Outline of the Book of John
- The Beginning of Jesus' Ministry (1:19-51)
- Changing Water into Wine (2:1-11)
- Cleansing the Temple (2:12-25)
- Jesus Teaches Nicodemus (3:1-21)
- John the Baptist's Final Testimony about Jesus (3:22-36)
- Jesus and the Samaritans (4:1-42)
- Healing of the Official's Son (4:43-54)
- Jesus' Visit to Jerusalem at an Annual Feast (ch. 5)
- Feeding the 5,000 and Jesus' Claim to Be the Bread of Life (ch. 6)
- Jesus at the Feast of Tabernacles and Disputes over Who He Is (chs. 7-8)
- Healing of the Man Born Blind (ch. 9)
- Jesus is the Good Shepherd (10:1-21)
- Conflict at the Feast of Dedication over Jesus' Identity (10:22-42)
- The Raising of Lazarus (ch. 11)
- Statement of the Gospel's Purpose (20:30-31)
- Epilogue: Jesus' Recommissioning of the Disciples (ch. 21)
Copyright 2002 © Zondervan. All rights reserved. Used with permission.
John 9 NLT
1 As Jesus was walking along, he saw a man
who had been blind from birth.
2 “Rabbi,” his disciples asked him, “why
was this man born blind? Was it because of his own sins or his parents’
sins?”
3 “It was not because of his sins or his
parents’ sins,” Jesus answered. “This happened so the power of God could be
seen in him.
4 We must quickly carry out the tasks
assigned us by the one who sent us. The night is coming, and then no one can
work.
5But while I am here in the world, I am the
light of the world.”
6 Then he spit on the ground, made mud
with the saliva, and spread the mud over the blind man’s eyes.
7 He told him, “Go wash yourself in the
pool of Siloam” (Siloam means “sent”). So the man went and washed and came back
seeing!
8 His neighbors and others who knew him as
a blind beggar asked each other, “Isn’t this the man who used to sit and
beg?”
9 Some said he was, and others said, “No,
he just looks like him!” But the beggar kept saying, “Yes, I am the same
one!”
10 They asked, “Who healed you? What
happened?”
11 He told them, “The man they call Jesus
made mud and spread it over my eyes and told me, ‘Go to the pool of Siloam and
wash yourself.’ So I went and washed, and now I can see!”
12 “Where is he now?” they asked. “I don’t
know,” he replied.
13 Then they took the man who had been
blind to the Pharisees,
14because it was on the Sabbath that Jesus had
made the mud and healed him.
15 The Pharisees asked the man all about
it. So he told them, “He put the mud over my eyes, and when I washed it away, I
could see!”
16 Some of the Pharisees said, “This man
Jesus is not from God, for he is working on the Sabbath.” Others said, “But how
could an ordinary sinner do such miraculous signs?” So there was a deep
division of opinion among them.
17 Then the Pharisees again questioned the
man who had been blind and demanded, “What’s your opinion about this man who
healed you?” The man replied, “I think he must be a prophet.”
18 The Jewish leaders still refused to
believe the man had been blind and could now see, so they called in his
parents.
19They asked them, “Is this your son? Was he
born blind? If so, how can he now see?”
20 His parents replied, “We know this is
our son and that he was born blind,
21 but we don’t know how he can see or who
healed him. Ask him. He is old enough to speak for himself.”
22 His parents said this because they were
afraid of the Jewish leaders, who had announced that anyone saying Jesus was
the Messiah would be expelled from the synagogue.
23That’s why they said, “He is old enough. Ask
him.”
24 So for the second time they called in
the man who had been blind and told him, “God should get the glory for this,
because we know this man Jesus is a sinner.”
25 “I don’t know whether he is a sinner,”
the man replied. “But I know this: I was blind, and now I can see!”
26 “But what did he do?” they asked. “How
did he heal you?”
27“Look!” the man exclaimed. “I told you once.
Didn’t you listen? Why do you want to hear it again? Do you want to become his
disciples, too?”
28 Then they cursed him and said, “You are
his disciple, but we are disciples of Moses!
29 We know God spoke to Moses, but we don’t
even know where this man comes from.”
30 “Why, that’s very strange!” the man
replied. “He healed my eyes, and yet you don’t know where he comes from?
31 We know that God doesn’t listen to
sinners, but he is ready to hear those who worship him and do his will.
32 Ever since the world began, no one has
been able to open the eyes of someone born blind.
33 If this man were not from God, he
couldn’t have done it.”
34 “You were born a total sinner!” they
answered. “Are you trying to teach us?” And they threw him out of the
synagogue.
35 When Jesus heard what had happened, he
found the man and asked, “Do you believe in the Son of Man? ”
36 The man answered, “Who is he, sir? I
want to believe in him.”
37 “You have seen him,” Jesus said, “and he
is speaking to you!”
38 “Yes, Lord, I believe!” the man said.
And he worshiped Jesus.
39Then Jesus told him, “I entered this world to
render judgment—to give sight to the blind and to show those who think they see
that they are blind.”
40 Some Pharisees who were standing nearby
heard him and asked, “Are you saying we’re blind?”
41 “If you were blind, you wouldn’t be
guilty,” Jesus replied. “But you remain guilty because you claim you can see.
John 9
After Christ’s departure out of the temple, in
the close of the foregoing chapter, and before this happened which is recorded
in this chapter, he had been for some time abroad in the country, it is
supposed about two or three months; in which interval of time Dr. Lightfoot and
other harmonists place all the passages that occur from Lu. 10:17to. 13:17 . What is recorded in ch. 7 and 8 was at
the feast of tabernacles, in September; what is recorded in this and the
following chapter was at the feast of dedication in December, ch. 10:22 . Mr. Clark and others place this
immediately after the foregoing chapter. In this chapter we have, I. The
miraculous cure of a man that was born blind (v. 1-7).
II. The discourses which were occasioned by it. 1. A discourse of the
neighbours among themselves, and with the man (v. 8-12).
Between the Pharisees and the man (v. 13-34).
Between Christ and the poor man (v. 35-38).
Between Christ and the Pharisees (v. 39to
the end).
Verses 1-7 We
have here sight given to a poor beggar that had been blind from his birth.
Observe,I. The notice which our Lord Jesus took of the piteous case of this
poor blind man (v. 1): As Jesus passed by he saw a man which
was blind from his birth. The first words seem to refer to the last of the
foregoing chapter, and countenance the opinion of those who in the harmony
place this story immediately after that. There it was said,paregen —he
passed by, and here, without so much as repeating him name (though our
translators supply it) kai parago —and as he passed by. 1.
Though the Jews had so basely abused him, both by word and deed gave him the
highest provocation imaginable, yet he did not miss any opportunity of doing
good among them, nor take up a resolution, as justly he might have done, never
to have favoured them with any good offices. The cure of this blind man was a
kindness to the public, enabling him to work for his living who
before was a charge and burden to the neighbourhood. It is noble, and generous,
and Christ-like, to be willing to serve the public, even when we are
slighted and disobliged by them, or think ourselves so. Though he was in his
flight from a threatening danger, and escaping for his life, yet he willingly
halted and staid awhile to show mercy to this poor man. We make more haste than
good speed when we out-run opportunities of doing good. 3. When the Pharisees
drove Christ from them, he went to this poor blind beggar. Some of the ancients
make this a figure of the bringing of the gospel to the Gentiles, who sat
in darkness, when the Jews had rejected it, and driven it from them. 4.
Christ took this poor blind man in his way, and cured him in transitu—as
he passed by. Thus should we take occasions of doing good, even as
we pass by, wherever we are.Now, (1.) The condition of this poor man
was very sad. He was blind, and had been so from his
birth. If the light is sweet, how melancholy must it needs be for a man,
all his days, to eat in darkness! He that is blind has
no enjoyment of the light, but he that is born blind has
noidea of it. Methinks such a one would give a great deal to have his
curiosity satisfied with but one day’s sight of light and colours, shapes and
figures, though he were never to see them more. Why
is the light of life given to one that is in this
misery, that is deprived of the light of the sun, whose way
is thus hid, and whom God hath thus hedged in? Job. 3:20-23. Let us bless God that it was not our case.
The eye is one of the most curious parts of the body, its structure exceedingly
nice and fine. In the formation of animals, it is said to be the first part
that appears distinctly discernible. What a mercy is it that there was no miscarriage
in the making of ours! Christ cured many that were blind by disease or
accident, but here he cured one that was born blind. [1.] That
he might give an instance of his power to help in the most desperate cases, and
to relieve when none else can. [2.] That he might give a specimen of
the work of his grace upon the souls of sinners, which gives sight to those
that were by nature blind.(2.) The compassions of our Lord Jesus towards him
were very tender. He saw him; that is, he took cognizance of his case,
and looked upon him with concern. When God is about to work deliverance, he is
said to seethe affliction; so Christ saw this poor man. Others saw him,
but not as he did. This poor man could not see Christ, but Christ saw him, and
anticipated both his prayers and expectations with a surprising cure. Christ is
often found of those that seek him not, nor see him, Isa. 65:1 . And, if we know or apprehend any thing
of Christ, it is because we were first known of him (Gal. 4:9 ) and apprehended by
him, Phil. 3:12 .II. The discourse between Christ and
his disciples concerning this man. When he departed out of the
temple they went along with him: for these were they that continued
with him in histemptations, and followed him whithersoever he went; and they
lost nothing by their adherence to him, but gained experience abundantly.
Observe,1. The question which the disciples put to their Master upon this blind
man’s case, v. 2. When Christ looked upon him, they had an eye
to him too; Christ’s compassion should kindle ours. It is probable that Christ
told them this poor man was born blind, or they knew it by common fame; but
they did not move Christ to heal him. Instead of this, they started a very odd
question concerning him: Rabbi, who sinned, this man or his parents, that
he was born blind? Now this question of theirs was,(1.) Uncharitably
censorious. They take it for granted that this extraordinary calamity was
the punishment of some uncommon wickedness, and that this man was a sinner
above all men that dwelt at Jerusalem, Lu. 13:4 .
