Il commento del pulpito
Giovanni 9:1-41
ESPOSIZIONE
Questi capitoli (9 e 10) portano il conflitto con gli ebrei al culmine prima dell'inizio del ministero pereo. Sono senza dubbio strettamente connessi con ciò che ha preceduto; ma la nota del tempo ( Giovanni 10:22 ) implica un intervallo di alcuni mesi di intensa attività altrove, per aver svolto il ministero di Cristo dalla festa dei Tabernacoli fino all'inverno.
Se Giovanni 10:22 rimanda, come sostiene Westcott mediante l'alterazione del Testo ricevuto e mediante una traduzione speciale, al discorso precedente, siamo costretti a dissociare la cura del cieco dall'insegnamento di Giovanni 8:1 ., e per quanto riguarda il versetto di apertura di Giovanni 9:1 .
come del tutto distinto e discontinuo con la scena tempestosa nel tempio. Il dott. Eustace Conder, "Schemi della vita di Cristo", considera la connessione così stretta tra l'ottavo, il nono e il decimo capitolo, da riunire l'intera serie di istruzioni in un unico gruppo e da intercalare una parte considerevole del successivo ministero galileo e anche quello in Persea tra i capitoli settimo e ottavo.
Su tale ipotesi, dopo lo scioglimento del Sinedrio nell'ultimo grande giorno della Festa dei Tabernacoli ( Giovanni 7:52 ), intervenne un'assenza di alcuni mesi prima che Gesù ( Giovanni 8:12 ) parlasse loro di nuovo, e disse , " Io sono la Luce del mondo", derivando la sua illustrazione dalla "Festa delle Luci", che accompagnava l' enkaiaia di Giovanni 10:22 .
La rimozione dal testo delle parole conclusive di Giovanni 8:59 come glossa, favorisce una pausa tra il tentativo di lapidazione di Gesù e il miracolo. Lange ha l'osservazione incoerente che il παράγων è "il participio del precedente sebbene dubbioso παρῆγεν". Se si trattasse di un gloss, il παρηγεν era stato introdotto da qualche copista dal l'παραγων, e quindi quest'ultimo può derivare alcun significato dal primo.
Ammettendo la falsità della glossa, la connessione tra i capitoli non è abbastanza stretta da consentire la supposizione che, all'uscita dal tempio con i suoi discepoli, sia avvenuto il colloquio e il miracolo. Godet pensa che il momento più probabile sia stato la sera del giorno memorabile in cui nostro Signore ei suoi discepoli erano tornati al tempio. È vero, in Atti degli Apostoli 3:2 uno storpio congenito sedeva alla porta del tempio, chiedendo l'elemosina; ma in questo luogo non si fa menzione del tempio.
Nostro Signore può aver "visto" questo mendicante in una qualsiasi delle sue peregrinazioni sulle pendici dell'Uliveto o sulla strada per Betania, e ora sembra essere in compagnia dei discepoli, e con loro solo. Apparentemente non stanno soffrendo per la recente eccitazione della gara rabbiosa nel tempio-corte. Hanno avuto il tempo di riprendersi e di attingere da Cristo, non come l'eterno IO SONO , ma come il loro "Rabbi", una soluzione di un enigma psicologico e teologico molto pressante che ha agitato tutte le scuole di pensiero.
Eppure la risposta di Gesù, che implica una nuova illustrazione del suo essere la "Luce del mondo", mostra che i grandi enunciati del discorso precedente erano ancora il tema in primo piano nella sua mente. Sappiamo che il discorso, ecc., ebbe luogo di sabato , e il risultato della guarigione si riferisce più da vicino alla discussione che seguì la guarigione dell'uomo impotente in Giovanni 5:1 . e 7.
(8) Il Signore conferma con un segno la dichiarazione di essere la Luce del mondo , donando la vista oltre che la luce . Quella che era stata proclamata come una grande verità del suo Essere e della sua missione, cioè. che egli era la Luce del mondo, doveva ora essere stabilito e confermato ai discepoli da un segnale miracoloso. La "critica superiore" trova spiegazione di questo e di altri miracoli simili a Betsaida ea Gerico, nella profezia di Isaia 42:19 ; Isaia 43:8 ; Isaia 35:5 ; Isaia 29:18 .
Volkmar sostiene che la storia di Zaccheo sia così riscritta! Thoma pensa che abbiamo una spiritualizzazione del "miracolo" su Saulo di Tarso. Sarebbe tempo perso evidenziare le differenze che sono evidenti alla critica più semplice.
E —il καί suggerisce una relazione sia nel soggetto, nel tempo, nel luogo, nell'occasione, nel tema, con ciò che l'aveva preceduto— mentre Gesù passava, percorrendo il suo cammino, vide un uomo cieco dalla nascita (cfr ἐκ ). κοιλίας μητρὸς αὐτοῦ, At Atti degli Apostoli 3:2 ; At Atti degli Apostoli 14:8 ). Atti degli Apostoli 3:2, Atti degli Apostoli 14:8
Era ovviamente un noto mendicante, che aveva spesso proclamato di essere cieco dalla nascita (cfr Giovanni 9:8 ). Tale condizione e storia rendevano la cura più difficile e disperata agli occhi dei professori ordinari dell'arte della guarigione, e la giustapposizione di un fatto così simbolico con la vicina attività di coloro che si vantavano del loro privilegio abramitico e della loro mera ereditarietà nazionale. vantaggi, è uno dei casi di poesia inconscia della storia evangelica.
Là siede, il tipo stesso della razza che dice: "Noi vediamo ", ma che agli occhi di Cristo proclamava la sua totale impotenza e cecità, non chiedendo nemmeno di essere illuminata, e rivelando il danno fondamentale fatto alla stessa razza e natura dell'uomo, e chiedendo tutto il potere di guarigione che era stato inviato nel mondo per dispensare. L'uomo che era stato colpito alla cecità, o la cui vista era stata lentamente dosata dalla malattia, divenne il tipo dell'effetto di peccati speciali sul carattere e sulla vita; quindi e .
g . la vanità nasconde radicali difetti e debolezze; l'orgoglio nasconde alla vista del peccatore le proprie trasgressioni; la cecità temporanea a grandi colpe è uno dei sintomi di un peccato grave come quello di Davide, e il pregiudizio è proverbialmente cieco e sordo; ma ecco un uomo che non è altro che il tipo di un pregiudizio congenito al male, di un danno ereditario fatto alla natura umana. A meno che Cristo non possa illuminare coloro che sono nati ciechi, non è il Salvatore di cui il mondo ha bisogno.
E i suoi discepoli lo interrogarono, dicendo: Rabbi. Questo appellativo onorifico si trova in Giovanni 1:38 , Giovanni 1:49 ; Giovanni 3:2 ; Giovanni 4:31 ; Giovanni 6:25 ; Giovanni 11:8 ; ma molto raramente negli altri Vangeli.
Si applica a Giovanni Battista ( Giovanni 3:26 ). La domanda sembra denotare uno stato d'animo molto diverso da quello con cui si chiudeva il capitolo precedente. Chi ha peccato, quest'uomo, oi suoi genitori, per essere nato cieco? Era l'idea corrente e la dottrina popolare, non solo che tutta la sofferenza in questa vita avesse la sua origine nel peccato, e fosse una testimonianza del danno arrecato alla nostra natura dal peccato, dall'interruzione delle nostre normali relazioni con il Dio vivente, ma inoltre che ogni singolare calamità indicava qualche peccato speciale o particolare.
Senza dubbio il Libro di Giobbe era una discussione formale della questione. L'autore di quell'opera ripudia il diritto di qualsiasi spettatore di inferire peccati speciali da punizioni particolari. Gesù, inoltre ( Luca 13:1 ); aveva ripetutamente scoraggiato la tendenza a giudicare, ma lo fece con l'ancor più solenne assicurazione che tutti gli uomini meritavano il destino speciale di alcuni.
Tuttavia, la calamità della cecità congenita, con tutta la sua disperazione, fornì un'occasione molto adatta per sollevare la domanda: "Chi ha peccato, quest'uomo oi suoi genitori?" È e sarà sempre difficile dire se i discepoli pensavano di aver esaurito le alternative, o credevano di avere ragioni plausibili per pensare che l'una o l'altra alternativa fosse possibile. Alcuni hanno sostenuto di aver fondato la Scrittura per la seconda delle supposizioni, che il peccato dei genitori del cieco fosse la vera causa della cecità del loro figlio.
Così ( Esodo 20:5 ) l'idea è incorporata nel Decalogo, ed è ripetuta in Esodo 34:7 e Numeri 14:18 , che le iniquità dei padri sono colpite dai loro figli. I quarant'anni nel deserto furono un punto facile ( Numeri 14:33 , Numeri 14:34 ; Geremia 32:18 ), e si possono dare numerosi esempi della punizione che discende da genitore a figlio; e .
g . sulla casa di Acab, e sui sofferenti dell'esilio in Babilonia. Confronta la continua minaccia di vendetta per l'infedeltà alla generazione a venire. L'argomento potrebbe essere stato rafforzato dall'osservazione della sorte degli uomini che hanno portato povertà, malattie e disonore sui loro bambini non ancora nati. Ezechiele aveva deliberatamente ripudiato l'inferenza che Israele aveva tratto dalle sue Scritture, nel detto o proverbio ( Ezechiele 18:2 ) che "i padri hanno mangiato uva acerba e i denti dei figli si sono allegati", e ha sostenuto con grande e appassionato serietà, "L'anima che pecca, morirà.
Questo può aver indotto i discepoli a porre la soluzione congetturale. Quest'uomo ha peccato? C'è un modo o un senso in cui il peccato stesso dell'uomo potrebbe essere la causa di una così grande calamità? Sembra del tutto gratuito ricavare da questo passo qualche conclusione finale circa il metodo in cui ritenevano possibile che la personalità dell'uomo precedesse la sua nascita, o qualsiasi convinzione certa che con la loro domanda intendessero più di questo: se il peccato è la causa di tale spaventosa privazione, dev'essere o l'uomo dei genitori o dei suoi. Non poteva essere suo, era dunque dei suoi genitori? C'era una discussione sufficiente sul problema tra gli ebrei perché una o più opinioni vaghe e incerte fluttuassero nelle loro menti.
(1) Non si può provare che la dottrina della metempsicosi sia mai stata sostenuta dagli ebrei. Il linguaggio in cui Giuseppe Flavio si riferisce alle opinioni dei farisei è ambiguo (cfr. 'Bell. Jud.,' Ezechiele 2:8 . 14; 'Ant.,' Ezechiele 18:1 . Ezechiele 18:3 ). La visione da loro sostenuta era semplicemente che "le anime immortali dei buoni (soltanto) passano in un altro corpo", sono elevate a una nuova vita; "ma che le anime dei peccatori αἰδίῳ τιμωρίᾳ κολαζέσθαι, siano afflitte con carne punitiva eterna." Questo differisce profondamente dalla dottrina della trasmigrazione orientale, o pitagorica, o platonica.
(2) La speculazione ebraica sulla preesistenza delle anime ha qualche connotazione da Sap. 8,19-20, dove lo pseudo-Salomone dice: "Ero un bambino spiritoso, e... essendo buono, sono entrato in un corpo incontaminato ," modificando alquanto l'idea platonica di un'armonia tra l'anima preesistente e il corpo; ma oltre a questo non c'è alcuna indicazione valida che la mente ebraica avesse accettato la dottrina che ebbe un ruolo così grande nelle discussioni successive quanto alle opinioni di Origene.
(3) Lightfoot ('Horae Hebraicae,' in , loc .) pensa "il dogma tenuto da R. Akiba, commentando Ecclesiaste 12:1 , secondo cui "nei giorni del Messia non ci sarà né merito né demerito" - i . e . che né il merito né demerito dei genitori saranno imputate ai posteri-può spiegare la query degli apostoli.
