sinner, I do not know; one thing I do know, that, whereas I was blind, now I see.” “one thing I do know”-Notice the courage of this blind man and also consider his simple logic. He isn’t impressed with what the Pharisees say they ‘know’, rather, he is impressed with the facts. He will not gullibly accept what some ‘expert’ says, just because they have been termed an expert by other men. ‘The man has a sturdy independence as

9

his answer shows…No fine-spun web of airy theory can budge a man who is able to say with conviction “one thing I know”. The man had sight. No mere words could alter that.’

(Morris p. 491)

John 9:26 ‘They said therefore to him, “What did He do to you? How did He open your eyes?”’

“How did He open your eyes?”-Having failed to break down this man’s testimony, their only hope is to have the beggar explain the situation again, in the hope that they can catch him in some contradiction. As Lenski notes, ‘this beggar is a steady disappointment and a growing surprise to the Pharisees.’ (p. 692) They are at this point merely stalling.

John 9:27 ‘He answered them, “I told you already, and you did not listen; why do you want to hear it again? You do not want to become His disciples too, do you?”’

“I told you already”-This man sees through their tactics. ‘Great scholars were they, but they could not understand or recall even the most vivid narration of an event enacted in their midst.’ (Foster p. 828)

“You do not want to become His disciples too, do you?”-‘is it your desire to become his disciples’ (Bas). Was this said sincerely, or is there a touch of testiness and sarcasm in the voice of the former blind man?

John 9:28 ‘And they reviled him, and said, “You are His disciple, but we are disciples of Moses.”’ ‘they reviled him’-‘They became abusive’ (Rieu). ‘probably indicates a chorus of jeers and insults.’ (Foster p. 828) ‘You are His disciple’-they felt they had proved this much.

John 9:29 “We know that God has spoken to Moses; but as for this man, we do not know where He is from.”

“We know”-‘The ground of their faith that Moses was a prophet speaking for God was the same sort of evidence they now rejected from Jesus—the miracles that were wrought.’

(Foster p. 828) In fact, Jesus was doing things which Moses had never done.

“we do not know where He is from”-Like many people today, the Pharisees hide behind a wall of willful ignorance. The attitude is, ‘We don’t know, therefore we are not accountable.’

John 9:30 ‘The man answered and said to them, “Well, here is an amazing thing, that you do not know where He is from, and yet He opened my eyes.”’

“Well, here is an amazing thing”-The blind man is increasing in courage. His lifetime of blindness had not blinded his mind! This man, a man who had never been

10

formally educated, was giving the Pharisees all they could handle. The blind man cannot remain quiet, he must expose their hypocrisy.

“and yet He opened my eyes”-‘saying this was truly a remarkable thing that the great scholars of the nation could not determine whence Jesus was, while they had before them indubitable evidence of this astounding miracle Jesus had just worked.’ (Foster p.

828) His attitude was, ‘You of all people should know that if a man works a miracle that it is a clear indication that God is with Him’ (John 3:2; Acts 2:22). ‘How can you, who claim to know so much, be ignorant of a man who is doing such great things?’

John 9:31 “We know that God does not hear sinners; but if anyone is Godfearing, and does His will, He hears him.”

“We know”-What boldness! This man who only hours previously had been a street beggar is now giving a sermon to the religious authorities. He deliberately uses their own words ‘We know’. But this time, he is saying, ‘We really do know the following for sure’, ‘this is what we know from the Word of God’.

“God does not hear sinners”-That is, God does not hear those who are persisting in sin (Isaiah 1:15; 59:2; Psalm 66:18; Proverbs 1:28; 15:29; 28:9). Let it be noted that God does hear the prayers of the sinner who is trying to find God (Acts 10:1ff, 31), and God will see to it that such a person is given the opportunity to hear the truth (Acts 10:33-35; 11:14). ‘A man whose life and conduct are in opposition to God is not heard even if he asks divine help for some work.’ (Lenski p. 698)

“if anyone is God-fearing, and does His will, He hears him”-Acts 10:34-35.

Note: This man had been blind all his life, but he hadn’t been deaf! He had intently listened whenever the Scriptures had been read within reach of his ears. This truth had been taught in the Scriptures and he had heard it (Psalm 34:15; Proverbs 15:29).

John 9:32 “Since the beginning of time it has never been heard that anyone opened the eyes of a person born blind.” “it has never been heard”-This miracle was without parallel in the Old Testament, neither Moses or the Prophets had ever healed a man born blind.

John 9:33 “If this man were not from God, He could do nothing.”

“He could do nothing”-Nicodemus had reached the same conclusion (John 3:1ff).

Honest men and women, from completely different backgrounds, with a totally different educational upbringing, can see the truth alike.

11

John 9:34 ‘They answered and said to him, “You were born entirely in sins, and are you teaching us?” And they put him out.’