For the barbarous people to infer, Surely this man is
a murderer, was not so strange; but it was inexcusablein them,
who knew the scriptures, who had read that all things come alike to
all, and knew that it was adjudged in Job’s case that the greatest
sufferers are not therefore to be looked upon as the greatest
sinners. The grace of repentance calls our own afflictionspunishments, but
the grace of charity calls the afflictions of others trials, unless
the contrary is very evident.(2.) It was unnecessarily
curious. Concluding this calamity to be inflicted for some very heinous
crime, they ask, Who were the criminals, this man or his parents? And
what was this to them? Or what good would it do them to know it? We are apt to
be more inquisitive concerning other people’s sins than concerning our own;
whereas, it is more our concern to know wherefore God contends with us than
wherefore he contends with others; for to judge ourselves is our sin. They
enquire, [1.] Whether this man was punished thus for some sin of his own,
either committed or foreseen before his birth. Some think that the disciples
were tainted with the Pythagorean notion of the pre-existence of
souls, and their transmigration from one body to another. Was this
man’s soul condemned to the dungeon of this blind body to punish it for some
great sin committed in another body which it had before animated? The Pharisees
seem to have had the same opinion of his case when they said, Thou wast
altogether born in sin (v. 34), as if all those, and those only, were born
in sin whom nature had stigmatized. Or, [2.] Whether he was punished
for the wickedness of his parents, which God sometimes visits
upon the children. It is a good reason why parents should take heed
of sin, lest their children smart for it when they are gone. Let not us thus be
cruel to our own, as theostrich in the wilderness. Perhaps the disciples
asked this, not as believing that this was the punishment of some actual sin of
his own or his parents, but Christ having intimated to another patient that his
sin was the cause of this impotency ch. 5:14 ),
"Master,’’ say they, "whose sin is the cause of this impotency?’’
Being at a loss what construction to put upon this providence, they desire to
be informed. The equity of God’s dispensations is always certain, for his
righteousness is as the great mountains, but not always to be
accounted for, for his judgments are a great deep. 2. Christ’s answer
to this question. He was always apt to teach, and to rectify his
disciples’ mistakes.(1.) He gives the reason of this poor man’s
blindness: "Neither has this man sinned nor
his parents, but he was born blind, and has continued so to this day,
that now at last the works of God should be made manifest in
him,’’ v. 3. Here Christ, who perfectly knew the secret
springs of the divine counsels, told them two things concerning such uncommon
calamities:—[1.] That they are not always inflicted as punishments of sin. The
sinfulness of the whole race of mankind does indeed justify God in all the
miseries of human life; so that those who have the least share of them must say
that God is kind, and those who have the largest share must not say
that he is unjust; but many are made much
more miserable than others in this life who are not at all
more sinful. Not but that this man was a sinner, and his parents
sinners, but is was not any uncommon guilt that God had an eye to in inflicting
this upon him. Note, We must take heed of judging any to be great sinners
merely because they are great sufferers, lest we be found, not
only persecuting those whom God has smitten(Ps. 69:26 ),
but accusing those whom he has justified, and condemning those for
whomChrist died, which is daring and dangerous, Rom. 8:33, Rom. 8:34 .
[2.] That they are sometimes intended purely for the glory of
God, and the manifesting of his works. God has a
sovereignty over all his creatures and an exclusive right in them, and may make
them serviceable to his glory in such a way as he thinks fit, in doing or
suffering; and if God be glorified, either by us or in us, we were not
made in vain. This man was born blind, and it was worth
while for him to be so, and to continue thus long dark, that the works of
God might be manifest in him. That is, First, That
the attributes of God might be made manifest in him: his justice in
making sinful man liable to such grievous calamities; his ordinary power and
goodness in supporting a poor man under such a grievous and tedious affliction,
especially that his extraordinary power and goodness might be manifested in
curing him. Note, The difficulties of providence, otherwise unaccountable, may
be resolved into this—God intends in them to show himself, to
declare his glory, to make himself to be taken notice of. Those who regard him
not in the ordinary course of things are sometimes alarmed by things
extraordinary. How contentedly then may a good man be a loser in his
comforts, while he is sure that thereby God will be one way or other a gainer
in his glory! Secondly, That the counsels of God concerning the Redeemer
might be manifested in him. He was born blind that our Lord Jesus
might have the honour ofcuring him, and might therein prove himself sent
of God to be the true light to the world. Thus the fall of man was permitted,
and the blindness that followed it, that the works of God might be
manifest in opening the eyes of the blind. It was now a great while
since this man was born blind, and yet it never appeared till now why he
was so. Note, The intentions of Providence commonly do not appear till a great
while after the event, perhaps many years after. The sentences in the
book of providence are sometimes long,and you must read a great way before
you can apprehend the sense of them.(2.) He gives the reason of his own
forwardness and readiness to help and heal him, v. 4, v. 5.
It was not for ostentation, but in pursuance of his undertaking: I must
work the works of himthat sent me (of which this is one), while it is
day, and working time; the night cometh, the period of that
day, when no man can work. This is not only a reason shy Christ was
constant in doing good to the souls and bodies of men, but why particularly he
did this, though it was the sabbath day, on which works of necessity might be
done, and he proves this to be a work of necessity.[1.] It was his Father’s
will: I must work the works of him that sent
me. Note, First, The Father, when he sent his Son into the
world, gave him work to do; he did not come into the world to take
state, but to do business; whom God sends he employs, for he sends none to be
idle. Secondly, The works Christ had to do were theworks of him that
sent him, not only appointed by him, but done for
him; he was a worker together with God. Thirdly, He was pleased
to lay himself under the strongest obligations to do the business he was sent
about: I must work. He engaged his heart, in the covenant
of redemption, to draw near, and approach to God as
Mediator, Jer. 30:21 . Shall we be willing to
be loose, when Christ was willing to be bound?
Fourthly, Christ, having laid himself under obligations to do his work,
laid out himself with the utmost vigour and industry in his work.
He worked the works he had to do; did ergazesthai ta
erga —made a business of that which was his business. It is not
enough to look at our work, and talk over it, but we must work it.[2.] Now was
his opportunity: I must work while it is day, while the time lasts
which is appointed to work in, and while the light lasts which is given to work
by. Christ himself had his day. First, All the business of
the mediatorial kingdom was to be done within the limits of time, and
in this world; for at the end of the world, when time shall be no more,
the kingdom shall be delivered up to God, even the Father, and
themystery of God finished. Secondly, all the work he had to do in
his own person here on earth was to be done before his
death; the time of his living in this world is the day here
spoken of. Note, The time of our life is our day, in which it concerns us to do
the work of the day. Day-time is the proper season for work (Ps. 104:22, Ps. 104:23 ); during the day of life we must be busy, not waste day-time, nor
play by day-light; it will be time enough to rest when our day is
done, for it is but a day. [3.] The period of his opportunity was at
hand, and therefore he would be busy; The night comes when no man can
work. Note, The consideration of our death approaching should quicken us
to improve all the opportunities of life, both for doing and getting
good. The night comes, it will come certainly, may come
suddenly, is coming nearer and nearer. We cannot compute how nigh our sun is,
it may go down at noon; nor can we promise ourselves a twilight between the day
of life and the night of death. When the night comes we cannot
work, because the light afforded us to work by
is extinguished; the grave is a land of darkness, and our work cannot
be done in the dark. And, besides, our time allotted us for our work
will then haveexpired; when our Master tied us to duty he tied us to time
too; when night comes, call thelabourers; we must then show our
work, and receive according to the things done. In the world of
retribution we are no longer probationers; it is too late to bid when
the inch of candle is dropped. Christ uses this as an argument with
himself to be diligent, though he had no opposition from within to struggle
with; much more need have we to work upon our hearts these and the like
considerations to quicken us.[4.] His business in the world was to enlighten it
(v. 5): As long as I am in the world, and
that will not be long, I am the light of the world. He had said this
before, ch. 8:12 . He is the Sun of
righteousness, that has not only light in his wings for those that can
see, but healing in his wings, or beams, for those that are blind and cannot
see, therein far exceeding in virtue that great light which rules by
day. Christ would cure this blind man, the representative of a blind
world, because he came to be the light of the world, not only to
give light, but to give sight. Now this gives
us, First, A great encouragement to come to him, as a
guiding, quickening, refreshing light. To whom should we look but to him? Which
way should we turn our eyes, but to the light? We partake of the sun’s light,
and so we may of Christ’s grace, without money and without
price. Secondly, A good example of usefulness in the world.
What Christ saith of himself, he saith of his disciples: You are lights in
the world, and, if so, Let your light shine. What were candles
made for but to burn?III. The manner of the cure of the blind man, v. 6, v. 7.
The circumstances of the miracle are singular, and no doubt
significant. When he had thus spoken for the instruction of his
disciples, and the opening of their understandings, he addressed himself to the
opening of the blind man’s eyes. He did not defer it till he could do it either
more privately, for his greater safety, or more publicly, for his greater
honour, or till the sabbath was past, when it would give less offence. What
good we have opportunity of doing we should do quickly; he that will never do a
good work till there is nothing to be objected against it will leave many a
good work for ever undone, Eccl. 11:4 . In the cure observe,1. The preparation of the eye-salve.
Christ spat on the ground, and made clay of the spittle. He could
have cured him with a word, as he did others, but he chose to do it in this way
to show that he is not tied to any method. He made clay of his own
spittle, because there was no water near; and he would teach us not to be nice
or curious, but, when we have at any time occasion, to be willing to take up
with that which is next hand, if it will but serve the turn. Why
should we go about for that which may as well be had and done
a nearer way? Christ’s making use of his own spittle intimates that
there is healing virtue in every thing that belongs to Christ; clay made of
Christ’s spittle was much more precious than the balm of Gilead.2. The
application of it to the place: He anointed the eyes of the blind man with
the clay. Or, as the margin reads it, He
spread (epechrise ), he daubed the clay upon the eyes of the
blind man, like a tender physician; he did it himself with his own
hand, though the patient was a beggar. Now Christ did this, (1.) To magnify his
power in making a blind man to see by that method which one would think more
likely to make a seeing man blind. Daubing clay on the eyes would close
them up, but never open them. Note, The power of God often works
by contraries; and he makes men feel their own blindness before he gives them
sight. (2.) To give an intimation that it was his mighty hand, the very same
that at first made man out of the clay; for by him God made the
worlds, both the great world, and man the little world. Man
was formed out of the clay, and moulded like the clay, and here
Christ used the same materials to give sight to the body that at first he used
to give being to it. (3.) To represent and typify the healing and opening of
the eyes of the mind by the grace of Jesus Christ. The design of the gospel is
to open men’s eyes, Acts. 26:18 . Now the eye-salve that does the work is of Christ’s
preparing; it is made up, not as this, of his spittle, but of his blood, the
blood and water that came out of his pierced side; we must come to Christ
for the eye-salve, Rev. 3:18 . He only is able, and he only
is appointed, to make it up, Lu. 4:18 .
The means used in this work are very weak and unlikely, and are made effectual
only by the power of Christ; when a dark world was to be enlightened, and
nations of blind souls were to have their eyes opened, God chose
the foolish things, andweak, and despised, for the doing of it. And
the method Christ takes is first to make men feel themselves blind, as this
poor man did whose eyes were daubed with clay, and then to give them sight.