(4) L'idea della possibile peccaminosità del bambino mentre era nel grembo di sua madre, una teoria basata sulla presunta attività morale di Giacobbe ed Esaù nel grembo di Rebecca, e l'affermazione che Giovanni Battista sussultò nel grembo di sua madre Elisabetta ( Luca 1:41 ) - potrebbe aver collaborato con altre idee vaghe che fluttuavano nelle loro menti con intensità sufficiente a spiegare la prima parte della loro domanda.
(5) La supposizione di alcuni (Tholuck), che i discepoli possano aver pensato che i peccati dell'uomo fossero preconosciuti e che la cecità fosse una punizione in anticipo, è così ripugnante per qualsiasi nozione della giustizia di Dio, che non possiamo supporre che essa mai entrati nella loro inchiesta. Il fatto che non meno di cinque ipotesi distinte sulla possibilità di colpevolezza prima della nascita abbiano avuto un posto nel pensiero ebraico e contemporaneo, è una spiegazione adeguata del fatto che avrebbero dovuto porre questo problema sempre ricorrente del male nella forma particolare in cui lo troviamo.
Gesù rispose: Né quest'uomo ha peccato, né i suoi genitori (che nascesse cieco). Non c'era una connessione immediata tra il peccato speciale dei genitori e questa particolare calamità. Nostro Signore non afferma con quelle parole l'assenza di peccato di quelle persone, ma recide il presunto legame tra la loro condotta e l'afflizione specifica davanti a loro. Ma (è nato cieco) che le opere di Dio si manifestassero in lui.
I discepoli vedranno presto nella storia di quest'uomo il significato della sua cecità per tutta la vita. Nell'uomo stesso opererà potentemente la grazia di Dio, un'illuminazione sia corporea che spirituale. Il male in questo caso è ricondursi a un bene maggiore. Ciò non offre l'opportunità a nessuno di accusare l'uno o l'altro di una speciale trasgressione, ma, come dovrebbe fare ogni male, offre l'opportunità per l'opera redentrice che Cristo è venuto a compiere e che ha permesso ai suoi discepoli di condividere.
Noi £ dobbiamo compiere le opere di colui che mi ha mandato , f1 finché è giorno. L'emendamento del testo aggiunge certamente molta bellezza all'affermazione. Cristo si identifica con i suoi discepoli. Sono impegnati accettando la sua chiamata, e lui stesso è stato incaricato dalla sua sublime missione di lavorare mentre è chiamato giorno. Il sole stava tramontando sulla città santa in quel giorno di sabato, e Gesù non aspetterà, né perderà l'occasione di fare la volontà misericordiosa del Padre.
Non ha detto: "Colui che ci ha mandato " (come legge Tischendorff1), perché "Come il Padre ha mandato lui, così ha mandato loro". Ma aggiunge: Viene la notte, quando nessun uomo può lavorare. L'interpretazione materialistica di Paulus, "Cristo deve avere la luce del giorno per un'operazione delicata", è troppo puerile per meritare una confutazione. Il suggerimento dei Padri greci (Crisostomo, Teofilatto, ecc.
), che qui distingueva tra l'opera di questo mondo e l'opera del mondo futuro, tra l'opera svolta prima e dopo la sua Passione, rappresentando l'opera del suo ministero terreno come compiuto nel giorno, e quella dello Spirito come opera fatto di notte, è singolarmente sfortunato. Nostro Signore sta semplicemente adottando la frase come immagine consueta per la vita e la morte. La morte pone fine a ogni attività umana sulla terra, anche a quella di Cristo, come umano Amico e Maestro.
Numerosi tentativi sono stati fatti per supporre un chiaro contrasto tra la vita di Cristo e il periodo che dovrebbe seguire la sua Passione. Tutti falliscono, perché l'attività stessa di Cristo riprende un'altra forma con la sua risurrezione e il dono del suo Spirito. La notte della morte, accompagnata dalla cessazione del lavoro attivo, è l'idea generale. Il lavoro della giornata deve essere svolto nella giornata. La prova implicata nel semplice fatto della sua limitazione, e in questo caso il suo rapido avvicinamento al compimento, è il pensiero principale, senza spingere troppo l'immaginario.
Dicendo: "Dobbiamo lavorare", ecc., ha dato una lezione e un esempio per tutti i tempi. Il "Pirke Aboth", "I detti dei Padri", registra le parole di R. Tryphon, "Il giorno è breve e il compito è grande, e gli operai sono pigri e la ricompensa è grande, e il Maestro di la casa è urgente».
Mentre -o, whensoever- io sono nel mondo, io sono la luce del mondo. Aveva detto ( Giovanni 8:12 ): "Io sono la luce del mondo: chi mi segue non camminerà nelle tenebre". Era sublimemente cosciente del suo potere di fare per il mondo morale ciò che il sole stava facendo per il mondo fisico. Egli fu l'Occasione della sua vita, la Condizione della sua attività, il mezzo della sua istruzione, la Sorgente di tutta la sua bellezza, la sua gioia e il suo progresso.
Il ὅταν, che si traduce quamdiu in vulgata, e "fintanto che" nella versione Autorizzata, significa strettamente "quando" e si riferisce all'intero periodo della sua attività (cfr Giovanni 1:5 ). Ma mentre il sole di questo mondo non può aprire gli occhi dei ciechi e spreca il suo splendore sulle loro orbite cieche, così, a meno che Cristo non fosse più del sole , e potesse dare il potere così come l'opportunità di vedere, non avrebbe mai hanno compiuto l'opera di colui che lo ha mandato.
Il fatto che sia la Luce lo porta a ricordare ai discepoli che è lui la vera Sorgente della vista così come delle condizioni della vista. Luce sufficiente perché tutto il mondo risplenda nell'oscurità, ma l'oscurità non la comprende. Questo popolo ebraico è circondato da inondazioni di luce. Il mondo spirituale si rivela pienamente allo sguardo stesso di Cristo. Ma l'umanità odia la luce, ama le tenebre su queste cose piuttosto che la luce.
V'è un cambiamento fondamentale radicale che deve venire sugli uomini, o non potranno mai vedere . Questo male, questa terribile calamità che ha colpito l'uomo, vizierà ogni provvedimento di misericordia. Ci deve essere un nuovo inizio, una nuova nascita, un'opera di Dio operata negli uomini, così come una rivelazione sublime fatta agli uomini, o l'intera missione del Cristo sarebbe incompleta.
Quando ebbe detto queste cose, sputò per terra, fece del fango con la saliva, e con il £ argilla dello stesso unse i suoi (i) occhi (del cieco). Il preciso significato e motivo del processo qui descritto è stato fonte di grande perplessità per i commentatori. Vediamo che, in altre occasioni, nostro Signore ha usato la sua stessa saliva come mezzo di cura.
Il tema trova nello sputo il simbolo dell'impurità dell'uomo così trattato ( Isaia 1:5 , Isaia 1:6 ), ma paragona in modo un po' incoerente l'"argilla" con il "collirio" di Apocalisse 3:17 , e l'"ausfiuss des Logos". In alcune occasioni Gesù toccò l'organo malato o carente, mise la sua mano sul lebbroso e le sue dita nelle orecchie del sordomuto.
In altre occasioni, ancora, guarì con la sola parola, e anche a distanza, coloro che. nella libertà e regalità del suo amore, scelse di alleviare le loro sofferenze. Era commosso, senza dubbio, in ogni caso dalla «condizione speciale e dal temperamento degli oggetti della sua compassione». L'uso di questi mezzi aveva probabilmente lo scopo di evocare la fede nascente che lo predisponeva a ricevere la guarigione, di stimolare la mente del sofferente a qualche relazione cosciente con la volontà stessa attraverso quelle altre facoltà di sensibilità tattile che in tutti i casi simili erano singolarmente acute.
Inoltre, la virtù della saliva nei casi di cecità era ben compresa. Lightfoot dà qualche curiosa prova di ciò, e Tacito ('Hist.,' 4:81) e Svetonius ('Vesp.,' Giovanni 7:1 .) registrano entrambi la guarigione di un cieco da parte dell'imperatore vespasiano da parte del uso della saliva del digiuno . Plinio (' Hist. Nat.,' 28:7) parla dello stesso rimedio per le malattie dell'occhio.
"Argilla" è anche parlato come sanativo da un medico di nome Serenus Samonicus (vedi Tholuck, Wetistein, Lange, in loc .). Queste idee possono aver avuto qualche verità in loro, e per il cieco trovare il processo descritto, applicato a se stesso da Colui che ha parlato delle operazioni divine che vengono operate in lui, avrebbe operato un potente effetto sul suo morale, fisico e spirituale. natura. Tale risultato nostro Signore intendeva produrre. Ma questa era solo una parte del processo di guarigione.
E , fatto questo, gli disse: Va ', vattene, presto, c'è qualcosa da fare per te, lavati nella piscina di Siloe . Σιλωάμ: questa è la forma greca della parola ebraica חַוֹלישִׁ, (חַלֹשִׁ con l'articolo הַלשִּׁהַ, la forma abbreviata Pihel חַלֹשָׁ, mandare avanti, con l'omissione del daghesh) adottata in Isaia 8:6 dai LXX .
, e anche da Giuseppe Flavio ('Bell. Jud.,' 5.4.1). L'unico altro luogo dell'Antico Testamento in cui si fa riferimento alla piscina di Siloe è Nehemia 3:15 . Lì la parola ebraica è תלַשֶּׁהַ, e resa dai LXX . κωδίων— i . e . di pelli di pecora; cioè la pozza che serviva a lavare le pecore prima di tosarle, o anche la fossa dell'abbronzatura (così Schleusner e Hesych.
)-ma è reso da Siloe in vulgata. Isaia sta contrapponendo le acque dello Shiloah, che scorrono dolcemente, con i torrenti turbolenti del Tigri, che rappresentava lo sfarzo e il potere di questo mondo. Le dolci acque della piscina di Siloe scorrono ancora dalla loro fonte apparente attraverso quelli che un tempo erano i giardini del re, nel Kedron vicino alla confluenza della valle di Giosafat con quella che un tempo era chiamata la valle del Figlio di Innom.
Silwan è il nome arabo della fontana e della piscina di Siloe, e anche del villaggio sul lato opposto della valle. Neemia si riferisce, con ogni probabilità, alla stessa piscina, le cui mura erano in parte le mura della città stessa sullo sperone inferiore del monte Ofel, che ora è finalmente determinato essere la Sion della Scrittura e la città di Davide . Si parla anche di una "torre di Siloe" ( Luca 13:4 ).
Non è necessario qui rivedere gli argomenti a favore di questa posizione, con la relativa conclusione che il Tyropaeon, la valle dei formaggiai, che separava Ofel e il monte del tempio dalla città alta, era la valle del figlio di Hinnom , pagg. 215; e "Luce fresca dagli antichi monumenti", p. 98, ecc.). La posizione della fontana e della piscina di Siloe è uno dei siti meglio autenticati in Palestina (vedi "Ricerche bibliche" di Robinson, 1:493-507).
Sayce fornisce forti ragioni per credere che sia stato fatto ai giorni di Salomone, e che il procedimento di Ezechia, di cui si parla in 2 Cronache 32:30 , quando deviò l'acqua da Ghihon e la portò al lato ovest della città di David, non era a causa (come Edersheim, Canon Birch, e altri) della formazione del tunnel a zig-zag dalla Fontana della Vergine, ma si riferiva alla formazione del tunnel del colonnello Warren, da cui venivano fatte le acque della stessa fontana disponibili all'interno della città trascinandoli più a nord-ovest, e raggiungendoli tramite una rampa di scale che scendono dalla città di Davide ( 2 Re 20:20 ).
Egli pensa che 2 Cronache 32:30 sia interpretato della vasca inferiore di Siloe. I riferimenti contemporanei di Isaia ( Isaia 7:3 ; Isaia 8:6 ; Isaia 22:9 ) si applicano solo al tunnel di Siloe, alla piscina di Siloe e a quella piscina inferiore, che fu riparata da Ezechia. La vasca superiore, e quindi il tunnel che la riforniva, erano conosciuti al tempo di Acaz.