“You were born entirely in sins”-‘Unable to reply to such scorching, logical denunciation from this unlettered man, they cast him out.’ (Foster p. 828) Ridicule the messenger is a favorite tactic when people can’t argue against the truth being presented.

They completely ignored everything he said, because they believed that his blindness was due to his or his parents sins. ‘God struck you blind because you were born in sins—why should we listen to anything that you could possibly say.’

‘And they put him out’-Merely out of their presence, or did they actually have him expelled from the synagogue? Were formal excommunication proceedings taken against him?

Jesus And The Blind Man

John 9:35 ‘Jesus heard that they had put him out; and finding him, He said, “Do you believe in the Son of Man?”’ “Do you believe in the Son of Man?”-While the Pharisees abused and ridiculed this man, God had to be pleased with this man’s courage, honesty and willingness to believe the obvious, in spite of opposition and peer pressure. The KJV here has ‘Son of God’ instead of Son of Man. Ancient manuscripts vary between both renderings. In either case, both terms apply to Jesus and in both cases having faith that Jesus is the Messiah is under consideration. The term ‘Son of Man’ was common term for the Messiah (Daniel 7:13) The blind man had earlier testified that he believed Jesus was a prophet (9:17). Jesus now helps this man come to the full knowledge of the truth.

“Do you believe”-Even when so many “important” and “learned” people are not believing? The same question confronts everyone of us. In spite of all the unbelief that surrounds us, do we believe? I think Lenski is right when he notes, ‘It is taken for granted that the beggar knows that he is now looking with his eyes upon the man who had miraculously opened those eyes.’ (p. 701)

John 9:36 ‘He answered and said, “And who is He, Lord, that I may believe in Him?” “who is He…that I may believe in Him?”-The man understood what Jesus was saying. Notice this man’s faith. He is ready to place trust in whoever Jesus will point to.

He just wants to believe in the Messiah, he has no preconceived ideas, he is ready to believe and believe whoever or whatever is necessary! Note the word ‘may’. Faith is a 12

privilege it isn’t a burden. ‘Although his knowledge of Jesus was limited, this beggar already trusts Jesus to such an extent, that he is at once ready to trust whomever he may point out as the Son of God.’ (Lenski p. 703)

John 9:37 ‘Jesus said to him, “You have both seen Him, and He is the one who is talking with you.”

‘This passage plainly refutes the contention made by Muslims that Jesus never claimed to be the Son of God.’ (Harkrider p. 71)

John 9:38 ‘And he said, “Lord, I believe.” And he worshiped Him.’ “Lord, I believe”-Notice what he didn’t say, ‘Lord, let me think about it.’ “he worshiped Him”-Jesus never refused the worship from men as did His apostles, who were mere men (Acts 10:26; 14:15). Since Jesus clearly taught that only God is to be worshiped (Matthew 4:10), and yet He accepted worship on many occasions (Matthew 8:2), it is clear that He was claiming to be God.

John 9:39 ‘And Jesus said, “For judgment I came into this world, that those who do not see may see; and that those who see may become blind.”’

“For judgment I came…”-The coming of Jesus into this world would naturally make a division among mankind (Matthew 10:34). Please note that presence of Jesus in this world has consequences which cannot be avoided. To those who are honest, like the former blind man, a knowledge of the truth is obtained, spiritual vision and understanding.

To those like the Pharisees, whatever truth they had is lost, misused or misapplied. None can avoid the judgment in the above verse. Those who accept Jesus will grow in spiritual understanding. Those who reject Him, will regress into further darkness. Let it be noted that a person cannot have spiritual understanding if they reject Jesus as the Son of God and spurn His teachings.

John 9:40 ‘Those of the Pharisees who were with Him heard these things, and said to Him, “We are not blind too, are we?”’

‘Those of the Pharisees who were with Him’-Some of the Pharisees were keeping an eye on Jesus and thus eves dropping on what He was saying. Let it be noted that some of these Pharisees could have included those who were sympathetic to Jesus (John 12:42-43). Jesus’ point to them would be, ‘Unless you confess me—you are blind’.

‘Being sympathetic to my cause, being a secret admirer, is a waste of time.’

13

John 9:41 ‘Jesus said to them, “If you were blind, you would have no sin; but since you say, ‘We see’, your sin remains.”’

Points To Note: 1. Their pride had caused them to say, ‘We see’, that is, we have no need for forgiveness.

If the Pharisees would have been honest, they would have realized their own shortcomings, and would have come to Jesus for help. They would have accepted His rebukes and not resented them. 2. Pity the person who thinks that they know it all and who resents the idea that they need anyone to teach them. 3. How blessed is the man who perceives his own lost condition and his great need for Jesus! (Matthew 5:3-4; Luke 18:14). 4. Our sin will remain as long as we claim that we don’t need God in our lives, as long as we argue, ‘But I am a good moral person.’ People who realize their spiritual blindness will naturally come to Jesus. 5. What this says, is that people who refuse to come to Jesus have a problem with their own pride.

14