Paul in his conversion was struck blind for three days, and then
thescales fell from his eyes. The way prescribed for getting
spiritual wisdom is, Let a man become a fool, that he may be
wise, 1 Co. 3:18 . We must be made uneasy with our
blindness, as this man here, and then healed.3. The directions given to the
patient, v. 7. His physician said to him, Go, wash in
the pool of Siloam. Not that this washing was needful to effect the
cure; but, (1.) Christ would hereby try his obedience, and whether he would
with an implicit faith obey the orders of one he was so much a stranger to.
(2.) He would likewise try how he stood affected to the tradition of the
elders, which taught, and perhaps had taught him (for many that
are blind are very knowing), that it was not lawful to wash the eyes,
no not with spittle medicinally, on the sabbath day, much less to go to a pool
of water to wash them. (3.) He would hereby represent the method of spiritual
healing, in which, though the effect is owing purely to his power and grace,
there is duty to be done by us. Go, search the scriptures, attend upon the
ministry, converse with the wise; this is like washing in the pool of Siloam.
Promised graces must be expected in the way of instituted ordinances. The
waters of baptism were to those who had been trained up in darkness like the
pool of Siloam, in which they might not only wash and be clean, but wash,
and have their eyes opened. Hence they that were baptized are said to
bephotisthentes —enlightened; and the ancients called
baptism photismos —illumination.Concerning the pool of Siloam
observe, [1.] That it was supplied with water from mount Zion, so that these
were the waters of the sanctuary (Ps. 46:4 ),
living waters, which werehealing, Eze. 47:9 .
[2.] That the waters of Siloam had of old signified the throne and kingdom of
the house of David, pointing at the Messiah (Isa. 8:6 ),
and the Jews whorefused the waters of Shiloa, Christ’s doctrine and law,
and rejoiced in the tradition of the elders. Christ would try this man, whether
he would cleave to the waters of Siloam or no. [3.] The evangelist takes notice
of the signification of the name, its being interpreted sent.Christ is
often called the sent of God, the Messenger of the covenant (Mal. 3:1 ); so that when Christ sent him to the
pool of Siloam he did in effect send him to himself; for Christ is all in
all to the healing of souls. Christ as a prophet directs us to himself as
a priest. Go, wash in the fountain opened, a fountain of life,
not a pool. 4. The patient’s obedience to these directions: He
went his way therefore, probably led by some friend or other; or perhaps
he was so well acquainted with Jerusalem that he could find the way himself.
Nature often supplies the want of sight with an uncommon sagacity;
and he washed his eyes; probably the disciples, or some stander
by, informed him that he who bade him do it was that Jesus whom he had heard so
much of, else he would not have gone, at his bidding, on that which looked so
much like a fool’s errand; in confidence of Christ’s power, as well as in
obedience to his command, he went, and washed.5. The cure effected: He
came seeing. There is more glory in this concise narrative, He
went and washed, andcame seeing, than in
Caesar’s Veni, vidi, vici—I came, I saw, I conquered. When the clay
was washed off from his eyes, all the other impediments were removed
with it; so when the pangs and struggles of the new birth are over, and the
pains and terrors of conviction past, the bands of sin fly off with them, and a
glorious light and liberty succeed. See here an instance, (1.) Of the power of
Christ. What cannot he do who could not only do this,but do
it thus? With a lump of clay laid on either eye, and washed off
again, he couched those cataracts immediately which the most skilful oculist,
with the finest instrument and the most curious hand, could not remove. No
doubt this is he that should come, for by him the blind receive their
sight. (2.) It is an instance of the virtue of faith and obedience. This man
let Christ do what he pleased, and did what he appointed him to do,
and so was cured. Those that would be healed by Christ must be ruled by him.
He came back from the pool to his neighbours and acquaintance,
wondering and wondered at; he cameseeing. This represents the benefit
gracious souls find in attending on instituted ordinances, according to Christ’s
appointment; they have gone to the pool of Siloam weak, and have come away
strengthened; have gone doubting, and come away satisfied; have gone mourning,
and come away rejoicing; have gone trembling, and come away triumphing; have
gone blind, and come away seeing, come away singing, Isa. 52:8 .
Verses 8-12 Such a wonderful event as the giving of sight
to a man born blind could not but be the talk of the town, and many heeded it
no more than they do other town-talk, that is but nine days’ wonder; but here
we are told what the neighbours said of it, for the confirmation of the matter
of fact. That which at first was not believed without scrutinymay
afterwards be admitted without scruple. Two things are debated in
this conference about it:—I. Whether this was the same man that had before been
blind, v. 8.1. The neighbours that lived near the place
where he was born and bred, and knew that he had been blind, could not but be
amazed when they saw that he had his eye-sight, had it on a sudden, and
perfectly; and they said, Is not this he that sat and begged? It
seems, this blind man was a common beggar, being disabled to work for his
living; and so discharged from the obligation of the law, that if any
would not work, neither should he eat. When he could not go about,
he sat; if we cannot work for God, we must sit
still quietly for him. When he could not labour, his parents not being
able to maintain him, he begged. Note, Those who cannot otherwise
subsist must not, like the unjust steward, be ashamed to beg; let no
man be ashamed of anything but sin. There are some common beggars that are
objects of charity, that should be distinguished; and we must not let the bees
starve for the sake of the drones or wasps that are among them. As to this man,
(1.) It was well ordered by Providence that he on whom this miracle was wrought
should be a common beggar, and so generally known and remarkable, by which
means the truth of the miracle was better attested, and there were more to
witness against those infidel Jews who would not believe that he had been
blind than if he had been maintained in his father’s house. (2.) It was
the greater instance of Christ’s condescension that he seemed (as I may say) to
take more pains about the cure of a common beggar than of others. When it was
for the advantage of his miracles that they should be wrought on those that
were remarkable, he pitched upon those that were made so by their poverty and
misery; not by their dignity.2. In answer to this inquiry, (1.) Some
said, This is he, the very same man; and these are witnesses to the
truth of the miracle, for they had long known him stone-blind. (2.) Others, who
could not think it possible that a man born blind should thus on a sudden
receive his sight, for that reason, and no other, said, He is not he, but
is like him, and so, by their confession, if it be he, it is a great
miracle that is wrought upon him. Hence we may take occasion to think, [1.] Of
the wisdom and power of Providence in ordering such a universal variety of the
faces of men and women, so that no two are so alike but that they may be
distinguished, which is necessary to society, and commerce, and the
administration of justice. And, [2.] Of the wonderful change which the
converting grace of God makes upon some who before were very wicked and vile,
but are thereby so universally and visibly altered that one would not take them
to be the same persons.3. This controversy was soon decided by the man
himself: He said, I am he, the very man that so lately sat and
begged; "I am he that was blind, and was an object of the charity of men,
but now see, and am a monument of the mercy and grace of God.’’ We do not find
that the neighbours appealed to him in this matter, but he, hearing the debate,
interposed, and put an end to it. It is a piece of justice we owe to our
neighbours to rectify their mistakes, and to set things before them, as far as
we are able, in a true light. Applying it spiritually, it teaches us that those
who are savingly enlightened by the grace of God should be ready to own what
they were before that blessed change was wrought, 1 Tim. 1:13, 1 Tim. 1:14 .II. How he came to have his eyes opened, v. 10-12. They will now turn aside, and see
this great sight, and enquire further concerning it. He did
not sound a trumpet when he did these alms, nor perform his
cures upon a stage; and yet, like a city upon a hill, they could not
be hid. Two things these neighbours enquire after:—1. The manner of the
cure: How were thine eyes opened? The works of the Lord being great,
they ought to be sought out, Ps. 111:2 .
It is good to observe the way and method of God’s works, and they will appear
the more wonderful. We may apply it spiritually; it is strange that blind eyes
should be opened, but more strange when we consider how they are opened; how
weak the means are that are used, and how strong the opposition that is
conquered. In answer to this enquiry the poor man gives them a plain and full
account of the matter: A man that is called Jesus made clay,—and I
received sight. v. 11. Note, Those who have experienced special
instances of God’s power and goodness, in temporal or spiritual things, should
be ready upon all occasions to communicate their experiences, for the glory of
God and the instruction and encouragement of others. See David’s collection of
his experiences, his own and others’, Ps. 34:4-6 . It is a debt we owe to our benefactor,
and to our brethren. God’s favours are lost upon us, when they are
lostwith us, and go no further.2. The author of it (v. 12): Where is he? Some perhaps asked
this question out of curiosity. "Where is he, that we may see him?’’ A man
that did such cures as these might well be a show, which one would go a good
way for the sight of. Others, perhaps, asked out of ill-will. "Where is he,
that we may seize him?’’ There was a proclamation out for the
discovering and apprehending of him ch. 11:57 );
and the unthinking crowd, in spite of all reason and equity, will have ill thoughts
of those that are put into an ill name. Some, we hope, asked this question out
of good-will. "Where is he, that we may be acquainted with him?
Where is he, that we may come to him, and share in the favours he is so free
of?’’ In answer to this, he could say nothing: I know not. As
soon as Christ had sent him to the pool of Siloam, it should seem, he withdrew
immediately (as he did, ch. 5:13 ), and did not stay till the man returned,
as if he either doubted of the effect or waited for the man’s thanks. Humble
souls take more pleasure indoing good than in hearing of it again; it will
be time enough to hear of it in theresurrection of the just. The man had
never seen Jesus, for by the time that he had gained his sight he had lost his
Physician; and he asked, it is probable, Where is he?None of all the new
and surprising objects that presented themselves could be so grateful to him as
one sight of Christ, but as yet he knew no more of him than that he was called,
and rightly called, Jesus—a Saviour. Thus in the work of grace
wrought upon the soul we see the change, but see not the hand that makes it;
for the way of the Spirit is like that of the wind, which thou hearest the sound
of, but canst not tell whence it comes nor whither it goes.