Giuseppe Flavio fa spesso riferimento alla fontana di Siloe, e dice espressamente che era situata alla foce del Tiro-paeon. L'Itin. Ciao.' e Girolamo entrambi affermano che era ai piedi del monte Sion (vedi in particolare il "Comm. in Esa. Isaia 8:6 " di Girolamo ). Antonino martire (nel VII secolo), Guglielmo di Tiro, Beniamino di Tudela e Feas vi fanno riferimento. Questo notevole collegamento con la Fontana di Maria era noto a Quaresmius nel diciassettesimo secolo, ma non fu scoperto fino a quando Robinson vi entrò da entrambe le estremità e scoprì che esisteva una comunicazione sotterranea diretta tra la cosiddetta Fontana della Vergine e la Fontana di Siloe.
Nel 1881 la scoperta accidentale di un'iscrizione in ebraico puro, di data incerta , descrive il processo di scavo, e spiega le false partenze fatte dalle due parti di scavatori, che alla fine si incontrarono e scoprirono i diversi livelli a cui erano stati Lavorando. Ogni volta che veniva fatto, da Salomone, Uzzia, Acaz o Ezechia, era ovviamente destinato a portare acqua fresca all'interno delle mura della città.
Il carattere intermittente del flusso dell'acqua nella Fontana della Vergine, per cui a volte due o tre volte al giorno, e in altre stagioni due o tre volte alla settimana, l'acqua sale improvvisamente e scompare con gorgoglii nei condotti fatti per la sua rimozione , è stato citato da Girolamo, come testimone oculare e uditivo dell'avvenimento. Lasciamo la questione dell'identificazione della Fontana della Vergine con una qualsiasi delle fontane citate nell'Antico Testamento.
Il punto di singolare interesse è che le acque di Siloe erano in comunicazione diretta con la sorgente superiore, che può essere ancora provata essere in relazione a una riserva d'acqua più abbondante nella roccia del tempio. Nelle ulteriori complessità di questo problema non è necessario entrare. Le piscine di Siloe sono ancora visibili vicino all'imbocco della valle del Tyropaeon. Non si può mettere in dubbio l'impronta del collegamento con la Fonte della Vergine, né si può contestare il fatto che da Siloe, durante la festa dei Tabernacoli, le acque sacre fossero portate in solenne processione e con rito sacro (cfr Giovanni 7:1 .
). Nostro Signore ha inviato il cieco, così trasalito in una certa ricettività della grazia, a quella che era la fonte simbolica dell'acqua della vita. Lo fece nel giorno di sabato, rivendicando la cooperazione con Geova nella sua opera veramente sabbatica: "Il Padre mio opera finora, e io opero". Siloe era già stato il tipo di ciò che Gesù era in realtà, quando aveva pianto e aveva detto: "Se uno ha sete, venga a me e beva.
" Di conseguenza, c'è un'appropriatezza sorprendente nella lingua di San Giovanni qui introdotta tra parentesi ( che è, interpretata, Sent ); equivalente a missio , da חלַשָׁ, equivalente a mittit o missus , che può essere sinonimo di חַוּלשָׁ, vale a dire. il participio rafforzato Kal con significato passivo.Giovanni è corretto nella sua etimologia.
Siloe deriva probabilmente il suo nome dal fatto che le sue acque venivano inviate dalle sorgenti superiori, attraverso canali conosciuti, con un significato speciale come dono di Dio per la conservazione della vita del popolo e memoriale secolare della sua bontà. L'antico poeta Nonno, Eutimio e Meyer vedono qui un riferimento all'uomo che fu così "inviato" a lavarsi ea essere guarito; ma una moltitudine di commentatori, da Teofilatto, Calvino, Cornelius a Lapide, fino a Luthardt, Godet e Westcott, giustamente insistono sul fatto che "Siloe", nel senso di "Inviato", fosse nel pensiero di Giovanni emblematico di colui che aveva così spesso parlato di stesso come l'inviato di Dio.
Il punto della parentesi è che il nome stesso di questa fonte guaritrice e simbolica è un tipo di Messia, che si identifica così con i doni inviati dal cielo della mano divina. Quindi (quindi) partì e si lavò . Il cieco non aveva bisogno di una guida per Siloe, e se avesse clonato così ci sarebbero stati una ventina di aiutanti o curiosi ansiosi di testare il significato del comando del Signore .
E se ne andò da Siloe , vedendo ; in tutta la strana e meravigliosa eccitazione di un uomo che, con il suo primo possesso di questo senso imperiale, si stava davvero muovendo in un mondo nuovo. Il miracolo, naturalmente, provoca la scuola critica o a ripudiare l'elemento soprannaturale, oa dubitare del fatto storico. Il tema sogna attraverso un mondo di parallelismi con la guarigione e l'apostolato di San Paolo.
(9) La prova della realtà del miracolo , l'antagonismo dei farisei , e la persecuzione del folle riscaldata .
I vicini dunque, e quelli che prima lo videro che (o, perché) era un mendicante . £ Questa è la prima volta che viene menzionata la sua nota posizione, e (se traduciamo ὅτι "perché") il fatto stesso della sua mendicità (probabilmente a voce alta) lo aveva reso un individuo noto. Disse: Non è questo colui che sedeva e pregava ?
Alcuni dicevano, è lui: altri , no £ ma lui è come lui. Un cambiamento così grande potrebbe aver provocato un'indagine sulla sua identità, e le due classi di oratori aggiungono una vivacità sorprendente al quadro. Lui (ἐκείνος) - l'uomo che ora si ergeva come l'oggetto centrale del gruppo eccitato (vedi Westcott per l'uso di ἐκεῖνος altrove a St.
Giovanni: Giovanni 2:21 ; Giovanni 5:11 ; Giovanni 10:6 ; Giovanni 13:30 ; Giovanni 19:21 )—piuttosto che "lui stesso"—ha detto, io sono ( lui ) che si è seduto e ha pregato. L'uomo risolve subito il dubbio, io sono lui . La prova dell'identità, se la questione viene sollevata, è subito risolta. La vivacità e la verosimiglianza della scena riducono il faticoso parallelo con San Paolo a un'inezia letteraria.
Gli dissero dunque: Come dunque si sono aperti i tuoi occhi? Se sei proprio l'uomo, come è successo?
Egli —l'uomo là individuato— rispose ( e disse ): L'uomo che si chiama Gesù ha fatto la creta, mi ha unto gli occhi e mi ha detto: Va' da £ Siloe e lavati. Così sono andato, e quando mi sono lavato ho ricevuto la vista. Nulla di più che il nome del suo Benefattore si è rivelato su di lui. Il nome è pieno di significato per lui: il "Salvatore", il "guaritore", ma non sa nulla delle sue affermazioni messianiche, né della sua autorità divina.
Cominciò, dove tutti i discepoli devono, con l' Uomo . Il modo di fare dell'uomo risveglia presto in lui interrogativi più alti e una spiegazione migliore. Attualmente il processo sembra magico, del tutto inspiegabile. L'argilla e l'acqua di Siloe non curano la cecità alla nascita, la cravatta è in un labirinto, come potrebbe essere. Il ἀνέβλεψα dovrebbe essere reso, secondo Meyer, "Ho guardato in alto". Non può essere tradotto così in Giovanni 9:15 e Giovanni 9:18 .
Senza dubbio significa strettamente: "Ho ricevuto di nuovo la vista"; ma c'è qualcosa nella spiegazione di Grozio: "Nessuno è detto erroneamente di ricevere ciò che, sebbene ne sia privato, appartiene alla natura umana nel suo insieme" (vedi Westcott). Gli occhi c'erano, ma inutilizzati. Meyer cita da Pausania l'uso simile di ἀναβλέπειν, in riferimento al recupero o all'ottenimento della vista da parte di un uomo nato cieco.
Gli dicono: Dov'è quell'uomo (Gesù)? Dice, non lo so.
Conducono ai farisei colui che un tempo era cieco . I "farisei" non è una definizione conclusiva dello stesso Sinedrio, che è generalmente indicato con l'aggiunta della frase "i capi sacerdoti" ( Giovanni 7:32 o 45). I farisei erano una società altamente organizzata, e alcuni noti raduni di loro potevano essere facilmente accessibili. Erano le guide religiose generalmente accreditate del popolo.
Una cosa milita contro un incontro così casuale. In Giovanni 9:18 viene nuovamente introdotto il termine "ebrei", sinonimo dei poteri ecclesiastici al potere nella città. Inoltre, le autorità davanti alle quali si è svolta la discussione e l'esame sembrano possedere il potere di scomunica dalla sinagoga. Sembra che a Gerusalemme esistessero due concili minori o tribunali sinagoga, di ventitré assessori ciascuno, corrispondenti agli analoghi tribunali delle città ebraiche, in rapporto con il Sinedrio e dotati della facoltà di pronunciare i gradi minori di scomunica dalla congregazione di Israele.
Non si può dire che questa presentazione del caso ad un tribunale ecclesiastico di più o meno autorità avvenisse necessariamente il giorno della guarigione. È una questione aperta se i tribunali sedessero di sabato. Non c'è nulla che dimostri un processo immediato della questione.
Ora era sabato nel giorno £ che Gesù fece l'argilla e aprì gli occhi. La frase è peculiare e implica che il giorno potrebbe essere stato un sabato festivo. L'introduzione qui mostra che la difficoltà dei vicini e degli altri amici era già stata sollevata, e qualcosa di più che un desiderio da parte loro di una guida religiosa ha attivato il loro appello ai farisei.
Perché mai il guarito dovrebbe essere condotto dai farisei, o addirittura alla corte della sinagoga, a meno che non sia stata sollevata qualche questione di casistica? Il movimento era indiscutibilmente avverso a Gesù. Non avrebbe potuto avere altro motivo. Né può sorgere alcun dubbio che Gesù avesse violato le regole rabbiniche del sabato, sebbene il suo atto fosse stato in perfetta armonia con lo spirito e perfino con la lettera della Legge mosaica.
Fare l'argilla con la saliva e la sabbia era un'infrazione alla regola ('Sabato', 24:3). È stato curiosamente stabilito in una delle interpretazioni vessatorie (conservata a Gerusalemme Gemara su 'Shabbath,' 14) che mentre "il vino potrebbe essere applicato come rimedio alla palpebra, per il motivo che questo potrebbe essere trattato come lavaggio, era peccato applicarlo all'interno dell'occhio" (Edersheim).
Ed era assolutamente vietato (nella stessa Gemara) applicare la saliva sulla palpebra, perché questa sarebbe stata l'applicazione di un rimedio. Erano altresì vietati tutti gli apparecchi medicinali, salvo in caso di pericolo per la vita o per l'incolumità fisica. Di conseguenza, il Signore aveva rotto con le glosse tradizionali sulla Legge in più di un modo (vedi Winer, 'Bibl. Realw.,' 2:346; Lightfoot, 'Ad Joan. 9.; 'Wetstein su Matteo 12:9 ; Wunsche, in loc .).
Di nuovo dunque i farisei , davanti ai quali era stato condotto il cieco, non volendo riposare con la semplice prova per sentito dire di tale grave trasgressione della Legge, anche loro — o, a loro volta — gli chiesero (ἠρώτων, imperfetto, interrogavano) come avesse ricevuto (recuperato) la vista (vedi nota a Giovanni 9:11 ).
Non il miracolo in sé, ma il modo di farlo li interessava e li eccitava. Ed egli disse loro: (Egli) ha messo dell'argilla sui miei occhi, e mi sono lavato, e vedo . Questo è un compendio più breve e significativo del processo già descritto. L'uomo guarito sembra intuire, dal loro modo, che si stesse meditando qualche accusa contro il suo Benefattore, e omette astutamente la saliva e la fabbricazione dell'argilla, e l'ordine del Salvatore, e il luogo dove era stato mandato a lavare.
indica, come spesso fa l'evangelista altrove ( Giovanni 7:43 ; Giovanni 10:19 ), che le parole e le opere di Cristo producono effetti opposti su classi diverse. Alcuni individui dei farisei dissero dunque tra di loro, questo uomo -referring a Cristo, poi più in alto nella loro mente e nel loro machinations- Quest'uomo non viene da Dio, perché non osserva il sabato.
