by Ted Byler
1 And as Jesus passed by, he saw a man which was blind from his birth. 2 And his disciples asked him, saying, Master, who did sin, this man, or his parents, that he was born blind? 3 Jesus answered, Neither hath this man sinned, nor his parents: but that the works of God should be made manifest in him.
The disciples believed that sin was the cause of this man’s blindness, but weren’t sure whose sin was to blame – the man’s or his parents. The controversy seems to have sprung from several Scripture passages that appear to be at odds with each other. The Law states, in several occasions, that the Lord would visit the iniquity of the fathers upon their children unto the third and fourth generation (Ex 20:5). Yet later prophets proclaimed that a man does not die on account of his father’s sins, but for his own sins (Eze 18:20; Jer 31:30).
The case of the man born blind may have been put forth by those who thought the Law’s decree that the iniquity of the fathers will be visited upon the children in effect over-ruled the prophets’ words that a son will not suffer for the sins of his father. A baby is born into this world blind, why? Apparently because the parents had sinned! Some commentators make this account hinge on the Jewish (in particular the Pharisee) belief in re-incarnation, and cite Josephus in support, along with Herod’s concern that Jesus was John the Baptist re-born (see Mark 6:14-16). Yet, there is no hint in this passage, or elsewhere in the Scriptures, that the disciples entertained the notion of re-incarnation; that is, the migration of a dead person’s soul into the body of a newborn.
Jesus answers that the man’s blindness is neither due to his nor his parent’s sins, but so that the works of God should be made manifest in him, which words serve as a prelude to Him healing the man. The implications in this account are every bit as true in the general sense. Mankind, good and bad, Christian and unbeliever, live side-by-side in a world that has been seriously marked and tainted by sin; first by the sin of Satan followed by Adam’s sin which brought corruption, chaos and death to the entire universe, and then by the accumulated and multiplied sins of every man who has lived since then. God however, is able to create beauty out of ashes and make good things spring from bad ones (Rom 8:28). Satan is come to steal, destroy and kill but Christ has come to give life, and that abundantly (John 10:10). The account of the blind man illustrates this in strong details. He wasn’t blind on account of particular sins, but because of the accumulated effects of a sinful world (Rom 8:22). Actually, the Law is clear that God made the deaf, dumb and blind, and even the wicked (Ex 4:11; Pro 16:4). Jesus has more to say on this topic in Luke 13:1-4.
As for the controversy between the Law and the Prophets concerning the sins of the parents being visited upon the children, that topic continues to be disputed in the Christian church today. Bill Gothard, for one, has even made it a central part of his ministry, going so far as to counsel Christian’s with unconquered sin in their lives to ask God to forgive their father’s sins in order to be released from that bondage. That is a false doctrine. The soul that sinneth, it shall die (Eze 18:20). No person is born guilty of sin, and there is no purpose to praying that God would release one from the sins of his forefathers. Every man, Christian or not, has had a sinful father! On the other hand, every man is a product of previous circumstances that have been deeply influenced by sin, and children end up being greatly affected both in body and mind, and that is what is meant by those verses in the Law which warn that the iniquity of the fathers will be felt by their children unto the fourth generation. A father’s sins contribute in great degree to the already sinful ambience in which his children and grandchildren are born. While the children must break free from that environment if they desire salvation, they do not need to ask God to release them from their sins of their fathers in order to do so.
4 I must work the works of him that sent me, while it is day: the night cometh, when no man can work. 5 As long as I am in the world, I am the light of the world.
While it is day refers to His time on earth, when He walked and worked freely and openly; but the night was coming, that time when He must yield Himself up to the powers of darkness (Luke 22:53), and even His disciples hid themselves in fear.