Verses 13-34 One
would have expected that such a miracle as Christ wrought upon the blind man
would have settled his reputation, and silenced and shamed all opposition, but
it had the contrary effect; instead of being embraced as a prophet for it, he
is prosecuted as a criminal.I. Here is the information that was given in to the
Pharisees concerning this matter: They brought to the Pharisees him
that aforetime was blind, v. 13. They brought him to the great sanhedrim,
which consisted chiefly of Pharisees, at least the Pharisees in the sanhedrim
were most active against Christ. 1. Some think that those who brought this man
to the Pharisees did it with a good design, to show them that this
Jesus, whom they persecuted, was not what they represented him, but really a
great man, and one that gave considerable proofs of a divine mission. What hath
convinced us of the truth and excellency of religion, and hath removed our
prejudices against it, we should be forward, as we have opportunity, to offer
to others for their conviction. 2. It should seem, rather, that they did it
with an ill design, to exasperate the Pharisees the more against
Christ, and there was no need of this, for they were bitter enough of
themselves. They brought him with such a suggestion as that in ch. 11:47, ch. 11:48 , If
we let him thus alone, all men will believe on him. Note, Those
rulers that are of a persecuting spirit shall never want ill instruments about
them, that will blow the coals, and make them worse.II. The ground which was
pretended for this information, and the colour given to it. That which is good
was never maligned but under the imputation of something evil. And the crime objected
here (v. 14) was that it was the sabbath day when
Jesus made the clay, and opened his eyes. The profanation of the
sabbath day is certainly wicked, and gives a man a very ill character; but the
traditions of the Jews had made that to be a violation of the law of the
sabbath which was far from being so. Many a time this matter was contested
between Christ and the Jews, that it might be settled for the benefit of the
church in all ages. But it may be asked, "Why would Christ not only work
miracles on the sabbath day, but work them in such a manner as he knew would
give offence to the Jews? When he had healed the impotent man, why should he
bid him carry his bed? Could he not have cured this blind man without making
clay?’’ I answer, 1. He would not seem to yield to the usurped power of the
scribes and Pharisees. Their government was illegal, their impositions were
arbitrary, and their zeal for the rituals consumed the substantials of
religion; and therefore Christ would not give place to them, by
subjection, no not for an hour. Christ was made under the law of God, but
not under their law. 2. He did it that he might, both by word and action,
expound the law of the fourth commandment, and vindicate it from their corrupt
glosses, and so teach us that a weekly sabbath is to
be perpetually observed in the church, one day in seven (for what
need was there to explain that law, if it must be presently abrogated?) and
that it is not to be so ceremonially observed by us as it was by the
Jews? Works of necessity and mercy are allowed, and the sabbath-rest to be
kept, not so much for its own sake as in order to the sabbath-work. 3. Christ
chose to work his cures on the sabbath day to dignify and sanctify the day, and
to intimate that spiritual cures should be wrought mostly on the Christian
sabbath day. How many blind eyes have been opened by the preaching of the
gospel, that blessed eye-salve, on the Lord’s day! How many impotent souls
cured on that day!III. The trial and examination of this matter by the
Pharisees, v. 15. So much passion, prejudice, and ill-humour,
and so little reason, appear here, that the discourse is nothing but crossing
questions. One would think, when a man in these circumstances was brought
before them, they would have been so taken up in admiring the miracle, and
congratulating the happiness of the poor man, that they could not have been
peevish with him. But their enmity to Christ had divested them of all manner of
humanity, and divinity too. Let us see how they teased this man.1. They
interrogated him concerning the cure itself.(1.) They doubted whether he had
indeed been born blind, and demanded proof of that which even the
prosecutors had acknowledged (v. 18): They did not believe, that is,
they would not, that he was born blind. Men that seek occasion to
quarrel with the clearest truths may find it if they please; and they that
resolve to hold fast deceit will never want a handle to hold it by.
This was not a prudent caution, but a prejudiced infidelity. However, it was a
good way that they took for the clearing of this: They called the parents
of the man who had received his sight. This they did in hopes to disprove
the miracle. These parents were poor and timorous, and if they had said that
they could not be sure that this was their son, or that it was only some weakness
or dimness in his sight that he had been born with, which if they had been able
to get help for him might have been cured long since, or had otherwise
prevaricated, for fear of the court, the Pharisees had gained their point, had
robbed Christ of the honour of this miracle, which would have lessened the
reputation of all the rest. But God so ordered and overruled this counsel of
theirs that it turned to the more effectual proof of the miracle, and left them
under a necessity of being either convinced or confounded. Now in this part of
the examination we have,[1.] The questions that were put to them (v. 19): They asked them in an imperious
threatening way, "Is this your son? Dare you swear to
it? Do you say he was born blind? Are you sure of it? Or did he but
pretend to be so, to have an excuse for his begging? How then doth he
now see? That is impossible, and therefore you had better unsay it.’’
Those who cannot bear the light of truth do all they can
to eclipse it, and hinder the discovery of it. Thus the managers
of evidence, or mismanagers rather, lead witnesses out of the way, and
teach them how to conceal or disguise the truth, and so involve themselves in a
double guilt, like that of Jeroboam, who sinned, and made Israel to sin.[2.]
Their answers to these interrogatories, in which,First, They fully attest
that which they could safely say in this matter; safely, that is,
upon their own knowledge, and safely, that is, without running themselves
into apremunire (v. 20): We know that this is our son (for
they were daily conversant with him, and had such a natural affection to him as
the true mother had, 1 Ki. 3:26 , which made them know it was their
own ); and we know that he was born blind. They had reason to
know it, inasmuch as it had cost them many a sad thought, and many a careful
troublesome hour, about him. How often had they looked upon him with grief, and
lamented their child’s blindness more than all the burdens and inconveniences
of their poverty, and wished he had never been born, rather than be born to
such an uncomfortable life! Those who are ashamed of their children, or any of
their relations, because of their bodily infirmities, may take a reproof
from these parents, who freely owned, This is our
son, though he was born blind, and lived upon alms.Secondly, They
cautiously decline giving any evidence concerning his cure; partly because they
were not themselves eye-witnesses of it, and could say nothing to it of
their own knowledge; and partly because they found it was
a tender point, and would not bear to be meddled with. And therefore,
having owned that he was their son and was born
blind, further these deponents say not.a. Observe how warily they
express themselves (v. 21): "By what means he now seeth
we know not, or who has opened his eyes we know
not, otherwise than by hearsay; we can give no account either by
what means or by whose hand it was done.’’ See how the wisdom of this world
teaches men to trim the matter in critical junctures. Christ was
accused as a sabbath-breaker, and as an imposter. Now these parents of the
blind man, though they were not eye-witnesses of the cure, were yet fully
assured of it, and were bound in gratitude to have borne their testimony to the
honour of the Lord Jesus, who had done their son so great a kindness; but they
had not courage to do it, and then thought it might serve to atone for their
not appearing in favour of him that they said nothing to his prejudice;
whereas, in the day of trial, he that is not apparently for Christ is
justly looked upon as really against him, Lu. 11:23 ; Mk. 8:38 .
That they might not be further urged in this matter, they refer themselves and
the court to him: He is of age, ask him, he shall speak for
himself. This implies that while children are not of age (while they
are infants, such as cannot speak) it is incumbent upon their parents
to speak for them, speak to God for them in prayer, speak to the
church for them in baptism; but, when they are of age, it is fit that they
should be asked whether they be willing to stand to that which their parents
did for them, and let them speak for themselves. This man, though he
was born blind, seems to have been of quick understanding above many,
which enabled him to speak for himself better than his friends could speak for
him. Thus God often by a kind providence makes up in the mind what is wanting
in the body, 1 Co. 12:23, 1 Co. 12:24 . His parents turning them over to him was only to save
themselves from trouble, and expose him; whereas they that had so great an
interest in his mercies had reason to embark with him in
his hazards for the honour of that Jesus who had done so much for
them.b. See the reason why they were so cautious (v. 22,v. 23): Because
they feared the Jews. It was not because they would put an honour upon
their son, by making him his own advocate, or because they would have the
matter cleared by the best hand, but because they would shift trouble
off from themselves, as most people are in care to do, no matter on whom they
throw it. Near is my friend, and near is my child, and perhaps near is my
religion, but nearer is myself—Proximus egomet mihi. But
Christianity teaches another lesson, 1 Co. 10:24 ; Esth. 8:6 . Here is,(a. ) Thelate
law which the sanhedrim had made. It was agreed and enacted by their
authority that, if any man within their jurisdiction did confess that
Jesus was Christ, he should be put out of the synagogue. Observe,[a. ]
The crime designed to be punished, and so prevented, by this statute, and that
was embracing Jesus of Nazareth as the promised Messiah, and manifesting this
by any overt-act, which amounted to a confessing of him. They themselves did
expect a Messiah, but they could by no means bear to think that this Jesus
should be he, nor admit the question whether he were or no, for two
reasons:—First, Because his precepts were all so contrary to their
traditional laws. The spiritual worship he prescribed overthrew their
formalities; nor did any thing more effectually destroy their singularity and
narrow-spiritedness than that universal charity which he taught; humility and
mortification, repentance and self-denial, were lessons new to them, and
sounded harsh and strange in their ears. Secondly, Because him
promises and appearances were so contrary to their traditional hopes. They
expected a Messiah in outward pomp and splendour, that should not only free the
nation from the Roman yoke, but advance the grandeur of the sanhedrim, and make
all the members of it princes and peers: and now to hear of a Messiah whose
outward circumstances were all mean and poor, whose first appearance and
principal residence were in Galilee, a despised province, who never made his court
to them, nor sought their favour, whose followers were neither sword-men nor
gown-men, nor any men of honour, but contemptible fishermen, who proposed and
promised no redemption but from sin, no consolation of Israel but what is
spiritual and divine, and at the same time bade his followers expect the cross,
and count upon persecution; this was such a reproach to all the ideas they had
formed and filled the minds of their people with, such a blow to their power
and interest, and such a disappointment to all their hopes, that they could
never be reconciled to it, nor so much as give it a fair or patient hearing,
but, right or wrong, it must be crushed. [b. ] The penalty to be
inflicted for this crime. If any should own himself a disciple of Jesus, he
should be deemed and taken as an apostate from the faith of the Jewish church,
and a rebel and traitor against the government of it, and should therefore
be put out of the synagogue, as one that had rendered himself
unworthy of the honours, and incapable of the privileges, of their church; he
should be excommunicated, and expelled the commonwealth of Israel. Nor was this
merely an ecclesiastical censure, which a man that made no conscience of their
authority might slight, but it was, in effect, an outlawry, which
excluded a man from civil commerce and deprived him of his liberty and
property. Note,First, Christ’s holy religion, from its first rise, has
been opposed by penal laws made against the professors of it; as if men’s
consciences would otherwise naturally embrace it, this unnatural
force has been put upon them. Secondly, The church’s artillery, when
the command of it has fallen into ill hands, has often been turned against
itself, and ecclesiastical censures have been made to serve a carnal secular
interest. It is no new thing to see those cast out of the synagogue that were
the greatest ornaments and blessings of it, and to hear those that expelled
them say, The Lord be glorified, Isa. 66:5 .