La forma della frase è particolarmente sprezzante, la parola "uomo" viene lanciata con molta enfasi alla fine della frase. Questo, a loro avviso, è un altro reato contro la Legge, dopo un grave avvertimento. La controversia precedente ( Giovanni 5:1 .) non aveva prodotto alcun effetto su Gesù. Continuò, secondo loro, a invalidare tutte le sue pretese violando le leggi del sabato, che avevano portato al punto più alto della perfezione.
Renan e altri insistono sulla ripetuta violazione del sabato da parte di Cristo; ma il fatto è che il Signore ha sostenuto il significato più alto del sabato, pur ripudiando risolutamente le glosse inumane e le manifesta assurdità dei costumi tradizionali e delle regole rabbiniche. Gesù non poteva essere, pensavano (o sostenevano), "da Dio", investito della sua autorità, o facendo le sue opere, così forte da non prendere la loro visione del sabato.
Questo Gesù attacca ostinatamente i loro pregiudizi. In sette distinte occasioni il Signore scelse di guarire di sabato, e quindi di sfidare le restrizioni degli augusti rabbini. Ma anche nel grande Sinedrio, nel più alto consiglio della nazione, sedevano uomini del carattere di Giuseppe, Nicodemo e Gamaliele, che avrebbero avuto un'idea del mandato divino di Gesù dal semplice fatto dei miracoli.
In questa corte minore gli oppositori di Cristo ignorano e dubitano del miracolo stesso, a causa dell'eresia insabbatica, mentre pochi sono convinti che segni di questo genere (e probabilmente ne avevano in mente molti) fossero di per sé prove della divina co- funzionamento e approvazione. Ma altri dicevano: Come può un uomo peccatore (secondo la tua ipotesi) fare tali segni ? "Per quanto vanno, questi miracoli sono la prova dimostrativa che almeno Dio deve essere con lui, come ha detto, e rendono estremamente dubbio che possa essere un uomo malvagio, dopo tutto, possa aver veramente infranto la Legge Divina.
"Un discorso come questo dei farisei è una prova enfatica del profondo effetto prodotto da Gesù sulla vita della nazione. È in stretta associazione con la notevole affermazione di Nicodemo ( Giovanni 3:2 ): "Sappiamo che nessun uomo può fare i segni (segni) quale sei fare, se Dio non è con lui ". Gesù e rabbinismo sono qui faccia a faccia. o che viene da Dio e che sono in realtà facendo la legge di Dio vuoto e insulso dalle loro tradizioni, o loro e il loro codice vengono da Dio e lui, avendo rotto con loro, ha rotto con Dio, e il miracolo risulterà in lui magia o falsità, collusione o peggio.
Si verifica così una crisi solenne di profonda importanza. E c'era una divisione (σχίσμα, taglio in due parti) tra loro. Questi effetti e conclusioni opposte sono la conferma delle parole del prologo ( Giovanni 1:4 , Giovanni 1:5 , Giovanni 1:11 , Giovanni 1:12 ), e confutano ulteriormente trionfalmente l'accusa che l'autore del Vangelo fosse mosso da un'instancabile ostilità verso il regno e la politica dell'antico Israele.
loro ; cioè i farisei, divisi nelle opinioni, ma probabilmente uniti nell'interrogatorio. Coloro, da una parte, che credevano nel miracolo, e ritenevano che portasse l'approvazione divina della condotta di Gesù, e, dall'altra, coloro che erano così soddisfatti della colpa morale implicata nell'operazione, da ritenere che il miracolo stesso, se non un inganno o una collusione, potrebbe anche indicare qualche fonte demoniaca, piuttosto che divina, dite dunque ancora al cieco — il πάλιν indica la ripetizione virtuale delle indagini già fatte ( Giovanni 9:15 ) Che dici di lui, visto che ti ha aperto gli occhi?? "Quale spiegazione hai da offrire? Che opinione hai dell'Uomo stesso? Alcuni di noi pensano che il suo scherno con la legge sabbatica escluda l'idea che un aiuto divino gli abbia permesso di compiere questa meraviglia.
Altri alcuni, come vedete, dichiarano che il fatto accaduto è la prova che Gesù deve aver avuto l'approvazione di Dio, ed essere sostenuto dalla grazia divina. Ma che dici tu, l'uomo guarito? Quale conclusione hai adottato? Vedendo che ha aperto gli occhi, quello che dici tu di Gesù?" C'è una nuda possibilità che l'uomo potrebbe dare una risposta vaga, o uno che riduca al minimo il miracolo.
È evidente che, mentre i farisei si contraddicevano a vicenda e correvano il rischio di uno scontro aperto, la fede del cieco che aveva ricevuto la vista si rafforzava. La luce stava sorgendo su di lui. La risposta, per quanto riguardava, si schierava audacemente dalla parte di Gesù, e forse prendeva spunto dal linguaggio di coloro che avevano detto: "Come può un uomo cattivo fare segni come questi?" E disse: È un profeta (cfr.
Giovanni 4:19 ; Giovanni 6:14 ). I profeti, in quanto uomini inviati da Dio, sono ancora più autorevoli dei dotti rabbini. Se Gesù ha infranto alcune di queste restrizioni mediante le quali hanno "messo una siepe intorno alla Legge", sicuramente aveva il diritto profetico di farlo. La guarigione segna una commissione divina, e l'uomo guarito possedeva e confessava liberamente tanto quanto questo: "Egli è un profeta.
"Maimonide (citato dal dottor Farrar) mostra che era corrente l'idea che un profeta potesse, di sua ipse dixit , alterare o attenuare anche la legge del sabato, e che allora il popolo era libero di obbedirgli.
La narrazione mette ancora una volta in risalto "i Giudei", il partito gerarchico, avverso a Gesù. I magistrati arrabbiati che erano in tribunale hanno permesso di vedere subito che non verranno manomessi, né perderanno la possibilità, se possibile, di perseguire i loro piani malvagi già formati contro Gesù. Prendono atto che nessun miracolo era avvenuto. In ogni caso, devono avere ulteriori prove del fatto.
I Giudei dunque non credettero , né rifiutarono di credere, riguardo a lui, che fosse stato cieco e avesse riacquistato la vista, finché chiamarono i genitori di colui che aveva riacquistato la vista e domandarono loro: È questo vostro figlio, che voi dici che è nato cieco? Come vede dunque adesso? C'erano tre domande proposte dopo il ritardo coinvolto nel andare a prendere i genitori del mendicante cieco. La prima è stata l'identificazione del cieco. Il secondo era il fatto della sua cecità congenita. Il terzo era il mezzo della sua cura.
Alla prima e alla seconda domanda i genitori danno risposte affermative. L'identificazione è completa e viene dimostrata l'incredibile qualità della cura. I suoi genitori ( allora ) risposero loro e dissero: Sappiamo che questo è nostro figlio e che è nato cieco . In nessuno dei Vangeli, e in nessun racconto di questo Vangelo, è data prova più certa della realtà di un fenomeno perfettamente inesplicabile.
La terza domanda è prudentemente rimessa alla coscienza e alla testimonianza dell'uomo stesso. I genitori avevano qualche giustificazione per la loro codardia. Non avevano informazioni oltre a quelle fornite loro dal figlio. La mattina di quel sabato era uscito barcollando come al solito, ed era tornato a casa pieno di gioia. Il loro figlio aveva senza dubbio raccontato loro la storia (l'uso di οἴδαμεν invece di γινώσκομεν è significativo).
Conoscevano per incontestabile conoscenza intuitiva la personalità e l'afflizione permanente del loro figlio; ma, dicono loro, non sappiamo ( assolutamente ) come ora vede; o chi ha aperto gli occhi, non lo sappiamo. Chiediglielo (se vuoi saperlo); è maggiorenne, e quindi la sua testimonianza è valida alla tua corte. Parlerà (riguardo) per se stesso . " Possiamo solo venire a sapere dalla sua testimonianza ciò che ci dice, e lui stesso può parlare per se stesso, e dirti tutto ciò che ha detto a noi ".
L'evangelista spiega la reticenza dei genitori con la paura delle conseguenze. Queste cose dicevano i suoi genitori, perché temevano i giudei. Questo passaggio fornisce una forte prova dell'uso tecnico del termine "gli ebrei". Senza dubbio questi genitori erano israeliti, ma non erano "ebrei" nel senso giovanneo. Gli "ebrei" erano le autorità gerarchiche ed ecclesiastico-politiche.
Poiché erano già giunti all'accordo ( Luca 22:5 ; At Atti degli Apostoli 23:20 ; Atti degli Apostoli 1 Macc. 9:70); si erano reciprocamente determinati: non ne consegue che il Sinedrio avesse emanato un ordine pubblico, ma che un formidabile partito di "ebrei" avesse fatto un συνθήκη, si fosse impegnato a vicenda e lo avesse fatto conoscere a sufficienza anche a persone come i poveri genitori del mendicante cieco, che sarebbe stato eseguito dall'autorità adeguata in tale materia - che se qualcuno confessasse di essere Cristo ("egli" (αὐτὸν) è notevole - mostra quanto fossero pieni i pensieri dell'evangelista della Personalità di Gesù), sia cacciato dalla sinagoga ; o, diventa non sinagoga .
Il Talmud parla di tre tipi di scomunica (di. anche Matteo 5:22 ), di cui i primi due disciplinari; la terza risponde all'espulsione completa e definitiva (in 'Jeremiah Moed. K.,' 81, d, להקם לדבי אוה, Edersheim). La designazione generale era shammata , da , distruggere. La prima forma era chiamata nesephah , e non equivaleva a altro che a un severo rimprovero.
Escluderebbe dai privilegi religiosi per sette o trenta giorni, secondo la dignità dell'autorità da cui è stata pronunciata (cfr 1 Timoteo 5:1 ). La seconda forma di shammata era chiamata niddui , che durava almeno trenta giorni e poteva essere ripetuta alla fine di essi. Se questi ammonimenti non avessero prodotto il loro giusto effetto, poteva portare alla terza e ultima scomunica, detta cherem , o ban, la cui durata era indefinita.
La seconda di queste forme era accompagnata da squilli di tromba e terribili maledizioni, che privavano il malato di ogni tipo di rapporto sociale. Fu evitato come lebbroso; se moriva, veniva sepolto senza funerale né lutto. Il cherem era un anatema ancora più terribile, e poteva durare per tutta la vita. I genitori del cieco potrebbero facilmente temere una simile maledizione. Il divieto a cui fu infine esposto questo cieco non gli impedì di muoversi per la città.
Il bando pronunciato su Gesù ha portato senza dubbio alla condanna, emettendo nella sua ignominia e processo per un reato capitale. Fu probabilmente la seconda delle tre forme di anatema a cui fu infine condannato. Era una tentazione abbastanza sufficiente per quei poveri genitori di aver conservato un'ostinata reticenza.
Perciò dissero i suoi genitori: È maggiorenne; chiedi a lui. Non si assumerebbero alcuna responsabilità per le opinioni del figlio sul suo Guaritore. Sapevano perfettamente che era il Gesù che si diceva fosse il Cristo della nazione, e non si sarebbero implicati nel dare alcun giudizio sulle sue affermazioni.
Così essi ("i Giudei") chiamarono una seconda volta l'uomo che era (era stato) cieco e gli dissero ; non chiedendo più alcun dettaglio sul processo di guarigione, cercarono con ingegno di smussare il bordo della potente testimonianza che quest'uomo aveva reso al rango profetico e persino alle pretese messianiche di Gesù, inducendolo ad abiurare. Date gloria a Dio , dicevano.