I must work. Jesus performed this healing on the Sabbath (v14), and probably spoke these words to highlight that there is no better day to do the work of God than on the Sabbath. And maybe the manufacturing of an ointment on the Sabbath contributes to the same topic. See also the healing of the man’s withered hand on the Sabbath in John 5. I am the Light of the world. Jesus is the source and proclaimer of spiritual wisdom and knowledge (see John 12:35, 46).
6 When he had thus spoken, he spat on the ground, and made clay of the spittle, and he anointed the eyes of the blind man with the clay, 7 And said unto him, Go, wash in the pool of Siloam, (which is by interpretation, Sent.) He went his way therefore, and washed, and came seeing.
While Jesus healed many blind people, this is the only time we read that he healed one that was born blind. The prophets had said that the Messiah would open the eyes of the blind (Is 35:5; Ps 146:8), and although there is certainly a spiritual aspect to that phrase, it had a literal, physical fulfillment too (see Luke 4:18, which cites the Septuagint version of Isaiah 61:1). Rather than simply speak the word, this time Jesus required the blind man to demonstrate his faith by going to wash in a specific pool of water. That may have been in order to respond further to the disciples’ question in the previous verses. If a person wishes that the good works of God should be manifest in his life (v3), he must be willing to cooperate to bring it about.
The pool of Siloam was a spring-fed reservoir just outside the city walls (Neh 3:15), which may be the same as the upper pool in 2Kgs 18:17; Is 7:3, 36:2. The word Siloam comes from the Hebrew language, and its meaning is apparently significant, for John gives its translatation: Sent (Gk-apostello). The word Siloam (σιλωαμ) occurs only once in the Septuagint, Forasmuch as this people refuseth the waters of Shiloah that go softly…behold, the Lord bringeth up upon them the waters of the river, strong and many…shall fill the breadth of thy land, O Immanuel (Is 8:6-8). I do not know how this meaning connects.
8 The neighbours therefore, and they which before had seen him that he was blind, said, Is not this he that sat and begged? 9 Some said, This is he: others said, He is like him: but he said, I am he. 10 Therefore said they unto him, How were thine eyes opened? 11 He answered and said, A man that is called Jesus made clay, and anointed mine eyes, and said unto me, Go to the pool of Siloam, and wash: and I went and washed, and I received sight. 12 Then said they unto him, Where is he? He said, I know not.
Many of the citizens of that locale were acquainted with the man born blind, for he was known to sit along the street as a beggar. Imagine their surprise to suddenly see him walking along with full vision! Some questioned whether it was someone who only looked like the beggar blind-man, but soon it became clear that it was indeed he.
“How did you gain your eye-sight?” they ask.
“The man called Jesus healed me,” he replied, adding the details of what he was required to do. His neighbors are amazed, and decided that the Pharisees must hear of this story too, so they took the man to be examined of them.
13 They brought to the Pharisees him that aforetime was blind. 14 And it was the sabbath day when Jesus made the clay, and opened his eyes. 15 Then again the Pharisees also asked him how he had received his sight. He said unto them, He put clay upon mine eyes, and I washed, and do see. 16 Therefore said some of the Pharisees, This man is not of God, because he keepeth not the sabbath day. Others said, How can a man that is a sinner do such miracles? And there was a division among them.
Jesus had healed the man on the sabbath day, and the Pharisees were outraged. He had made the clay and broken the law in the same manner that He had earlier told the lame man to carry his bed on the sabbath (John 5:11). But some of the Pharisees were hesitant to condemn Jesus. “How can a sinner work such miracles?” they wondered. So they questioned the man further, unsure of how to continue, for it was apparent to all that a great miracle had been wrought.
A lesson may be learned from the Pharisees in this instance. These men had made their own interpretational view of the Sabbath to be the only correct version, and they judged all other views to be heretical, not of God. May we not fall into a similar error in judging all other Christians in their traditions. The opposite error of judging nothing must be also avoided, but the most Scriptural method of evaluating a professing Christian’s life is his actions, his obedience to the commandments of Christ.