Now of this edict it is said, 1. That the Jews had agreed it,
or conspired it. Their consultation and communion herein were a
perfect conspiracy against the crown and dignity of the Redeemer, against the
Lord and his Anointed. 2. That they had already agreed it. Though he had been
but a few months in any public character among them, and, one would think, in
so short a time could not have made them jealous of him, yet thus early were
they aware of his growing interest, and already agreed to do their utmost to
suppress it. He had lately made his escape out of the temple, and, when they
saw themselves baffled in their attempts to take him, they presently took this
course, to make it penal for any body to own him. Thus unanimous and thus
expeditious are the enemies of the church, and their counsels; but he
that sits in heaven laughs at them, and has them in
derision, and so may we.(b. ) The influence which this law had upon
the parents of the blind man. They declined saying any thing of Christ, and shuffled
it off to their son,because they feared the Jews. Christ had incurred the
frowns of the government to do their son a kindness, but they would not incur
them to do him any honour. Note, The fear of man brings a snare (Prov. 29:25 ), and often makes people deny and
disown Christ, and his truths and ways, and act against their consciences.
Well, the parents have thus disentangled themselves, and are discharged from
any further attendance; let us now go on with the examination of the man
himself; the doubt of the Pharisees, whether he wasborn blind, was put out
of doubt by them; and therefore,(2.) They enquired
of himconcerning the manner of the cure, and made their remarks
upon it, v. 15, v. 16.[1.]
The same question which his neighbours had put to him now again the
Pharisees asked him, how he had received his sight. This they
enquired not with any sincere desire to find out the truth, by tracing the
report to the original, but with a desire to find an occasion against Christ;
for, if the man should relate the matter fully, they would prove Christ a
sabbath-breaker; if he should vary from his former story, they would have some
colour to suspect the whole to be a collusion.[2.] The same answer, in effect,
which he had before given to his neighbours, he here repeats to the Pharisees: He
put clay upon mine eyes, and I washed, and do see. He does not here speak
of the making of the clay, for indeed he had not seen it made. That
circumstance was not essential, and might give the Pharisees most occasion
against him, and therefore he waives it. In the former account he said, I
washed, and received sight; but lest they should think it was only a
glimpse for the present, which a heated imagination might fancy itself to have,
he now says, "I do see: it is a complete and lasting cure.’’[3.]
The remarks made upon this story were very different, and occasioned a debate
in the court, v. 16.First, Some took this occasion to
censure and condemn Christ for what he had done. Some of the Pharisees
said, This man is not of God, as he pretends, because he keepeth
not the sabbath day. 1. The doctrine upon which this censure is
grounded is very true—that those are not of God —those
pretenders to prophecy not sent of God, those pretenders to saintship
not born of God —who do not keep the sabbath day. Those
that are of God will keep the commandments of God; and this is
his commandment, that we sanctify the sabbath. Those that are of God keep up
communion with God, and delight to hear from him, and speak to him, and
therefore will observe the sabbath, which is a day appointed for intercourse
with heaven. The sabbath is called a sign, for the sanctifying of it
is a sign of a sanctified heart, and the profaning of it a sign of a profane
heart. But, 2. The application of it to our Saviour is very unjust, for he did
religiously observe the sabbath day, and never in any instance violated it,
never did otherwise than well on the sabbath day. He did not keep the
sabbath according to the tradition of the elders and the superstitious
observances of the Pharisees, but he kept it according to the command of God,
and therefore, no doubt, he was of God, and his miracles proved him to
be Lord also of the sabbath day. Note, much unrighteous and uncharitable
judging is occasioned by men’s making the rules of religion more strict than
God has made them, and adding their own fancies to God’s appointments, as the
Jews here, in the case of sabbath-sanctification. We ourselves may forbear such
and such things, on the sabbath day, as we find a distraction to us, and we do
well, but we must not therefore tie up others to the same strictness. Every
thing that we take for a rule of practice must not presently be made a rule of
judgment.Secondly,Others spoke in his favour, and very pertinently
urged, How can a man that is a sinner do such miracles? It seems
that even in this council of the ungodly there were some that were
capable of a free thought, and were witnesses for Christ, even in the
midst of his enemies. The matter of fact was plain, that this was a true
miracle, the more it was searched into the more it was cleared; and this
brought his former similar works to mind, and gave occasion to speak
magnificently of them, toiauta semeia —such great signs, so
many, so evident. And the inference from it is very natural: Such things as
these could never be done by a man that is a sinner, that is,
not by any mere man, in his own name, and by his own power; or, rather, not by
one that is a cheat or an imposter, and in that sense a a sinner; such a one
may indeed show some signs and lying wonders, but not such signs and
true wonders as Christ wrought. How could a man produce such divine
credentials, if he had not a divine commission? Thus there was a division
among them, a schism, so the word is; they clashed in their opinion, a
warm debate arose, and the house divided upon it. Thus God defeats
the counsels of his enemies by dividing them; and by such testimonies as these
given against the malice of persecutors, and the rubs they meet with, their
designs against the church are sometimes rendered ineffectual and always
inexcusable.2. After their enquiry concerning the cure, we must observe their
enquiry concerning the author of it. And here observe,(1.) What the
man said of him, in answer to their enquiry. They ask him (v. 17), "What sayest thou of him,
seeing that he has opened thine eyes? What dost thou think of his doing
this? And what idea hast thou of him that did it?’’ If he should
speak slightly of Christ, in answer to this, as he might be tempted
to do, to please them, now that he was in their hands, as his parents had
done—if he should say, "I know not what to make of him; he may be a conjuror
for aught I know, or some mountebank’’—they would have triumphed in it. Nothing
confirms Christ’s enemies in their enmity to him so much as the slights put
upon him by those that have passed for his friends. But, if he should speak
honourably of Christ, they would prosecute him upon their new law, which did
not except, no, not his own patient; they would make him an example, and so
deter others from applying to Christ for cures, for which, though they came
cheap from Christ, yet they would make them pay dearly. Or perhaps Christ’s
friends proposed to have the man’s own sentiments concerning his physician, and
were willing to know, since he appeared to be a sensible man, what he thought
of him. Note, Those whose eyes Christ has opened know best what to say of him,
and have great reason, upon all occasions, to say well of him. What think we of
Christ? To this question the poor man makes a short, plain, and direct
answer: "He is a prophet, he is one inspired and sent of God to
preach, and work miracles, and deliver to the world a divine message.’’ There
had been no prophets among the Jews for three hundred years; yet they did not
conclude that they should have no more, for they knew that he was yet to come
who should seal up vision and prophecy, Dan. 9:24 . It should seem, this man had not any
thoughts that Christ was the Messiah, the great prophet, but one of the same
rank with the other prophets. The woman of Samaria concluded he was a
prophet before she had any thought of his being the Messiah ch. 4:19 ); so this blind man thought well of
Christ according to the light he had, though he did not think well enough of
him; but, being faithful in what he had already attained to, God revealed
even that unto him. This poor blind beggar had a clearer judgment of
the things pertaining to the kingdom of God, and saw further into the proofs of
a divine mission, than the masters in Israel, that assumed an
authority to judge of prophets.(2.) What they said of him, in reply to the
man’s testimony. Having in vain attempted to invalidate the evidence of the
fact, and finding that indeed a notable miracle was wrought, and they could
not deny it, they renew their attempt to banter it, and run it down, and
do all they can to shake the good opinion the man had of him that opened his
eyes, and to convince him that Christ was a bad man (v. 24): Give God the praise, we know that this
man is a sinner. Two ways this is understood: [1.] By way
of advice, to take heed of ascribing the praise of his cure to a
sinful man, but to give it all to God, to whom it was due. Thus, under colour
of zeal for the honour of God, they rob Christ of his honour, as those do who
will not worship Christ as God, under pretence of zeal for this great truth,
that there is but one God to be worshipped; whereas this is his declared will,
that all men should honour the Son even as they honour the
Father; and in confessing that Christ is Lord we give glory to God
the Father. When God makes use of men that are sinners as instruments of
good to us, we must give God the glory, for every creature is that to
us which he makes it to be; and yet there is gratitude owing to the
instruments. It was a good word, Give God the praise, but here it was
ill used; and there seems to be this further in it, "This man is a
sinner, a bad man, and therefore give the praise so much the
more to God, who could work by such an instrument.’’ [2.] By way
of adjuration; so some take it. "We know (though thou dost not,
who hast but lately come, as it were, into a new world) that this man
is a sinner, a great impostor, and cheats the country; this we
are sure of, therefore give God praise’’ (as Joshua said to Achan)
"by making an ingenuous confession of the fraud and collusion which we are
confident there is in this matter; in God’s name, man, tell the truth.’’ Thus
is God’s name abused in papal inquisitions, when by oaths, ex
officio, they extort accusations of themselves from
the innocent, and of others from
the ignorant. See how basely they speak of the Lord Jesus: We
know that this man is a sinner, is a man of sin. In which we may observe, First, Their
insolence and pride. They would not have it thought, when they asked the man
what he thought of him, that they needed information; nay, they know very well
that he is a sinner, and nobody can convince them of the contrary. He had challenged
them to their faces ch. 8:46 ) to convince him of
sin, and they had nothing to say; but now behind his back they speak of
him as a malefactor, convicted upon the notorious evidence of the fact. Thus
false accusers make up in confidence what is wanting in
proof. Secondly, The injury and indignity hereby done to the Lord
Jesus. When he became man, he took upon him the form not only of
a servant, but of a sinner(Rom. 8:3 ),
and passed for a sinner in common with the rest of mankind. Nay, he was
represented as a sinner of the first magnitude, a sinner above all men; and,
being made sin for us, he despised even this shame.3. The debate
that arose between the Pharisees and this poor man concerning Christ. They
say, He is a sinner; he says, He is a prophet.As it is an
encouragement to those who are concerned for the cause of Christ to hope that
it shall never be lost for want of witnesses, when they find a poor blind
beggar picked up from the way-side, and made a witness for Christ, to the faces
of his most impudent enemies; so it is an encouragement to those who are called
out to witness for Christ to find with what prudence and courage this man
managed his defence, according to the promise, It shall be given you in
that same hour what you shall speak. Though he had never seen Jesus, he
had felt his grace. Now in the parley between the Pharisees and this poor man
we may observe three steps:—(1.) He sticks to the certain matter of fact the
evidence of which they endeavour to shake. That which is doubtful is best
resolved into that which is plain, and therefore, [1.] He adheres to that which
to himself at least, and to his own satisfaction, was past dispute (v. 25): "Whether he be a sinner or
no I know not, I will not now stand to dispute, nor need I, the matter is
plain, and though I should altogether hold my peace would speak for itself;’’
or, as it might better be rendered, "If he be a sinner, I know it
not, I see no reason to say so, but the contrary; for this one thing
I know, and can be more sure of than you can be of that of which you are
so confident, that whereas I was blind, now I see, and therefore must