Molti hanno sostenuto (vedi Calvin, De Wette, Lange, Lucke e Meyer) che questa è solo una forma solenne di scongiuro, che corrisponde a Giosuè 7:19 ; Esdra 10:11 ; Esdra 3 Esdra 9:8, ed era un appello ipocrita all'uomo di mangiare le sue stesse parole sotto giuramento; e Godet insiste: "Hanno chiesto che questa affermazione colpevole, 'Egli è un profeta', fosse cancellata da quella contraria,' Egli è un peccatore.
'" Moulton dice: "Una formula usata quando un criminale che si pensava nascondesse la verità veniva esortato a fare una confessione completa." Luthardt, Lampe e altri osservano giustamente che questa teoria di scongiuro, sebbene si adatti a Giosuè 7:19 , non corrisponde a 1 Samuele 6:5 o Geremia 12:16 , e che i farisei desiderassero piuttosto che l'uomo desse gloria direttamente a Dio, e non a Gesù.
Insinuavano che la loro azione fosse dettata dallo zelo per l'onore di Dio, e tentavano l'uomo a rinnegare la mediazione della grazia divina attraverso le labbra e per volontà di Gesù. Aggiungono: Sappiamo (οἴδαμεν) assolutamente, su basi teologiche al di là della comprensione del povero, e possiamo sostenerlo con tutto il peso della nostra tradizione e consuetudine: sappiamo che quest'Uomo è un peccatore. Non danno alcun riferimento e non acconsentono ai particolari. Avrebbero intimidito l'uomo con la loro assunzione di una conoscenza superiore.
Rispose quindi (e disse £), Se sia un peccatore - usando ironicamente le parole dei "giudei" - non lo so . Tu lo affermi, ma i fatti della mia esperienza sono del tutto di tutt'altro genere. Non lo so, come dici tu. Gli ebrei ragionano per pregiudizi scontati; l'uomo guarito non ha tali prove, né tali motivi - aggiunge con parole immortali, Una cosa so con invincibile convinzione, che mentre ero cieco (De Wette dice che non c'è bisogno di considerare il ὤν come un participio imperfetto, e il presente suggerisce l'intera carriera dell'uomo dalla nascita fino a quella memorabile mattina), ora vedo .
La semplice e coerente testimonianza dell'uomo trionfa sulla loro logica, che ha cercato di sconcertare il suo giudizio. Il linguaggio che un'esperienza profondamente sentita può sempre portare contro le dimostrazioni a priori dell'insufficienza dell'evidenza della rivelazione divina. ero cieco; ora vedo il volto di Dio nella natura, il regno di Dio tutto intorno a me, il fatto del mio perdono, l'alba di un giorno più luminoso.
Gli dissero dunque : £ Che ti ha fatto? come ha aperto i tuoi occhi? Hanno cercato di trarre da lui la prova esplicita che Gesù aveva infranto il sabato, o forse di invischiarlo in qualche dichiarazione diversa. Il fatto del mutamento soprannaturale è praticamente concesso all'ostinazione della dichiarazione reiterata dell'uomo, e all'identificazione della sua persona da parte di altri.
Westcott qui differisce dalla maggior parte dei recenti espositori e suppone che le "domande suggeriscono che erano disposti a credere se i fatti non fossero decisivi contro la fede". Ma la risposta dell'uomo prova che vedeva l'astuzia de' suoi antagonisti, ed era irritato dal loro vistoso disegno di trasformare l'infinito beneficio che aveva ricevuto nel materiale di un'accusa contro il suo Benefattore.
Rispose loro, ve l'avevo già detto, e voi non avete sentito (le versioni italiche e la vulgata qui omettono la negazione, che secondo De Wette sarebbe portatrice di comprensione; ma così com'è, la frase è equivalente a "non avevi orecchie, non vi prestaste attenzione, se aveste già ascoltato i semplici fatti"): perché mai lo sentireste di nuovo? Non presterai più attenzione ora di allora; o vuoi trasformarlo in una carica? C'è un'altra alternativa, espressa in umili suppliche o in una replica ironica, secondo come interpretiamo il καί. La prossima domanda è o
(1) (Lutbardt) Sareste anche voi suoi discepoli , come le molte folle che gridano la sua lode? è questa la tua piega? sicuramente no! o
(2) it may mean, Is it possible that it is in your mind, not only to find out all about the how of this great miracle, but also to become his disciples? Neither of these interpretations is perfectly consistent with his taunt, "ye did not hear." Therefore
(3) (Bengel) the most natural meaning is, Would ye also, as well as myself, the poor beggar, become his disciples? (so Westcott, Moulton, and Lange). The poor man was roused, ironical, and ready, notwithstanding the threat of the great excommunication hanging over him, to announce his own discipleship to any extent and at any risk.
They reviled him, and said, £ Thou art the disciple of that Man (ἐκείνου)—between whom and us there is an impassable chasm. Here is one of the strongest indications of the irreversible breach between the Jews and Jesus—but we, instead of being his disciples, are disciples of Moses. This speech shows that, whatever the blind man meant to convey by the reproachful entreaty of Giovanni 9:27, the Jews took it as proof of his virtual confession of discipleship to Jesus, and this they assumed was tantamount to breaking with Moses. They assume that their traditionary interpretation of the Mastic Law has all the authority of the great Lawgiver himself.
They pursue the antithesis between Jesus and Moses, and thus make an involuntary admission of his abnormal and astounding claims. We know—it is the fundamental fact of our religions history, and of the Divine revelation entrusted to us. We know, by supreme conviction, as something almost equivalent to a fundamental law of thought, that God hath spoken to Moses. (Observe the perfect λελάληκεν, "hath spoken" in such fashion that his words abide fur ever and are still sounding in their ears.
) Moses was made a little lower than the angels. God spake to him on Sinai, and from the mercy-scat, and face to face as a man speaketh with his friend (Esodo 33:11; Deuteronomio 34:10; Numeri 12:8). The most august ideas and associations clustered round his venerable name. Jesus was supposed to have challenged the supreme authority of Moses, and no sort of comparison could be drawn, in their opinion, between the two.
But as for this Man, we know not whence he is. It is remarkable that, in Giovanni 7:27, they had been equally explicit in declaring, "We know whence he is." Then they thought to discredit iris Messianic claim by drawing a distinction between the well-known parentage and home of Jesus, and the coming of Messiah from some undiscoverable source, some hidden place, where God retained him before his revelation to Israel (see notes, Giovanni 7:27, Giovanni 7:28).
While, however, Christ (Giovanni 8:14) allowed the validity of their superficial knowledge on that occasion, he declared that he alone knew whence he came and whither he was going (see notes, Giovanni 8:14). It is, perhaps, in reference to this last expression that they echo his own words. The supernatural source of his being and teaching seemed to their minds, throughout that discourse and controversy, to vacillate between the Divine and the demonic. The contrast between Moses and Jesus in this bitter speech runs along the same low level. "We know not whence" he derives his prophetic character, or his right to legislate for the people of God.
The man answered and said to them, Why £ herein is the marvelous thing. Lange translates, "With respect to this man, this is marvelous, to wit." The R.T. has accurately given the force of the γὰρ, the combination of γε and ἄρα, by the rendering "why?" The "herein" is the ignorance which the Jews now profess of the Divine call and mission of the Healer.
Their confusion, their obscurity, their vacillation, on such a patent fact is the marvel of marvels, almost more wonderful than the cure of his blindness. That ye know not whence he is, and (yet) he opened my eyes (καί not infrequently has the three of "and yet"—simple juxtaposition conveying a strong contrast; see Giovanni 8:55; Giovanni 6:70; Giovanni 7:4).
The man rises into holy and eloquent wrath. Their entire history, their principles of judging of a prophetic call, the whole modus of Divine revelation, ought to have shown that one whose simple will stood in such vivid juxtaposition with work which none but Almighty God could do, ought to have enlightened them. "The blind man, finding he was argued with, grew bolder, and began to argue in turn; if he had not studied theology (say rabbinical casuistry and Mishnaic accretions to the Divine Law), he at least knew his catechism" (Godet).
We know—the new-born disputant takes up the language of these proud casuists, and adopts the technical phrase which they had used (Giovanni 9:24, Giovanni 9:29)—we know, you and I, that God heareth not sinners in any special sense of miraculous approval (Giobbe 27:9; Giobbe 35:13; Salmi 109:7; and especially Salmi 66:18, Salmi 66:19; Proverbi 15:29; Isaia 1:15).
One aspect of Old Testament teaching shows that a man must delight himself in the Lord in order to receive the desires of his heart. If we ask anything according to his will, he heareth us; but the prayer of the sinner, the desire of the wicked, is contrary to the will of' God. When the sinner turns from his sins to the Lord, the cry for mercy is in harmony with the will of God. In one sense every prayer is the prayer of sinful men; but it is the Divine life working within them that offers acceptable prayer.
The prayer of the sinner as such is not heard. We know God does not listen to the cry of sinners, when, as sinners, they ask from the ground of their sin, to secure their own sinful purpose; but if any man be a worshipper of God (the word Θεοσεβής is an ἅπαξ λεγόμενον, and occurs nowhere else in the New Testament), and doeth his (God's) will, this man he heareth.
The blind beggar has learned the deepest truth of the Divine revelation about the conditions of acceptable prayer. The immediate application was the miraculous unwonted event as answer to the effectual fervent prayer of the righteous man (see Giacomo 5:16). So much for the general relation of this Healer to God. The rabbis were never tired of urging that the "answers to prayer depended on a man being devout and doing the will of God" (Edersheim, who quotes 'Ber.,' 6, b; 'Taanith,' Giovanni 3:8; 'Succah,' 14, a; 'Yoma,' 28, a). So that the man was here fighting with drawn sword.
The man, having once begun, will not be stopped in his argument. Since the world began (ἐκ τοῦ αἰῶνος does not elsewhere occur in the New Testament; we have ἀπ αἰῶνος three times, and ἀπὸ τῶν αἰῶνων) it was never heard that any one opened the eyes of one born blind. There is no record of any cure of blindness in the Old Testament.
The miracle stands forth with grand distinctness on the page of history. If such stories had been told, neither he nor the author of this narrative knew of them. The Pharisees and Jews have no reply to this burst of grateful but indignant testimony to the uniqueness of his Deliverer, and then, with a home-thrust which cut through their weak objections and repudiated their cruel inferences, he added, Unless this Man were from God, he could do nothing; he could neither have wrought this marvel, nor any of the deep impressions wrought upon you.
"Da Dio;" questa è la risposta finale dell'uomo alla domanda: "Che ne dici di lui, visto che ti ha aperto gli occhi?" Dio ha la gloria, mentre io ripudio ciò che tu dai come giudizio contro di lui. In verità Dio lo ha udito come Colui che in questo ha semplicemente fatto la sua volontà. Così gli ebrei sono costretti per alcuni istanti ad ascoltare, da uno conosciuto come un mendicante di strada, parole di insegnamento lungo le linee più belle di un'esperienza profonda.
Vinte da questa logica di semplice fatto e semplice inferenza, le autorità non hanno altra arma da usare se non invettive e persecuzioni. Risposero e gli dissero: Tu sei nato tutto nei peccati ; attraverso e attraverso un reprobo nato. Prendono l'idea superstiziosa che sembra fluttuare nella mente dei discepoli ( Giovanni 9:2 ).
Dai peccati dei tuoi genitori o dai tuoi peccati nel grembo di tua madre, ti sei guadagnato nel mondo con il marchio della tua infamia su di te. Così ammettono il cambiamento che è sopraggiunto su di lui, ritornando alla peculiare depravazione che era stata impressa sulla sua fronte, secondo la loro ristretta interpretazione della divina provvidenza. E hai la presunzione di insegnarci? Gli eletti, i dotti, i ministri approvati di Dio? Con tutta questa eredità e segno di separazione da Dio, osi istruire i principali pastori e maestri d'Israele? Non si fermarono a parole crudeli, ma nella loro amarezza di spirito lo cacciarono via ; lo cacciarono violentemente dalla sinagoga dove erano allora seduti (così Meyer, Maldonatus, Bengel e molti altri).