17 They say unto the blind man again, What sayest thou of him, that he hath opened thine eyes? He said, He is a prophet. 18 But the Jews did not believe concerning him, that he had been blind, and received his sight, until they called the parents of him that had received his sight. 19 And they asked them, saying, Is this your son, who ye say was born blind? how then doth he now see? 20 His parents answered them and said, We know that this is our son, and that he was born blind: 21 But by what means he now seeth, we know not; or who hath opened his eyes, we know not: he is of age; ask him: he shall speak for himself. 22 These words spake his parents, because they feared the Jews: for the Jews had agreed already, that if any man did confess that he was Christ, he should be put out of the synagogue. 23 Therefore said his parents, He is of age; ask him.
The Pharisees decided to solicit the testimony of the man and his parents concerning Jesus, not because they were interested in their judgments, but because they did not believe…that he had been blind and received his sight (v18). For his part, the blind man was convinced that only a prophet of God could open the eyes of a blind man. His parents, however, refused to opine on the matter, for it was well known that all those who publicly sided with Jesus would be put out of the synagogue (John 7:13; 12:42). They testified that the blind man made whole was indeed their son and that he had truly been born in that condition, but how he had become healed they knew not.
24 Then again called they the man that was blind, and said unto him, Give God the praise: we know that this man is a sinner. 25 He answered and said, Whether he be a sinner or no, I know not: one thing I know, that, whereas I was blind, now I see. 26 Then said they to him again, What did he to thee? how opened he thine eyes? 27 He answered them, I have told you already, and ye did not hear: wherefore would ye hear it again? will ye also be his disciples? 28 Then they reviled him, and said, Thou art his disciple; but we are Moses’ disciples.
The counsel was unsure about how to proceed, having no choice but to accept the testimony of the parents that this was their born-blind son standing now completely whole. So they again called the once-blind, uneducated man so that they might coerce him into denying that Christ was the author of his healing. “Give God the praise, for this man is a sinner,” they tell him. Commentators have pointed out the similarity of this phrase to Joshua 7:19, where it is used to compel a confession. “Tell us the real truth of the matter, for we know that this Jesus is a sinner.”
The man cannot be swayed, “Whether He be a sinner I do not know; what I do know is that once I was blind, but now I see!” He had already confessed Jesus to be a prophet, and no true prophet could be a sinner. But rather than be dragged into that argument the man puts the real issue back on the table; answer this: a man blind from his birth is now seeing. The Pharisees struggled to respond, finally asking him to give testimony again concerning how Jesus had healed him. Perhaps this was to detect some inconsistency in his story, but more likely it was simply because they were stumped. The man’s answer had presented no good way forward in their attempt to discredit Jesus and the miracle He had wrought.
Will ye also be His disciples? With this, the man both teased the unbelieving Pharisees and virtually confessed that he is a believer. They are offended to the core and reviled him. This had never been a matter in which they were seeking the truth, and their contumacious response confirms it.
29 We know that God spake unto Moses: as for this fellow, we know not from whence he is. 30 The man answered and said unto them, Why herein is a marvellous thing, that ye know not from whence he is, and yet he hath opened mine eyes. 31 Now we know that God heareth not sinners: but if any man be a worshipper of God, and doeth his will, him he heareth. 32 Since the world began was it not heard that any man opened the eyes of one that was born blind. 33 If this man were not of 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.
The council thought they had answered wisely by identifying themselves with Moses, but they had unwittingly provided a wide opening that even this untrained man at once recognized, “Concerning the man Jesus,” they said, “We know nothing, we don’t even know where He comes from.”
“Amazing!” replies the man, “Not since the world began has anyone healed a man born blind like this Jesus, yet you do not where He is from! You say He is not of God, but then He would be powerless, for we all know that God does not hear sinners” (see John 3:2). His words stung the very hearts of the conceited, egocentric Pharisees and their response is haughty and final, Thou wast altogether born in sins, and dost thou teach us? I wonder, did these Pharisees really think they had not been born in sin?