not only say that he has been a good friend to me, but that he is
a prophet; I am both able and bound to speak well of him.’’ Now
here, First, He tacitly reproves their great assurance of the ill
character they gave of the blessed Jesus: "You say that
you know him to be a sinner; I, who know him as well as you
do, cannot give any such character.’’ Secondly, He boldly relies upon
his own experience of the power and goodness of the holy Jesus, and resolves to
abide by it. There is no disputing against experience, nor arguing a man out of
his senses; here is one that is properly an eyewitness of the power and grace
of Christ, though he had never seen him. Note, As Christ’s mercies are most
valued by those that have felt the want of them, that have been blind and now
see, so the most powerful and durable affections to Christ are those that arise
from an experimental knowledge of him, 1 Jn. 1:1 ; Acts. 4:20 . The poor man does not here give a nice
account of the method of the cure, nor pretend to describe
it philosophically, but in short, Whereas I was blind, now
I see. Thus in the work of grace in the soul, though we cannot tell
when and how, by what instruments and by what steps and advances, the blessed
change was wrought, yet we may take the comfort of it if we can say, through
grace, "Whereas I was blind, now I see. I did live a carnal,
worldly, sensual life, but, thanks be to God, it is now otherwise with me,’’Eph. 5:8 . [2.] They endeavour to baffle and
stifle the evidence by a needless repetition of their enquiries into it (v. 26): What did he to thee? How opened he
thine eyes? They asked these questions, First, Because they
wanted something to say, and would rather speak impertinently than
seem to be silenced or run a-ground. Thus eager disputants, that resolve they
will have the last word, by such vain repetitions, to avoid the shame of being
silenced, make themselves accountable for many idle words. Secondly, Because
they hoped, by putting the man upon repeating his evidence, to catch him
tripping in it, or wavering, and then they would think they had gained a good
point.(2.) He upbraids them with their obstinate infidelity and invincible
prejudices, and they revile him as a disciple of Jesus, v. 27-29, where the man is more bold with them and
they are more sharp upon him than before.[1.] The man boldly upbraids them with
their wilful and unreasonable opposition to the evidence of this miracle, v. 27. He would not gratify them with a repetition
of the story, but bravely replied, I have told you already, and you did
not hear, wherefore would you hear it again, will you also be his
disciples? Some think that he spoke seriously, and really
expecting that they would be convinced. "He had many disciples, I will be
one, will you also come in among them?’’ Some zealous young Christians see so
much reason for religion that they are ready to think every one will presently
be on their mind. But it rather seems to be spoken ironically: "Will
you be his disciples? No, I know you abhor the thoughts of it; why then should
you desire to hear that which will either make you his disciples or leave you
inexcusable if you be not?’’ Those that wilfully shut their eyes against the
light, as these Pharisees here did, First,Make themselves contemptible and
base, as these here did, who were justly exposed by this poor man for denying
the conclusion, when they had nothing to object against either of the
premises. Secondly, They forfeit all the benefit of further
instructions and means of knowledge and conviction: they that have been told
once, and would not hear, why should they be told it again? Jer. 51:9 . See Mt. 10:14 . Thirdly, They
hereby receive the grace of God in vain. This implied in
that, "Will you be his disciples? No, you resolve you will not;
why then would you hear it again, only that you may be his accusers and
persecutors?’’ Those who will not see cause to embrace Christ, and join with
his followers, yet, one would think, should see cause enough not to hate and
persecute him and them.[2.] For this they scorn and revile him, v. 28. When they could not resist the wisdom and
spirit by which he spoke, they broke out into a passion, and scolded him, began
to call names, and give him ill language. See what Christ’s faithful witnesses
must expect from the adversaries of his truth and cause; let them count
upon all manner of evil to be said of them, Mt. 5:11 . The method commonly taken by
unreasonable man is to make out with railing what is wanting in truth and
reason.First, They taunted this man for his affection to Christ; they
said, Thou art his disciple, as if that were reproach enough, and
they could not say worse of him. "We scorn to be his disciples, and will
leave that preferment to thee, and such scoundrels as thou art.’’ They do what
they can to put Christ’s religion in an ill name, and to represent the
profession of it as a contemptible scandalous thing. Theyreviled him. The
Vulgate reads it, maledixerunt eum—they cursed him; and what was
their curse? It was this, Be thou his disciple. "May such a
curse’’ (saith St. Augustine here) "ever be on us and on our children!’’
If we take our measures of credit and disgrace from the sentiment or rather
clamours of a blind deluded world, we shall glory in ourshame, and
be ashamed of our glory. They had no reason to call this man
a disciple ofChrist, he had neither seen him nor heard him preach, only he
had spoken favourably of a kindness Christ had done him, and this they could
not bear.Secondly, They gloried in their relation to Moses as their
Master: "We are Moses’s disciples, and do not either need
or desire any other teacher.’’ Note, 1. Carnal professors of religion are very
apt to trust to, and be proud of, the dignities and privileges of their profession,
while they are strangers to the principles and powers of their religion. These
Pharisees had before boasted of their good parentage: We are Abraham’s
seed; here they boast of their good education, We are Moses’s
disciples; as if these would save them. 2. It is sad to see how much one
part of religion is opposed, under colour of zeal for another part. There was a
perfect harmony between Christ and Moses; Moses prepared for Christ, and Christ
perfected Moses, so that they might be disciples of Moses, and become the
disciples of Christ too; and yet they here put them in opposition, nor could
they have persecuted Christ but under the shelter of the abused name of Moses.
Thus those who gainsay the doctrine of free grace value themselves as promoters
of man’s duty, We are Moses’s disciples; while, on the other hand,
those that cancel the obligation of the law value themselves as the assertors
of free grace, and as if none were the disciples of Jesus but they; whereas, if
we rightly understand the matter, we shall see God’s grace and man’s duty meet
together and kiss and befriend each other.Thirdly, They gave some sort of
reason for their adhering to Moses against Christ (v. 29): We know that God spoke unto Moses; as
for this fellow, we know not whence he is. But did they not know that
among other things which God spoke unto Moses this was one, that they must
expect another prophet, and further revelation of the mind of God? yet, when
our Lord Jesus, pursuant to what God said to Moses, did appear, and gave
sufficient proofs of his being that prophet, under pretence of sticking to the
old religion, and the established church, they not only forfeited, but forsook,
their own mercies. In this argument of their observe, 1. How impertinently they
allege, in defence of their enmity to Christ, that which none of his followers
ever denied: We know that God spoke unto Moses, and, thanks be to
God, we know it too, more plainly to Moses than to any other of the prophets;
but what then? God spoke to Moses, and does it therefore follow that Jesus is
an impostor? Moses was a prophet also? Moses spoke honourably of Jesus ch. 5:46 ), and Jesus spoke honourably of Moses (Lu. 16:29 ); they were both faithful in the same
house of God, Moses as a servant, Christ as a Son; therefore their pleading
Moses’ divine warrant in opposition to Christ’s was an artifice, to make
unthinking people believe it was as certain that Jesus was a false prophet as
that Moses was a true one; whereas they were both true. 2. How absurdly they
urge their ignorance of Christ as a reason to justify their contempt of
him: As for this fellow. Thus scornfully do they speak of the blessed
Jesus, as if they did not think it worth while to charge their memories with a
name so inconsiderable; they express themselves with as much disdain of the
Shepherd of Israel as if he had not been worthy to be set with the dogs of
their flock: As for this fellow, this sorry fellow, we know not
whence he is. They looked upon themselves to have the key of knowledge,
that none must preach without a license first had and obtained from them, under
the seal of their court. They expected that all who set up for teachers should
apply to them, and give them satisfaction, which this Jesus had never done,
never so far owned their power as to ask their leave, and therefore they
concluded him an intruder, and one that came not in by the door: They knew
not whencenor what he was, and therefore concluded him
a sinner; whereas those we know little of we should judge charitably
of; but proud and narrow souls will think none good but themselves, and those
that are in their interest. It was not long ago that the Jews had made the
contrary to this an objection against Christ ch. 7:27 ): We know this man whence
he is, but when Christ comes no man knows whence he is. Thus they
could with the greatest assurance either affirm or deny the same thing,
according as they saw it would serve their turn. They knew not whence he
was; and whose fault was that? (1.) It is certain that they ought to have
enquired. The Messiah was to appear about this time, and it concerned them to
look about them, and examine every indication; but these priests, like
those, Jer. 2:6 , said not, Where is the
Lord? (2.) It is certain that they might have known whence he was, might
not only have known, by searching the register, that he was born in Bethlehem;
but by enquiring into his doctrine, miracles, and conversation, they might have
known that he was sent of God, and had better orders, a better commission, and
far better instructions, than any they could give him. See the absurdity of
infidelity. Men will not know the doctrine of Christ because they are resolved
they will not believe it, and then pretend they do not believe it because they
do not know it. Such ignorance and unbelief, which support one another,
aggravate one another.(3.) He reasons with them concerning this matter, and
they excommunicate him.[1.] The poor man, finding that he had reason on his
side, which they could not answer, grows more bold, and, in prosecution of his
argument, is very close upon them.First, He wonders at their obstinate
infidelity (v. 30); not at all daunted by their frowns, nor
shaken by their confidence, he bravely answered, "Why, herein is a
marvelous thing, the strangest instance of wilful ignorance that ever was
heard of among men that pretend to sense, that you know not whence he
is, and yet he has opened mine eyes.’’ Two things he wonders at:—1. That
they should be strangers to a man so famous. He that could open the
eyes of the blind must certainly be a considerable man, and worth taking notice
of. The Pharisees were inquisitive men, had a large correspondence and
acquaintance, thought themselves the eyes of the church and its watchmen, and
yet that they should talk as if they thought it below them to take cognizance
of such a man as this, and have conversation with him, this is a strange thing
indeed. There are many who pass for learned and knowing men, who understand
business, and can talk sensibly in other things, who yet are ignorant, to a
wonder, of the doctrine of Christ, who have no concern, no, not so much as a
curiosity, to acquaint themselves with that which the angels desire to
look into. 2. That they should question the divine mission of one that had
undoubtedly wrought a divine miracle. When they said, We know not whence
he is, they meant, "We know not any proof that his doctrine and
ministry are from heaven.’’ "Now this is strange,’’ saith the poor man,
"that the miracle wrought upon me has not convinced you, and put the
matter out of doubt,— that you, whose education and studies give you advantages
above others of discerning the things of God, should thus shut your eyes
against the light.’’ It is a marvelous work and wonder, when the
wisdom of the wise thus perisheth (Isa. 29:14 ), that they deny the truth of that of which they cannot
gainsay the evidence. Note, (1.) The unbelief of those who enjoy the means of
knowledge and conviction is indeed a marvelous thing, Mk. 6:6 . (2.) Those who have themselves
experienced the power and grace of the Lord Jesus do especially wonder at the
wilfulness of those who reject him, and, having such good thoughts of him
themselves, are amazed that others have not. Had Christ opened the eyes of the
Pharisees, they would not have doubted his being a prophet.Secondly, He
argues strongly against them, v. 31-33.