Non ci viene detto che lì per lì lo scomunicarono o lo desinagogarono. È probabile che questo divieto sia seguito, con le solite terribili formalità. Aveva praticamente confessato che le più alte affermazioni che Gesù avesse mai fatto su se stesso erano vere, e si era reso soggetto alla maledizione già pronunciata ( Giovanni 9:22 ). Questa meravigliosa narrazione, con i suoi dettagli realistici, non è diventata il testo di un discorso.
Rimane per sempre la sorprendente conferma della parola stessa di nostro Signore, che era Luce per il mondo e anche Vista, ed era in grado di fornire sia la condizione oggettiva che il cambiamento soggettivo mediante il quale solo la natura dell'uomo poteva ricevere la luce della vita. Da Giovanni 9:8 a Giovanni 9:34 è quasi l'unico passaggio del Vangelo, ad eccezione del passaggio, Giovanni 3:22 , in cui non stiamo alla presenza effettiva del Signore, o non siamo ascoltando i suoi giudizi sugli uomini e sulle cose, e le sue rivelazioni del mistero della propria Persona. La narrazione finora è a sé stante e ci offre uno spaccato della vita che si svolgeva a Gerusalemme contemporaneamente all'autorivelazione divina di Gesù.
(10) Le questioni del ministero della luce .
(a) La visione di chi non vede . Questi versi narrano il seguito per quanto riguardava l'uomo. Westcott e altri ne esagerano piuttosto l'importanza quando affermano che qui fu "l'inizio della nuova società". "La società universale si basa sulla confessione di una nuova verità" (Westcott). Anche in questo Vangelo il primo capitolo mostra che Gesù radunò intorno a lui dei discepoli che da quel momento in poi avrebbero «veduto gli angeli di Dio salire e scendere sul Figlio dell'uomo.
Nei capitoli secondo e quarto egli «faceva e battezzava discepoli». I dodici ( Giovanni 6:1 .) non volevano lasciarlo in mezzo a una diffusa disaffezione, perché confessavano che era «il Santo di Dio, "che aveva "parole di vita eterna". Di conseguenza, è sufficiente dire che, quando le autorità dell'ecclesia ebraica escludevano il discepolo di Cristo, il Signore lo ammetteva a una comunione più nobile; ma la comunione, la società, aveva stato già formato.
Gesù udì che lo avevano fatto uscire ad est ; o, spingerlo avanti . Gesù è rappresentato come "uditore", non dalle stesse labbra dell'uomo, ma dal rapporto corrente. Non si dice che sia venuto a conoscenza della circostanza per intuizione, ma che abbia ascoltato mediante i normali processi di conoscenza. Questo semplice tocco mostra quanto lo scrittore sia coerente in tutto con la tesi principale del suo Vangelo che tocca l'umanità perfetta del Figlio di Dio, che "si è fatto carne.
" ed era "venuto nella carne", pur essendo "da Dio". confessando nel modo più pubblico che Gesù era "il Profeta", se non il Cristo. E avendolo trovato . Così, dunque, il Signore, come il buon Pastore, cercò la pecora smarrita nel deserto, e non si fermò finché l'ha trovato.
La luce del giorno che aveva creato un mondo completamente nuovo per chi prima non aveva mai guardato un volto umano, era stata stranamente a scacchi e in ombra. Vedeva solo facce arrabbiate e sguardi distolti, e anche i suoi genitori codardi avrebbero esitato a riceverlo nella loro povera dimora; ma Gesù lo trovò e disse: Credi tu nel £ Figlio di Dio ? Non "Vuoi credere?" ma "Riponi la tua fiducia nel Figlio di Dio?" Riconosci il fatto che è venuto il Messia della speranza della nazione? Credi in lui? Sarebbe più naturale che l'appellativo più attuale Figlio di Dio , piuttosto che l'idea più recondita di Figlio dell'uomo , si fosse presentato davanti all'uomo guarito.
Il "tu" è enfatico e contrappone lo stato d'animo di quest'uomo a quello degli "ebrei". Aveva dichiarato che il suo Guaritore veniva "da Dio", che era "un Profeta", Uno che "faceva la volontà di Dio" e che "Dio ascolta", anche quando chiedeva cose apparentemente impossibili. Cristo mette alla prova la qualità e il calibro della sua fede.
Egli rispose e disse: £ E chi è costui, affinché (ἵνα) io possa credere in lui? La congiunzione aggiunge molto all'entusiasmo della risposta. La sua fede era pronta per la piena espressione. Sospettava quasi, come fece la Samaritana ( Giovanni 4:25 ), che Gesù stesse indicando se stesso. Il ; piuttosto che τί; ("chi?" piuttosto che "cosa?") mostra l'intensità del desiderio dell'uomo di trovare, acclamare e confidare nel "Figlio di Dio".
" La disposizione, la postura, della sua mente è quella della fede. L'oggetto adeguato per quella fede non gli è stato rivelato. Simbolo adatto di molti nel loro passaggio dalle tenebre alla luce. Quando è ricettivo, suscettibile, consapevole del bisogno, con qualche nozione, anche se oscura, di chi e di che cosa hanno più bisogno, molti sono disposti anche ora a pronunciare la stessa importuna richiesta.
[E £ ] Gesù disse: L'avete visto entrambi , con gli occhi così aperti di recente. Non hai scoperto che io sono il tuo Guaritore, il tuo Profeta, il tuo Messia? Il ἑώρακας si riferisce alla presente intervista, non a una precedente; poiché non ci viene detto che avesse già cercato o trovato il suo Benefattore (Lucke, Meyer, Luthardt). L'hai visto con gli occhi del tuo spirito e con gli occhi della carne, e inoltre colui che parla con te, familiarmente come l'uomo con l'uomo , è lui: "quella Persona sublime che sembra stare lontana dal pensiero ed esperienza" (Westcott).
Anche il ἐκεῖνος di questo passaggio e di Giovanni 19:35 è un uso abbastanza classico per esprimere, nelle labbra di chi parla, un riferimento a se stesso indicato e presentato oggettivamente come una terza persona (vedi Meyer, e la nostra nota su Giovanni 19:35 , e il suo rapporto con la paternità del Vangelo). Da nessuna parte nostro Signore ammette più apertamente di essere il Cristo, il Figlio di Dio.
I discepoli si alzano appena oltre il culmine di questa rivelazione anche nella notte della Passione. La fede dell'uomo stava aspettando il suo Oggetto, e la visione arriva alla sua visione spirituale senza scala.
And he said, Lord, I believe—the Kyrie means more than in Giovanni 9:36—and he worshipped him. The verb προσκυνεῖν is used by John for homage paid to God (Giovanni 4:20; Giovanni 12:20; and twenty-three times in the Revelation, always in the sense of "worship").
This prostration, when no prayer was offered, no forgiveness asked, but a simple act of faith exercised, was nothing less than the highest homage the man could pay. The adoration of this man is a fitting climax to the scene (Giovanni 8:59), and anticipates that of Thomas (Giovanni 20:28). The higher significance of the Sonship dawned upon him in the unearthly tone and manner of the Lord.
These scenes, and the offer of Divine homage unrebuked by Jesus and uncommented upon by the evangelist, are among the most potent arguments for the belief of the Church in the Divine nature of the Lord.
(b) The blindness of those who are satisfied with their twilight.
The sight of the man, enlightened and prostrate in adoring gratitude, led Jesus, in the face of the bystanders, with Pharisees among them (Giovanni 9:40), to declare the general effects which would follow from his entire self-manifestation (so Meyer, Godet). Westcott says, "Not to any one or group, but as interpreting the scene before him." A sublime monologue. And Jesus said, I came for judgment.
Not κρισιν, to execute judgment, but εἰς κρίμα, with a view to bring about a judicial decision on the moral condition of mankind (see notes on Giovanni 3:17, Giovanni 3:18; Giovanni 5:22, Giovanni 5:23; Giovanni 8:11, Giovanni 8:15, Giovanni 8:16) as a matter of fact.
"This is the κρίσις, that men love darkness rather than light." Christ came to save—that was his supreme purpose; but to the Son is given the whole κρίσις, and κρῖμα will follow the revelation of the Son of God. He is the Touchstone of humanity. What men think of Christ is the question which decides in every age their moral condition before God.
Into this world of sin and strife, of crossing lights and strange delusions, of ignorance and superstition (εἰς τὸν κόσμον is different when τοῦτον is added; see Giovanni 8:23; Giovanni 11:9; Giovanni 12:25, Giovanni 12:31; Giovanni 13:1; Giovanni 16:11; Giovanni 18:36)—not the world as the mere cosmos, or the sphere of creative activity, nor even the whole of humanity as Giovanni 3:16, but humanity viewed in its separation from grace, and in all its need—in order that they who see not might see; i.
e. not those who merely feel that they cannot see (as Lucke, Meyer, etc.), but the practically blind—the μὴ βλέποντες, those who are sitting in darkness, with the capacity for sight, but not the opportunity; who cannot, as a matter of fact, apart from the revelation of new light, see the face of God; the babes to whom the Lord of heaven and earth has been pleased to unveil himself (see Matteo 11:25); the poor in spirit, who do not but now may see the kingdom, and the pure in heart ready to behold their God.
So far the κρῖμα declares itself to be a blessed consummation—sight to the blind, cleansing to the leper, life to the dead. Even the man born blind suns himself in the heaven of the Savior's smile. The Light of the world shines upon them, and they see. But Christ's coming brings out also the character of those, and pronounces judgment on those, who say of themselves, "We see;" "We have never been in bondage," "We need no repentance;" "Abraham is our father;" "We know the Law;" "Who (nevertheless) do not come to the Light;" who are not "of the truth;" and the beaming of his unappreciated glory involves in their case, that those who see might become blind (τυφλοί), incapable of seeing.
Those who have the knowledge of the Law, "the wise and prudent" (Luca 10:21), who boast their freedom, their knowledge, their advantages, their profession, may, nay do, by resolute turning away from "the Light of this world," lose their power of spiritual vision. But the unsophisticated, needy, even the publicans and harlots, consciously sitting in the region of the shadow of death, do by faith and repentance find that the great Light has unawares shone upon them.
Those of the Pharisees who were with him. This expression does not simply mean who were near him at that moment, but who were to a certain extent siding with him (Giovanni 8:30, Giovanni 8:31), while criticizing and rejecting his message; who were incensed with him for promising to them "freedom" and sonship, and whose faith in his claims was of the most superficial and vacillating kind.
These wavering, self-satisfied Pharisees heard these things, and they said to him, Are we blind also? Many commentators, who call attention to the contrast between the τυφλοί and μή βλέποντες of Giovanni 9:39, think that the speakers who made use of this word did not draw the distinction, and meant nothing more than their use μὴ βλέποντες by of τυφλοί.
But this is unsatisfactory; whatever it 'means in the one clause, it ought to mean in the other. There is a difference between "becoming blind," and being "the blind." They ask whether they are blind also, i.e. as blind as those who have, according to Christ's own dictum, become so. They seem to admit that some who have the power of sight have been blinded by the very light that shines upon them, but they are in doubt with reference to their own case.
The reply of our Lord is not meant to be a crushing and final retort, condemning them to hopeless night, but was obviously intended to show them that they are not yet free from sin, that they are only partially appreciating the light which shines upon them. If ye were blind—incapable of sight; if ye had all along been deprived of the faculty of perceiving the true Light that shineth in the darkness (a condition of things which would have emancipated them from responsibility, and which Christ would not admit to be the case); perhaps more, if ye had been utterly blind to the light which is shining upon you now, which, however, is not true—ye would not have sin.
This is akin to the solemn language of Giovanni 15:22. They did not themselves admit that there was any congenital blindness about them. They did not pretend or expect to ride off on such a πρόφασις, such an excuse. Could they be, judicially or naturally, blind?
The very idea was an absurdity, and so Jesus added, But now ye say, We see. You even boast that you are "instructors of the ignorant, and leaders of the blind; a light to those who sit in darkness, having the form of knowledge and truth in the Law" (Romani 2:17). You are the very opposite of the "not-seeing" (μὴ βλέποντες); you are self-satisfied; you will not come to the Light.
