John 9:13-23

THE BLIND MAN INVESTIGATED

Text 9:13-23

13

They bring to the Pharisees him that aforetime was blind.

14

Now it was the sabbath on the day when Jesus made the clay, and opened his eyes.

15

Again therefore the Pharisees also asked him how he received his sight. And he said unto them, He put clay upon mine eyes, and I washed, and I see.

16

Some therefore of the Pharisees said, This man is not from God, because he keepeth not the sabbath. But others said, How can a man that is a sinner do such signs? And there was a division among them.

17

They say therefore unto the blind man again, What sayest thou of him, in that he opened thine eyes? And he said, He is a prophet.

18

The Jews therefore did not believe concerning him, that he had been blind, and had received his sight, until they called the parents of him that had received his sight,

19

and asked them, saying, Is this your son, who ye say was born blind? how then doth he now see?

20

His parents answered and said, We know that this is our son, and that he was born blind:

21

but how he now seeth, we know not; or who opened his eyes, we know not; ask him; he is of age; he shall speak for himself.

22

These things said his parents, because they feared the Jews: for the Jews had agreed already, that if any man should confess him to be Christ, he should be put out of the synagogue.

23

Therefore said his parents, He is of age; ask him.

Queries

a.

Why the disagreement among the Pharisees (John 9:16)?

b.

Why did the Jews refuse to believe that the man had been healed until they questioned his parents?

c.

Were the man's parents really ignorant of who had opened their son's eyes?

Paraphrase

Then they conducted the former blind man to the Pharisees (and it should be remembered that it was on the sabbath day that Jesus made clay and opened the man's eyes). The man was being asked again, now by the Pharisees, how he had received his sight. So he said to them, He put clay on my eyes and I washed, and now I am seeing. Some of the Pharisees were saying, This fellow is no man sent from God, for he is not keeping the sabbath. Others were saying, How is a sinner-man able to do such great signs? And there was disagreement among them. Therefore they spoke again to the man, saying, What do you say about him seeing that you have declared that he opened your eyes? The blind man replied, He is a prophet! However, the Jews would not believe the beggar that he had been blind and had received his sight, until they called the man's parents and questioned them, saying, Is this man your son, whom you are saying was born blind? How then is it that he now sees? The man's parents answered, We know that this is our son and we know that he was born blind. How he is now able to see, or who opened his eyes we do not know! Ask him; he is of age. He can speak for himself. His parents gave this answer because they were afraid of the Jews; for the Jewish authorities had already agreed that anyone who acknowledged Jesus as the Christ should be excommunicated from the synagogue. And for this very reason his parents said, He is of age, ask him.

Summary

The Pharisees will not even believe that the man was formerly blind. His parents testify that he was born blind. But the man's parents will not testify as to who their son's Healer is, for fear of excommunication. One thing is certain to the Pharisees: Jesus of Nazareth cannot be a God-sent miracle worker for he violates their Sabbath traditions.

Comment

Who brought the former blind man before the Pharisees? We do not know. The best guess is that some of the helpers of the Pharisees were sent to find the beggar and bring him in for questioning. It is doubtful that any of the neighbors of the man would be so eager to involve him. The news of the miracle would certainly get back to the Pharisees rapidly for, as John says parenthetically, Jesus performed the miracle on the Sabbath! For Jesus to heal again on the Sabbath was like waving a red flag in the face of a herd of enraged bulls. (For a study of Jesus and controversy, see our Volume I, pages 214-217.)

This seems to have been a formal investigation by the Pharisees, called for the specific purpose of questioning the man and passing judgment upon the miracle and the miracle-worker. It was the duty of the religious leaders to investigate all such incidents. They were charged with investigating the claims and doctrines of all who professed a message from God (Matthew 23:2; John 1:19-24). For an excellent discussion of this matter see Hendriksen's commentary on this section. It was also the duty and responsibility of the Pharisees to judge righteous judgment. These men, however, had already passed judgment on the miracle-worker, Jesus, before they investigated the miracle. They had already made up their minds that Jesus was a blasphemer. This investigation could only be a mockery of truth.

The beggar answered the first question simply and precisely. It is interesting to note that the beggar used the present tense when he said, I see. Instead of saying, I was made to see, he says, I am seeing. He wants to emphasize for the Pharisees that although they may never know how the miracle took place, they can be sure that it did take place!