They had determined concerning Jesus that he was not of God (v. 16), but was a sinner (v. 24), in answer to which the man here proves not
only that he was not a sinner (v. 31),
but that he was of God, v. 33.a. He
argues here, (a. ) With great knowledge. Though he could not read a letter
of the book, he was well acquainted with the scripture and the things of God;
he had wanted the sense of seeing, yet had well improved that of hearing, by
which faith cometh; yet this would not have served him if he had not had an
extraordinary presence of God with him, and special aids of his Spirit, upon
this occasion. (b. ) With great zeal for the honour of Christ, whom he
could not endure to hear run down, and evil spoken of. (c. ) With great
boldness, and courage, and undauntedness, not terrified by the proudest of his
adversaries. Those that are ambitious of the favours of God must not be afraid
of the frowns of men. "See here,’’ saith Dr. Whitby, "a blind man and
unlearned judging more rightly of divine things than the whole learned council
of the Pharisees, whence we learn that we are not always to be led by the
authority of councils, popes, or bishops; and that it is not absurd for laymen
sometimes to vary from their opinions, these overseers being sometimes guilty
of great oversights.’’b. His argument may be reduced into form, somewhat
like that of David,Ps. 66:18-20 . The proposition in David’s argument is, If I regard
iniquity in my heart, God will not hear me; here it is to the same
purport, God heareth not sinners: the assumption there is, But
verily God hath heard me; here it is, Verily God hath heard Jesus, he
hath been honoured with the doing of that which was never done before: the
conclusion there is to the honour, Blessed be God; here to the honour
of the Lord Jesus, He is of God. (a. ) He lays it down for an
undoubted truth that none but good men are the favourites of heaven (v. 31): Now we know, you know it as well
as I, that God heareth not sinners; butif any man be a
worshipper of God, and does his will, him he heareth. Here,[a. ] The
assertions, rightly understood, are true. First, Be it spoken to the
terror of the wicked, God heareth not sinners, that is, such sinners
as the Pharisees meant when they said of Christ, He is a sinner, one
that, under the shelter of God’s name, advanced the devil’s interest. This
bespeaks no discouragement to repenting returning sinners, but to those that go
on still in their trespasses, that make their prayers not only consistent with,
but subservient to, their sins, as the hypocrites do; God will
not hear them, he will not own them, nor give an answer of peace to
their prayers. Secondly, Be it spoken to the comfort of the
righteous, If any man be a worshipper of God, and does his will, him
he heareth.Here is, 1. The complete character of a good man: he is one
that worships God, and does his will; he is constant in his
devotions at set times, and regular in his conversation at all times. He is one
that makes it his business to glorify his Creator by the solemn adoration of
his name and a sincere obedience to his will and law; both must go together. 2.
The unspeakable comfort of such a man: him God hears; hears his
complaints, and relieves him; hears his appeals, and rights him; hears his
praises, and accepts them; hears his prayers, and answers them, Ps. 34:15 .[b. ] The application of these
truths is very pertinent to prove that he, at whose word such a divine power
was put forth as cured one born blind, was not a bad man, but, having
manifestly such an interest in the holy God as that he heard him always ch. 9:31, ch. 9:32 ),
was certainly a holy one.(b. ) He magnifies the miracles which Christ had
wrought, to strengthen the argument the more (v. 32):Since
the world began was it not heard that any man opened the eyes of one
that was born blind. This is to show either, [a. ] That it was a
true miracle, and above the power of nature; it was never heard that any man,
by the use of natural means, had cured one that was born blind; no
doubt, this man and his parents had been very inquisitive into cases of this
nature, whether any such had been helped, and could hear of none, which enabled
him to speak this with the more assurance. Or, [b. ] That it was an
extraordinary miracle, and beyond the precedents of former miracles; neither
Moses nor any of the prophets, though they did great things, ever did such
things as this, wherein divine power and divine goodness seem to strive which
should outshine. Moses wrought miraculous plagues, but Christ wrought
miraculous cures. Note, First, The wondrous works of the Lord Jesus
were such as the like had never been done before. Secondly, It
becomes those who have received mercy from God to magnify the mercies they have
received, and to speak honourably of them; not that thereby glory may redound
to themselves, and they may seem to be extraordinary favourites of Heaven, but
that God may have so much the more glory.(c. ) He therefore
concludes, If this man were not of God, he could no nothing, that is,
nothing extraordinary, no such thing as this; and therefore, no
doubt, he isof God, notwithstanding his nonconformity to your traditions
in the business of the sabbath day. Note, What Christ did on earth sufficiently
demonstrated what he was in heaven; for, if he had not been sent of God, he
could not have wrought such miracles. It is true the man of sin comes
with lying wonders, but not with real miracles; it is likewise
supposed that a false prophet might, by divine permission, give a sign or
a wonder(Deu. 13:1, Deu. 13:2 ),
yet the case is so put as that it would carry with it its own confutation, for
it is to enforce a temptation to serve other gods, which was to set Godagainst
himself. It is true, likewise, that many wicked people have in Christ’s
name done many wonderful works, which did not prove those that wrought them to
be of God, but him in whose name they were wrought. We may each of us know by
this whether we are of God or no: What do we? What do we for God, for
our souls, in working out our salvation? What do we more than others?[2.] The
Pharisees, finding themselves unable either to answer his reasonings or to bear
them, fell foul upon him, and with a great deal of pride and passion broke off
the discourse, v. 34. Here we are told,First, What
they said.Having nothing to reply to his argument, they reflected upon his
person: Thou wast altogether born in sin, and dost thou teach us? They
take that amiss which they had reason to take kindly, and are cut to the heart
with rage by that which should have pricked them to the heart with penitence.
Observe, 1. How they despised him, and what a severe censure they passed upon
him: "Thou wast not only born in sin, as every man is, but
altogether so, wholly corrupt, and bearing about with thee in thy body as well
as in thy soul the marks of that corruption; thou wast one whom
nature stigmatized.’’ Had he still continued blind, it had been
barbarous to upbraid him with it, and thence to gather that he was more deeply
tainted with sin than other people; but it was most unjust to take notice of it
now that the cure had not only rolled away the reproach of his blindness, but
hadsignalized him as a favourite of Heaven. Some take it thus: "Thou
hast been a common beggar, and such are too often common sinners, and thou
hast, no doubt, been as bad as any of them;’’ whereas by his discourse he had
proved the contrary, and had evinced a deep tincture of piety. But when proud
imperious Pharisees resolve to run a man down, any thing shall serve for a
pretence. 2. How they disdain to learn of him, or to receive
instruction from him: Dost thou teach us? A mighty emphasis must be
laid here upon thouand us. "What! wilt thou, a
silly sorry fellow, ignorant and illiterate, that hast not seen the light of
the sun a day to an end, a beggar by the way-side, of the very dregs and refuse
of the town, wilt thou pretend to teach us, that are the sages of the
law and grandees of the church, that sit in Moses’s chair and are masters in
Israel?’’ Note, Proud men scorn to be taught, especially by their inferiors,
whereas we should never think ourselves too old, nor too wise, nor too good, to
learn. Those that have much wealth would have more; and why not those that have
much knowledge? And those are to be valued by whom we may improve in learning.
What a poor excuse was this for the Pharisees’ infidelity, that it would be a
disparagement to them to be instructed, and informed, and convinced, by such a
silly fellow as this!
Verses 35-38 In
these verses we may observe,I. The tender care which our Lord Jesus took of
this poor man (v. 35): When Jesus heard that they had
cast him out (for it is likely the town rang of it, and everybody cried
out shame upon them for it), then he found him,which implies his seeking
him and looking after him, that he might encourage and comfort him, 1. Because
he had, to the best of his knowledge, spoken so very well, so bravely, so
boldly, in defence of the Lord Jesus. Note, Jesus Christ will be sure to stand
by his witnesses, and own those that own him and his truth and ways. Earthly
princes neither do, nor can, take cognizance of all that vindicate them and
their government and administration; but our Lord Jesus knows and observes all
the faithful testimonies we bear to him at any time, and a book of remembrance
is written, and it shall redound not only to our credit hereafter, but our
comfort now. 2. Because the Pharisees had cast him out and abused him. Besides
the common regard which the righteous Judge of the world has to those who
suffer wrongfully (Ps. 103:6 ), there is a particular notice taken of
those that suffer in the cause of Christ and for the testimony of a good
conscience. Here was one poor man suffering for Christ, and he took care that
as his afflictions abounded his consolations should much
more abound. Note, (1.) Though persecutors may exclude good men from
their communion, yet they cannot exclude them from communion with Christ, nor
put them out of the way of his visits. Happy are they who have a friend from
whom men cannot debar them. (2.) Jesus Christ will graciously find and receive
those who for his sake are unjustly rejected and cast out by men. He will be a
hiding place to his outcasts, and appear, to the joy of those whom their
brethren hated and cast out.II. The comfortable converse Christ had with him,
wherein he brings him acquainted with the consolation of Israel. He had well
improved the knowledge he had, and now Christ gives him further instruction;
for he that is faithful in a little shall be entrusted with more,Mt. 13:12 .1. Our Lord Jesus examines his
faith: "Dost thou believe on the Son of God?Dost thou give credit to
the promises of the Messiah? Dost thou expect his coming, and art thou ready to
receive and embrace him when he is manifested to thee?’’ This was that faith of
the Son of God by which the saints lived before his manifestation. Observe,
(1.) The Messiah is here called the Son of God, and so the Jews had
learned to call him from the prophecies, Ps. 2:7 Ps. 89:27 . See ch. 1:49 , Thou art the Son of
God, that is, the true Messiah. Those that expected the temporal kingdom
of the Messiah delighted rather in calling him the Son of
David, which gave more countenance to that expectation,Mt. 22:42 . But Christ, that he might give us an
idea of his kingdom, as purely spiritual and divine, calls himself the Son
of God, and rather Son of man in general than of David in
particular. (2.) The desires and expectations of the Messiah, which the
Old-Testament saints had, guided by and grounded upon the promise, were
graciously interpreted and accepted as their believing on the Son of
God. This faith Christ here enquires after: Dost thou
believe? Note, The great thing which is now required of us (1 Jn. 3:23 ), and which will shortly be enquired
after concerning us, is our believing on the Son of God, and by this
we must stand or fall for ever.2. The poor man solicitously enquires concerning
the Messiah he was to believe in, professing his readiness to embrace him and
close with him (v. 36): Who is he, Lord, that I may
believe on him? (1.) Some think he did know that Jesus, who cured him, was
the Son of God, but did not know which was Jesus, and therefore, supposing this
person that talked with him to be a follower of Jesus, desired him to do him
the favour to direct him to his master; not that he might satisfy his curiosity
with the sight of him, but that he might the more firmly believe in him, and
profess his faith, and know whom he had believed. See Cant. 5:6, Cant. 5:7 Cant. 3:2, Cant. 3:3 .