What is the issue? The Lord seems to pause before his answer (the οὖν, "therefore," is rejected by the best manuscripts and critics): Your sin abideth; or, remaineth. It will remain until you fully admit the great principle and reason, the motive and characteristics, of my mission. The very facility you profess, the intimacy you claim with the Law and its founder, and your partial knowledge of my claim, take away your excuse. The discourse which follows shows how entire must be the submission to Christ, how complete the union with him, of those who say, "We see."
HOMILETICS
Cure of the man born blind.
This new miracle caused a fresh outburst of Jewish hatred against our Lord. Of the six miracles of blindness recorded in the Gospels, this only is a case of blindness from birth.
I. THE CURIOUS QUESTION OF THE DISCIPLES. "Master, who sinned, this man or his parents, that he should be born blind?"
1. Their conviction was that affliction was in all cases the consequence of sin.
(1) In the moral government of God there is a necessary connection between sin and suffering (Romani 6:23).
(2) Yet the suffering may be sent to prevent sin as well as to punish Giovanni 2:2. Though they were disciples, they erred respecting the connection between sin and suffering. There was an alternative question.
(1) They seemed to think it possible that the man born blind should have sinned before he was born, in some pre-existing state. The disciples were the victims of many traditional errors and delusions.
(2) They had more ground for believing that the affliction of blindness was the effect of the sin of the beggar's parents. Some fact of this kind was familiar to their minds in the wording of the second commandment (Esodo 20:5), and in the representative relationship of family life (Ebrei 7:10).
(3) The disciples submitted the question to our Lord because of its extreme difficulty. The one supposition seemed ungrounded and impossible, the other seemed not in conflict with the justice of God.
II. OUR LORD'S ANSWER TO THEIR QUESTION. "Neither hath this man sinned, nor his parents: but that the works of God should be made manifest in him."
1. Our Lord does not assert the sinlessness of the beggar or his parents.
2. But he denies any moral connection in this case between the individual and family sin and the blindness from birth. It is a warning that we should not be too ready to regard every affliction as a Divine judgment.
3. He deals with the case from the practical rather than from the speculative side, representing it as an occasion for the exercise and display of the Divine power and goodness.
(1) Our Lord carries it back into the sphere of the Divine counsel.
(2) He represents God as brining good out of evil.
4. Our Lord emphasizes the Divine necessity that engages him in this blessed work. "I must work the works of him that sent me, while it is day: the night cometh, when no man can work."
(1) This miracle occurred on the sabbath, probably on the evening of the day which was marked by his long dialogue with the Jews in the temple. He not only went about every day doing good, but every hour was devoted to a holy activity.
(2) The moments were precious, because the work of his human activity was rapidly coming to an end. Our working season is at best a short season. "The night cometh" to end all.
(3) His function as being "the Light of the world" imposed this incessant activity upon him. "As long as I am in the world, I am the Light of the world."
(a) Therefore the true Light cannot but shine upon the world's darkness.
(b) And he is the only Agent to remove the physical and spiritual darkness that appealed to his compassion.
III. THE METHOD OF THE MIRACLE. "When he had thus spoken, he spat on the ground, and made clay of the spittle, and he anointed the eyes of the blind man with the clay, and said unto him, Go, wash in the pool of Siloam." Why did our Lord act in this manner?
1. Partly to test the faith of the blind beggar.
2. In all the cases of miracle involving the loss of connection with the world of sense, Jesus takes care to have personal communication established, so as to assure the sufferer of his presence and supply a foundation for faith.
(1) The deaf man cannot hear Christ's voice, but the momentary touch of his ear established the necessary communication.
(2) The blind could not see the look of Divine compassion which others could see, but the clay or the spittle would be felt as indicating the presence of One whose words held out the hope of cure.
(3) The means are, after all, though under a physical aspect, designed to affect the mental condition of the sufferer.
IV. THE SUCCESS OF THE MIRACLE. "He went his way therefore, and washed, and came seeing."
1. His ready obedience was a sign of his faith.
2. His faith in Divine power at once opened up to him a new world. The eye establishes between us and the world a nearer and wider communication than any other organ of sense.
3. Christ puts honor upon the exercise of true faith and obedience to his commands.
V. THE CURIOSITY OF THE BEGGAR'S NEIGHBOURS RESPECTING THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE MIRACLE. "Is not this he that sat and begged? Some said, This is he: others said, He is like him: but he said, I am he."
1. Some acknowledged his identity, but others tried to evade the fact of the miracle by affecting to doubt his identity.
2. They all alike laid stress upon the manner, not upon the fact, of the miracle. "How were thine eyes opened?"
3. The beggar's frank acknowledgment of all the facts. "The Man that is called Jesus made clay, and anointed mine eyes, and said unto me, Go to the pool of Siloam, and wash: and I went and washed, and I received sight."
(1) He must have been previously familiar with Jesus, else he could not have known his name. His presence every day at the temple, as he begged of the passers-by, put him in the way of knowing much concerning the acts of Christ.
(2) It is a proof at once of his faith and of his gratitude that he publicly confessed his obligations to the Savior.
4. The effect of this declaration on his neighbors. "Then said they unto him, Where is he? He said, I know not."
(1) Jesus had evidently disappeared at once from the scene, perhaps exhausted by the anxieties of his long conflict with the Jews in the temple.
(2) The curiosity of the Jews to know where Jesus was, was prompted more by hatred than by the desire to do him honor.
The investigation of the miracle.
This was prompted by the unfriendly questioners first referred to.
I. THE INQUIRY OF THE PHARISEES.
1. They first examined the beggar as to the facts of his cure. These it was as impossible to ignore as it was difficult to explain.
2. The performance of the cure on the sabbath day was the pivot upon which the question turned. "Now it was the sabbath day that Jesus made the clay, and opened the eyes of this man." Of the three and thirty miracles of our Lord recorded in the Gospels, no less than seven were performed on the sabbath day, as if to show, in opposition to Pharisaic perversions, that works of mercy were essentially included in the sabbath law.
II. THE DIVISION AMONG THE PHARISEES. "Therefore said some of the Pharisees, This Man is not of God, because he keepeth not the sabbath day. Others said, How can a bad man do such miracles? And there was a division among them."
1. The ill-conditioned party concede the truth of the miracle, but imply that it must have been done by the power of the evil one. They take their stand upon a false idea of the sabbath.
2. The friendly party, including men like Nicodemus and Joseph of Arimathaea, feel the difficulty of a bad man doing works of mercy and love through Divine power. The difficulty is ethical as well as theological.
III. THE WITNESS OF THE BEGGAR HIMSELF. "They say unto the blind man again, What sayest thou of him, that he hath opened thine eyes? He said, He is a Prophet."
1. He does not hesitate to oppose the judgment of the Pharisees in words that bespeak the firmest conviction.
2. He recognizes in the miracle the energy of Divine Tower, and in Jesus the character of a Representative of God.
3. How often a simple, unlettered believer sees what learned rabbis, or doctors, or synods, cannot see!
IV. THE APPEAL OF THE PHARISEES TO THE BEGGAR'S PARENTS.
1. It was the suggestion of their unbelief. "But the Jews did not believe concerning him that he had been blind." Unbelief always seeks to justify itself in some way. None are so blind as those who will not see.
2. They expected that the parents, through fear of excommunication, would either deny the identity of their son, or the fact of his blindness from birth.
3. Mark the wariness, yet the cowardice, of the parents.
(1) They adhere strictly to matters of fact. They declare the identity of their son and his congenital blindness, but decline to commit themselves as to the method of cure, or as to the person who had effected it.
(2) They devolve the responsibility of an answer as to the most critical point upon their son. "He is of age; ask him."
(3) Their caution is due entirely to fear. "These words spake his parents, because they feared the Jews." The excommunication was a serious thing in a thoroughly ecclesiastical community. It entailed social disadvantages and discomforts, as well as exclusion from the religious privileges of the Israelite.
V. A FRESH APPEAL TO THE BLIND BEGGAR. "Then again called they the man that was blind, and said unto him, Give God the glory: we know that this Man is a sinner."
1. They demand a denial of the miracle as in some sense essential to a right view of God's glory.
(1) They desire to obliterate a fact by a false interpretation of the sabbatic law.
(2) They regard the assertion of the beggar that Jesus was a Prophet as blasphemy, because it impeached at once God's truth and God's holiness.
(3) The Pharisees represent themselves as the depositaries of theological knowledge, but assign no reason for a conclusion adverse to Christ's claims. Their conduct is eminently unreasonable. They oppose fact to knowledge.
2. The answer to their appeal brings further discomfiture. "Whether he be a sinner or no, I know not: one thing I know, that, whereas I was blind, now I see."
(1) The beggar declines to settle theological problems. His reticence is wiser than the bold but groundless assertions of the Pharisees.
(2) He takes his stand firmly upon fact. Once he was blind, now he sees. The difficulty is on their side; it is for them to explain it. The fact is without dispute.
3. The anger of the Pharisees. "Then they reviled him, and said, Thou art his disciple; but we are Moses' disciples."
(1) They confront unanswerable logic with the language of insult.
(2) They oppose the authority of Moses—no doubt on the sabbath law—to that of Jesus. On the ground of their allegiance to Moses they reject the clearest evidences of Christ's Divine mission. "But if ye receive not Moses' writings, how can ye believe my words?"
(3) Mark the crushing rejoinder of the beggar. "Why herein is a marvelous thing, that ye know not from whence he is, and yet he hath opened mine eyes."
(a) The Pharisees claimed special knowledge to decide upon the authority of any one professing to be a prophet, yet they failed to give account of all the facts of the case.
(b) The man asserts a fact of great theological import to settle the claims of Jesus: "Now we know that God heareth not sinners."
(α) It is a fact based on Scripture teaching (Isaia 1:11; Salmi 66:18; Salmi 119:7). All men, no doubt, are sinners, but the Scripture statement applies specially to men living in habitual sin and without faith in God.
(β) The privileges of believers are fully asserted. "But if any man be a worshipper of God, and doeth his will, him he heareth." God hears the prayer of the man whose religion is both speculatively and practically true.
(γ) The miracle wrought in the present case was without parallel. "Since the world began was it not heard that any man opened the eyes of one that was born blind." No science or skill had ever effected a cure of this sort. Therefore there must have been superhuman and Divine power exercised in the operation. "If this Man were not of God, he could do nothing." Thus his general argument from Scripture and his conclusion alike deny the assertion of the Pharisees that Jesus was a sinner.
(4) The passionate abuse lavished on their critic. "Thou wast altogether born in sins, and dost thou teach us? And they drove him out."
(a) The Pharisees cast in his teeth the calamity of his birth as a sign of special sin. They forget that they are only, by their act, acknowledging the reality of a miracle they had all along tried to evade or deny.
(b) They are aghast at the assumption of a person under God's curse undertaking to teach theology to the recognized guides of Israel.
(c) They expel him with an impatient contempt from their presence.
The moral result of the miracle.
The bodily cure is to lead to spiritual enlightenment.
I. JESUS SEEKS OUT THE OUTCAST BEGGAR FOR BLESSING. "And when he had found him, he said, Dost thou believe on the Son of God?"
1. It is the office of the good Shepherd to seek out the sheep cast away, as if to fulfill the psalmist's words, "When my father and my mother forsake me, the Lord taketh me up."
2. Something more than miracle is needed to impart faith. He had been the subject of a bodily cure, but our Lord is now to make him the subject of spiritual illumination. Miracles alone cannot work faith.
3. The courageous fidelity of the man in the presence of the Pharisees makes him worthy of the greater blessing in store for him; yet he is saved wholly by grace.
4. Mark the directness of our Lord's question. "Dost thou believe on the Son of God?"
(1) It could not be evaded or misunderstood.
(2) The Object of faith was more than a prophet, more than the Messiah; he was God's own Son, a Divine Person, the Author of eternal salvation.