The Pharisees, caring not one iota that a man had been delivered from the chains of darkness, are interested only in their sanctimonious Sabbath traditions. The real issue here, however, is not their Sabbath traditions, but finding some straw of an accusation with which to condemn Jesus of Nazareth and sentence Him to death.
Others of the Pharisees are less emotional. There stood the beggarformerly blind from birth but now seeing. Their problem was: How can a man that is an open sinner do such great signs? The word used for sinner is hamartolos, used in most places as an intensifier (cf. Luke 7:37; Luke 7:39; Luke 13:2) and means an open sinner or flagrant sinner. Jesus claimed to work miracles greater than any other (cf. John 15:24) and the beggar claims this miracle to be extraordinary (John 9:32). There may have been a division in their thinking here, but it is quickly resolved and in united action they both condemn Jesus and excommunicate the beggar (John 9:28-29; John 9:34).

For the moment, however, the judges cannot agree among themselves. They hope they have frightened the beggar by hauling him before their august court. If he is frightened enough, perhaps he will say exactly what they want him to say about JesusHe is a profaner of the Law. But the beggar is far from frightened. He is indeed a man of courage and conviction. He answers, He is a prophet! The Pharisees had already expressed their judgment of Jesus (Sabbath breaker), but with the bravery of conviction the beggar confessed Jesus to be a prophet. What a contrast! Men who had studied the Law and the Prophets all their lives could not see that Jesus was sent from God, while a man blind from birthunable to have ever studied the Scripturescan readily see that Jesus must be a prophet sent from God. The real contrast is between those who would not see and one who would see; it is a matter of wanting to see! The Pharisees were also wanting the beggar to commit himself to an opinion concerning Jesus that they might use it against him later. If they cannot harm Jesus, they will harm the man He healed. The hate of the Jewish rulers for Jesus was so intense that they would go to any length to express it. Later they would seek to kill the resurrected Lazarus out of their hate for Jesus (cf. John 12:9-11).

Although the Pharisees had the testimony of the man himself and, perhaps, the testimony of those who brought the beggar to them, they refused to accept the fact that the man had been blind and had been miraculously given his sight. That should have been enough evidence. But let's give them the benefit of the doubt and judge their reaction after more evidence has been presented.
The parents of the beggar are called before the investigating committee, In answer to the question as to whether he is their son they answer affirmatively. In answer to the question concerning his congenital blindness, again the answer is, Yes, he was born blind. Now the facts are incontrovertible. That a very notable miracle has been wrought is undeniable. Now if the Pharisees will not believe it is not a matter of insufficient evidence but of willful rejection of the truth!

The parents could have used some of the courage and conviction of their son. They were evidently not telling the truth when they said, ... who opened his eyes, we know not. for John 9:22 implies that they did know. But, as Hendriksen points out, before we criticize them too severely we must consider what we would have done in similar circumstances. To be excommunicated for the Jew was even more fearful than modern-day excommunication from the Roman Catholic Church. The excommunicated Jew was literally cut off from all social, religious, economic, or fraternal associations. His family counted him as dead (cf. John 12:42; John 16:2). The excommunicated Jew was to become to his countrymen as a heathen (cf. Matthew 18:17).

The parents, fearing these terrible consequences, determined before facing the Pharisees that they would never confess Jesus as the Messiah. It should also be clear that the Pharisees did not call this investigation to determine the truth. They had already agreed among themselves and made a public declaration that anyone openly confessing Jesus as the Messiah would be excommunicated. This inquiry was made in hopes that they might get some evidence to make what they had already determined to dokill Jesusappear less evil.

There is a very expressive phrase in the Greek rendering of John 9:23. The English Therefore of John 9:23 is a translation of the Greek, dia touto, which would best be translated Because of this, or For this very reason. There was no doubt in John's mind that the parents-' reluctance to confess Jesus as the one who had healed their son was for the very reason that they feared excommunication.

Quiz

1.

Is this investigation by the Pharisees a seeking after the truth? Why?

2.

Why ask the beggar his opinion of Jesus?

3.

Why did the Jews not believe that the beggar had formerly been blind?

4.

After the answers of the parents, what must the Pharisees admit?

5.

What was involved in being put out of the synagogue?

6.

What was the real reason for the refusal of the parents to tell who had healed their son?