It is Christ only that can direct us to himself. (2.) Others think he did know
that this person who talked with him was Jesus, the same that cured him, whom
he believed a great and good man and a prophet, but did not yet know that he
was the Son of God and the true Messiah. "Lord, I believe there is a
Christ to come; thou who hast given me bodily sight, tell me, O tell me, who
and where this Son of God is.’’ Christ’s question intimated that the Messiah
was come, and was now among them, which he presently takes the hint of, and
asks, Where is he, Lord? The question was rational and just: Who
is he, Lord, that I may believe on him? For how could he believe in one of
whom he had not heard; the work of ministers is to tell us who the Son of
God is, that we may believe on him, ch. 20:31 .3. Our Lord Jesus graciously reveals
himself to him as that Son of God on whom he must believe: Thou hast both
seen him, and it is he that talketh with thee, v. 37. Thou needest not go far to find out the Son
of God, Behold the Word is nigh thee. We do not find that Christ did
thus expressly, and in so many words, reveal himself to any other as to this
man here and to the woman of Samaria: I that speak unto thee am
he. He left others to find out by arguments who he was, but to these weak
and foolish things of the world he chose to manifest himself, so as not to
the wise and prudent. Christ here describes himself to this man by
two things, which express his great favour to him:— (1.) Thou hast seen
him; and he was much indebted to the Lord Jesus for opening his eyes, that
he might see him. Now he was made sensible, more than ever, what an unspeakable
mercy it was to be cured of his blindness, that he might see the Son of God, a
sight which rejoiced his heart more than that of the light of this
world. Note, The Greatest comfort of bodily eyesight is its
serviceableness to our faith and the interests of our souls. How contentedly
might this man have returned to his former blindness, like old Simeon, now that
his eyes had seen God’s salvation! If we apply this to the opening of
the eyes of the mind, it intimates that spiritual sight is given principally
for this end, that we may see Christ, 2 Co. 4:6 .
Can we say that by faith we have seen Christ, seen him in his beauty and glory,
in his ability and willingness to save, so seen him as to be satisfied
concerning him, to be satisfied in him? Let us give him the praise, who opened our
eyes. (2.) It is he that talketh with thee; and he was indebted to
Christ for condescending to do this. He was not only favoured with a sight of
Christ, but was admitted into fellowship and communion with him. Great princes
are willing to be seen by those whom yet they will not vouchsafe
to talk with. But Christ, by his word and Spirit, talks with those
whose desires are towards him, and in talking with them manifests himself to
them, as he did to the two disciples, when he talked their hearts warm, Lu. 24:32 . Observe, This poor man was
solicitously enquiring after the Saviour, when at the same time he saw him, and
was talking with him. Note, Jesus Christ is often nearer the souls that seek
him than they themselves are aware of. Doubting Christians are sometimes
saying, Where is the Lord? and fearing that they are cast out
from his sight when at the same time it is he that talks with
them, andputs strength into them. 4. The poor man readily entertains
this surprising revelation, and, in a transport of joy and wonder, he
said, Lord, I believe, and he worshipped him. (1.) He professed his
faith in Christ: Lord, I believe thee to be the Son of God. He would
not dispute any thing that he said who had shown such mercy to him,
and wrought such a miracle for him, nor doubt of the truth of a doctrine which
was confirmed by such signs. Believing with the heart, he thus confesses with
the mouth; and now the bruised reed was become a cedar. (2.) He paid his homage
to him: He worshipped him, not only gave him the civil respect
due to a great man, and the acknowledgments owing to a kind benefactor, but
herein gave him divine honour, and worshipped him as the Son of Godmanifested
in the flesh. None but God is to be worshipped; so that in worshipping Jesus he
owned him to be God. Note, True faith will show itself in a humble adoration of
the Lord Jesus. Those who believe in him will see all the reason in the world
to worship him. We never read any more of this man; but, it is very likely,
from henceforth he became a constant follower of Christ.
Verses 39-41 Christ,
having spoken comfort to the poor man that was persecuted, here speaks
conviction to his persecutors, a specimen of the distributions of trouble and
rest at the great day, 2 Th. 1:6, 2 Th. 1:7 . Probably this was
not immediately after his discourse with the man, but he took the next
opportunity that offered itself to address the Pharisees. Here is,I. The
account Christ gives of his design in coming into the world (v. 39): "For judgment
I am come to order and administer the great affairs of
the kingdom of God among men, and am invested with a judicial power
in order thereunto, to be executed in conformity to the wise counsels of God,
and in pursuance of them.’’ What Christ spoke, he spoke not as a preacher in
the pulpit, but as a king upon the throne, and a judge upon the bench.1. His
business into the world was great; he came to keep the assizes and
general goal-delivery. He came for judgment, that is, (1.) To preach
a doctrine and a law which would try men, and effectually discover and
distinguish them, and would be completely fitted, in all respects, to be the rule
of government now and of judgment shortly. (2.) To put a difference between
men, by revealing the thoughts of many hearts, and laying open men’s true
characters, by this one test, whether they were well or ill affected to him.
(3.) To change the face of government in his church, to abolish the Jewish
economy, to take down that fabric, which, though erected for the time by the
hand of God himself, yet by lapse of time was antiquated, and by the incurable
corruptions of the managers of it was become rotten and dangerous, and to erect
a new building by another model, to institute new ordinances and offices, to
abrogate Judaism and enact Christianity; for this judgment he
came into the world, and it was a great revolution.2. This great truth he
explains by a metaphor borrowed from the miracle which he had lately wrought.
That those who see not might see, and that those who see might be made
blind.Such a difference of Christ’s coming is often spoken of; to some his
gospel is a savour of life unto life, to others of death unto
death. (1.) This is applicable to nations and people, that the Gentiles,
who had long been destitute of the light of divine revelation, might see it;
and the Jews, who had long enjoyed it, might have the things of their peace hid
from their eyes, Hos. 1:10 Hos. 2:23 . The Gentiles see a
great light, while blindness ishappened unto Israel, and their eyes are
darkened. (2.) To particular sons. Christ came into the world, [1.]
Intentionally and designedly to give sight to those that were spiritually
blind; by his word to reveal the object, and by his Spirit to heal the organ,
that many precious souls might be turned from darkness to light. He
came for judgment, that is, to set those at liberty from their
dark prison that were willing to be released, Isa. 61:1 . [2.] Eventually,
and in the issue, that those who see might be made blind; that those
who have a high conceit of their own wisdom, and set up that in contradiction
to divine revelation, might be sealed up in ignorance and infidelity. The
preaching of the cross was foolishness, and an infatuating think, to those who
by wisdom knew not God. Christ came into the world
for this judgment, to administer the affairs of a spiritual
kingdom, seated in men’s minds. Whereas, in the Jewish church, the blessings
and judgments of God’s government were mostly temporal, now the method of
administration should be changed; and as the good subjects of his kingdom
should be blessed with spiritual blessings in heavenly things, such as arise
from a due illumination of the mind, so the rebels should be punished with
spiritual plagues, not war, famine, and pestilence, as formerly, but such as
arise from a judicial infatuation, hardness of heart, terror of
conscience, strong delusions, vile affections. In this way Christ
will judge between cattle and cattle,Eze. 34:17, Eze. 34:22 .II. The Pharisees’
cavil at this. They were with him, not desirous to learn any good
from him, but to form evil against him; and they said, Are we blind
also?When Christ said that those who saw should by his coming be
made blind, they apprehended that he meant them, who were
the seers of the people, and valued themselves on their insight and foresight. "Now,’’
say they, "we know that the common people are blind; but are we blind
also? What we? The rabbin, the doctors, the learned in the laws, the
graduates in the schools, are we blind too?’’ This is scandalum
magnatum—a libel on the great. Note, Frequently those that need reproof
most, and deserve it best, though they have wit enough to discern
a tacit one, have not grace enough to bear a justone. These
Pharisees took this reproof for a reproach, as those lawyers (Lu. 11:45 ): "Are we
blind also? Darest thou say that we are blind, whose judgment every one
has such a veneration for, values, and yields to?’’ Note, Nothing fortifies
men’s corrupt hearts more against the convictions of the word, nor more
effectually repels them, than the good opinion, especially if it be a high
opinion, which others have of them; as if all that had gained applause with men
must needs obtain acceptance with God, than which nothing is more false and
deceitful, for God sees not as man sees.III. Christ’s answer to this cavil,
which, if it did not convince them, yet silenced them: If you were
blind you should have no sin; but now you say, We see, therefore your sin
remaineth. They gloried that they were not blind, as the common people,
were not so credulous and manageable as they, but would see with their own
eyes, having abilities, as they thought, sufficient for their own
guidance, so that they needed not any body to lead them. This very thing which
they gloried in, Christ here tells them, was their shame and ruin.
For,1. If you were blind, you would have no sin. (1.) "If you
had been really ignorant, your sin had not been so deeply aggravated, nor would
you have had so much sin to answer for as now you have. If you were blind, as
the poor Gentiles are, and many of your own poor subjects, from whom you have
taken the key of knowledge, you would have had comparatively no
sin.’’ The times of ignorance God winked at; invincible
ignorance, though it does not justify sin, excuses it, and lessens the guilt.
It will be more tolerable with those that perish for lack of vision than with
those that rebel against the light. (2.) "If you had been
sensible of your own blindness, if when you would see nothing else you could
have seen the need of one to lead you, you would soon have accepted Christ as
your guide, and then you wouldhave had no sin, you would have submitted to
an evangelical righteousness, and have been put into a justified state.’’ Note,
Those that are convinced of their disease are in a fair way to be cured, for
there is not a greater hindrance to the salvation of souls than
self-sufficiency.2. "But now you say, We see; now that you have
knowledge, and are instructed out of the law, your sin is highly aggravated;
and now that you have a conceit of that knowledge, and think you see your way
better than any body can show it you,therefore your sin remains, your case
is desperate, and your disease incurable.’’ And as those are most blind
who will not see, so their blindness is most dangerous who fancy they
do see. No patients are so hardly managed as those in a frenzy who say that
they are well, and nothing ails them. The sin of those who are
self-conceited and self-confidentremains, for they reject the gospel of
grace, and therefore the guilt of their sin remains unpardoned; and they
forfeit the Spirit of grace, and therefore the power of their sin remains
unbroken. Seest thou a wise man in his own conceit? Hearest thou the
Pharisees say, We see? There is more hope of a fool, of a publican
and a harlot, than of such.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Please leave a good comment, Negative comments will not be posted.