And so saying, they cast him out. Whether that means they threw him out of their assembly, or that they excommunicated him from the Jewish synagogue (v22) is unclear. Their anger hints that they unchurched him, but the Greek hints otherwise. Put out of the synagogue in verse 22 is aposunagogus ginomai (αποσυναγωγος γενηται), while in verse 32, they cast him out, is simply ekballo autos exo (εξεβαλον αυτον εξω). In either case, the account of this man single-handedly stumping the Sanhedrim is amazing, and it brings to mind the prophecy of David in Psalms 8:2 and the words of Christ in Mat 11:25.
The Pharisaical council’s manner of interview reminds me of the vicious interrogations that the Anabaptists endured in the cruel and imperious courts of the Catholics and Protestants. This man, however, escaped with his life. Many Anabaptists did not (see also John 16:2).
35 Jesus heard that they had cast him out; and when he had found him, he said unto him, Dost thou believe on the Son of God? 36 He answered and said, Who is he, Lord, that I might believe on him? 37 And Jesus said unto him, Thou hast both seen him, and it is he that talketh with thee. 38 And he said, Lord, I believe. And he worshipped him.
Sometime later, Jesus and the healed man meet again. Their conversation shows the spiritual ignorance of the blind man, but also his complete willingness to believe. The man fell at Jesus’ feet and he worshipped Him. I have found statements such as this one that describes men worshipping Jesus to be very effective in showing Jehovah’s Witnesses that Jesus is God, for while they teach that only Jehovah may be worshipped, the Scriptures record on many occasions that Jesus accepted the worship of men. The Apostles always refused attempts to worship them (Acts 10:25-26; 14:13-15; Rev 19:10).
39 And Jesus said, For judgment I am come into this world, that they which see not might see; and that they which see might be made blind. 40 And some of the Pharisees which were with him heard these words, and said unto him, Are we blind also? 41 Jesus said unto them, If ye were blind, ye should have no sin: but now ye say, We see; therefore your sin remaineth.
As He did so often during His earthly ministry, Jesus here used physical events to teach a spiritual lesson. The man’s blindness becomes an example of the spiritual blindness of so many people in the world, of which there are two varieties. First is that spiritual blindness of those never exposed to the light of the Gospel, and is represented by the man blind from birth. Second is the spiritual blindness of those who are deceived by sin, Satan and self (2Cor 4:4; Rev 3:17). This group is blind by intelligent choice, seeing and hearing but choosing not believing (Acts 28:26). Jesus came to give light to those which see not (Luke 1:79; 2Cor 4:6; Eph 5:14), so that they which see might be made blind (John 12:40).
The ever-present Pharisees observed the exchange, and they sense that He is speaking about them. “Are you saying WE are blind?” They, of course, thought that all religious knowledge and divine revelation resided with them. Hadn’t God spoken to their fathers and chosen them as a peculiar treasure to God above all people? (Ex 19:5).
Jesus does not mince words with His response, “If you were truly blind you would not be responsible; you are seeing but do not believe, therefore your sin remains” (same idea in John 15:22-25). Their blindness was self-induced refusal, while hearing they would not understand and seeing they would not believe (Mat 13:13-14).
For judgment I am come. The Father has committed all judgment to the Son (John 5:22), who has not come to condemn the world but to save it (John 3:17). On one hand, Jesus judges no man (John 12:47; 8:15-16), on the other, He must judge the unrighteous (John 8:26; 5:30). The apparent tension in these dual truths is this: Jesus’ mission purpose is not to judge and condemn but to heal and save! Those who blind themselves to His truth will be judged by Christ, or perhaps more accurately, they will stand judged of themselves, their own actions proving them guilty and condemning them. The works and words of Jesus require man to decide, believe and act; those who reject Him are condemned by their own blindness. See also Luke 2:34; John 19:11.