5. Mark how our Lord leads him on to a clearer recognition of himself. The man asked, "Who is he, Lord, that I might believe on him?" His faith was already looking out for its object. The answer is, "Thou hast both seen him, and he it is that talketh with thee." The very Person who had given him restored sight, and who here honored him by his conversation, was the Object of his faith.
II. MARK HOW QUICKLY FILTH FOLLOWS ON OUR LORD'S WORDS, HOW QUICKLY CONFESSION FOLLOWS ON FAITH, AND HOW QUICKLY WORSHIP FOLLOWS ON CONFESSION.
1. Faith is based on knowledge. "Lord, I believe." The man receives Christ's testimony with alacrity, and accepts him as his Redeemer.
2. The confession is prompt, unhesitating, and enduring.
3. The worship is as sincere as the confession. They who believe in Christ for salvation will be sure to worship him. The worship of Christ is common to Christendom.
Moral result of Christ's coming into the world.
The incident now ended suggests a wider reflection.
I. THE DOUBLE RESULT OF CHRIST'S ADVENT. "I am come into this world to exercise judgment, that they which see not might see; and that they that see should become blind."
1. The Son did not come for judgment, but judgment was the result of his coming. His advent tested the false and the true; it revealed what was in the hearts of men; it brought light into the darkness with two opposite results.
2. The twofold result of the judgment.
(1) As it affects those who "do not see"—that is, the ignorant, who are conscious of their spiritual blindness, and therefore ask for the light. They are made "to see." Light arises out of the darkness of sin, ignorance, and unbelief, so that they realize all the fullness of life, righteousness, and faith.
(2) As it affects those "who see"—who claim to have "the key of knowledge "(Matteo 11:25), and are "confident that they are guides of the blind, lights of them which are in darkness" (Romani 2:11). Being unconscious of their real ignorance, they are judicially blinded so that they should not see the truth. Being "wise and prudent," they despise the revelation of truth, and relapse into utter darkness, as the judgment of God upon their careless or hostile attitude toward the truth.
II. THE PERSONAL APPLICATION OF THE TEST OF JUDGMENT. "And those of the Pharisees which were with him heard these words, and said to him, Are we also blind?"
1. The question is dictated by the pride of sect, and by a touch of anger that they who were so learned should be classed with the ignorant rabble.
2. The answer of Jesus is terribly severe.
(1) He seems to say—Would God you were really blind! There might in that ease be hope of light penetrating the darkness of your hearts. Conscious ignorance would be a preparation for saving knowledge.
(2) But they were at once blind and unconscious of the fact. "But now ye say, We see."
(3) This blindness was fatal.
(a) They had no excuse for it. "If ye were blind, ye should have no sin." They were, therefore, witnesses against themselves.
(b) Sin rested upon them because they were responsible for their blindness.
HOMILIES BY J.R. THOMSON
The passage of a soul from darkness into light.
This graphic and dramatic narrative begins with the healing of a bodily privation by the exercise el Christ's miraculous power. But its chief interest lies in the spiritual process which it unfolds. It relates how a young man, poor and blind, but intelligent, candid, and brave, received spiritual as well as bodily illumination, and how he displayed insight in apprehending Christ's character, courage in resisting Christ's adversaries, and gratitude in acknowledging Christ's claims. The several steps of this process deserve attentive study.
I. THE COMMENCEMENT AND THE REAL EXPLANATION OF THE WHOLE PROCESS IS TO BE FOUND IN THE MERCY OF GOD.
Our Lord gives what may be called the final cause of this man's blindness when he instructs his disciples that the intention of the Creator was to be found in the opportunity afforded for the manifestation of the Divine energy and grace in the work of restoration. It is well to look for human explanations, but it is better to receive, when they are afforded, such as are Divine. In studying the transformations of human character the wise man will look for the deepest reasons in the purposes of the Eternal.
II. THE ATTENTION AND INTEREST OF THIS MAN WERE EXCITED BY JESUS' COMPASSION AND BENEFICENCE. Himself receiving a signal proof of Christ's pity in the exercise on his behalf of Christ's healing power, the man could not fail to feel the charm of his Benefactor's character.
In this the experience of many has been parallel with his. There are ever those who, seeing what Christ has effected for the benefit of humanity, and reflecting upon the advantages which have accrued to themselves through the work of Christ upon earth, are led to inquire into the gospel, and to ask what there is in the Savior to account for the influence he has exerted over human society. What he has done naturally leads to the inquiry, "Who is he?"
III. THE REFLECTION OF THIS MAN UPON THE MISSION OF CHRIST WAS FURTHER PROMOTED BY THE INQUIRIES OF HIS NEIGHBORS. Those who had long been acquainted with him asked him of his own experience, asked him of his healer; and such inquiries naturally led him to form more definite convictions.
"Truth, like a torch, the more 'tis shook it shines."
Seasons of religious interest and inquiry often serve the purpose of compelling the unsettled and undecided to endeavor at least to understand and to justify their own position.
IV. THIS MAN'S CONVICTIONS WERE CLEARED AND HIS FAITH STRENGTHENED BY OPPOSITION AND PERSECUTION. The fire that burns the dross purifies the gold. A weak nature may be harmed by adversity, terrified by threats, coerced by violence.
But this man's best nature was brought out by contact with opposition. He was not to be browbeaten. He turned round upon his persecutors, and put them in the wrong. Even their injustice in excommunicating him was unavailing; he was gaining a spiritual standing from which he could smile at the threats and actions which were intended to dismay him. Often has it happened in the history of Christianity that times of persecution have strengthened and steadied the faith of true believers. Some of the noblest characters that have adorned the Church have been cradled in the storm.
V. CIRCUMSTANCES AND DIVINE TEACHING LED THIS MAN FROM STAGE TO STAGE OF CHRISTIAN BELIEF. This appears in a very marked manner from the view he gradually came to take of his Benefactor.
First he spoke of him as "a Man called Jesus;" then he pronounced him to be "a Prophet;" later on he asserted him to be "from God." He was following the light he had, and this is ever the way to fuller and clearer light. Thus he was led to take the final step, the natural result of those preceding.
VI. THIS MAN'S ARDENT FAITH AND PROFOUND WORSHIP WERE CALLED FORTH BY THE INTERVIEW HE HAD WITH JESUS HIMSELF.
There was already a candid and teachable disposition; there was already an affectionate gratitude towards Jesus. It was only needed that Christ should fully declare himself. And when he did this, it is observable that the man restored to sight saw spiritually as well as physically. He beheld the Son of God standing before him; he believed and worshipped. All that had gone before led up to this, and without this would have been incomplete.
Now at length this once blind soul passed into the clearness and the fullness of the light of heaven, Now he could say with reference to his spiritual state what he had before said of his earthly vision, "Whereas I was blind, now I see."—T.
The final cause of human suffering.
No man, with an eye to observe and a heart to feel, can look abroad upon human life without being impressed and saddened by the spectacle presented to his view. There is so much of privation, of pain, of weariness, of disappointment, of distress, that it sometimes seems as if "the whole head were sick, and the whole heart faint." "Life," it has been said, "is a tragedy to those who feel." But men are so constituted that they cannot be satisfied to observe and to feel.
They are compelled to think, and many are compelled to theorize. The prevalence of want and misery leads many to formulate a pessimistic philosophy, which accounts the evil in the world to exceed the good, and which seeks an explanation of the facts in the theory that there is no benevolent Deity, but that the supreme power in the universe is a brutal and unconscious Fate. This daring and blasphemous doctrine has, indeed, many advocates.
But there are very many more who seek a less bold solution to the difficulty. It does not follow, because a speculation is comparatively modest, it is therefore sound. Our Lord's disciples faced the fact of human suffering, and by suggesting an explanatory theory, which was altogether inadmissible, gave him an opportunity both of rejecting it and of offering an authoritative interpretation of the facts.
I. SIN IS IN A GENERAL VIEW TO BE REGARDED AS THE CAUSE OF HUMAN PRIVATION AND SUFFERING Our Lord himself taught this on such occasions as that on which he said, "Sin no more, lest a worse thing come upon thee.
" Experience and observation teach us that violation of the Divine laws impressed upon nature is the cause of very many of the hardships, pains, and calamities that befall mankind. The link between sin and suffering is forged and riveted by the hand of the Divine Governor of the universe.
II. MEN, WHOSE KNOWLEDGE IS VERY LIMITED, SHOULD BE SLOW TO ATTRIBUTE INDIVIDUAL PHYSICAL ILLS TO INDIVIDUAL SINS.
Sin as a whole is answerable for most of human evils, and many are the evils which devolve upon every generation as an inheritance. But we should often do injustice did we charge a man's sins, or the sins of his ancestors, with his bodily infirmities. Our Lord warned his disciples not to deem those Galilaeans sinners above others, on whom the tower of Siloam fell. And he expressly exonerated both the blind man and his parents from responsibility for his affliction and privation.
III. IF WE CANNOT ALWAYS DISCOVER THE EFFICIENT CAUSE OF HUMAN PRIVATION AND SUFFERING, WE MAY ACCEPT OUR LORD'S REVELATION OF ITS FINAL CAUSE.
There is a prevalent tendency of mind, especially among the scientific inquirers of our day, to disparage teleology. We are told to observe that a thing happens, to inquire how it happens, but not to venture into the speculation why it happens. Intention, design, are widely denied as the explanation of human actions, as the explanation of natural phenomena. Our Lord Jesus, the great Prophet, the Divine Enlightener of man, tells us that there is a reason for human infirmities and calamities.
"That the works of God should be made manifest in him"—such was the reason why this man was born blind. Here opens up before our mental vision a vast field of inquiry and thought. For if this be so, then there is a purpose in physical evil, and that a moral purpose; then it is permitted and appointed by God, the All-Merciful. Then God does concern himself alike with the existence add the alleviation or cure of such evil; then the works of our beneficent God may be made manifest in the case of even a lowly sufferer.
Thus there opens up before us the possibility and the prospect that the world may come to be pervaded by the illumination of Divine love and pity, and by the radiance of a blessed and glorious hope.
"And even pain is not in vain;
For out of discord springs a sweet harmonious strain."
—T.
The day is for labor.
Very instructive and very encouraging is the way in which, in this passage, our Divine Lord associates his people with himself. In assuming our nature he accepted the ordinary conditions of our life, its duties and its limitations. Generally speaking, what no man could do he would not do; what all men must submit to he would submit to also. Neither then nor now is he ashamed to call us brethren. As Son of man, he partakes both our nature and our lot.
His Spirit and his language assure us of this. Accordingly, his experience is not merely something for us to admire; it is for us so to ponder that we may share it. He partakes our conflict that we may partake his victory. In the words of the text these principles are made manifest, in their application to the "work" which gives meaning to human life.
I. THE CHARACTER OF THE EARTHLY SERVICE. The works themselves to which Jesus here referred were special. By "works" he undoubtedly intended miracles, signs, wonders—such deeds of power and mercy as that which the condition of the blind man suggested that he should perform for his benefit.
But our Lord often spoke of his "work" in a more general sense; and even here there is nothing exclusive of his spiritual ministry, to which this language certainly applies. This saying of Jesus casts light upon the character of the earthly service rendered by himself, and required of all his faithful disciples and followers.
1. Diligence is characteristic both of the Master and of his servants. No reader of the Gospels can fail to be impressed with the laboriousness of Christ's public life. There were times when he had no leisure even to eat; there never was a time when he neglected an opportunity of benevolence. Whether in teaching or in healing he was ever occupied, and occupied for purposes unselfish and brotherly.
2. His works were the proof of his obedience. Our Lord evidently lived a life of devotion to the Father who "sent" him. He did not his own will, but the Father's. It was his meat to do the will of him who sent him, and to finish his work. His advent, his ministry, his death, were all proofs of his obedience. Though a Son, yet learned he obedience by the things which he suffered.
How much more must subjection to the Father's will befit us, who are the creatures of his power, the subjects of his dominion! It gives dignity to our life to feel that we too are sent into the world by God—that we are his messengers, his servants, his children, bound to do his behests, and to live as accountable to him.
3. Obligation characterizes all true service. Even the Son of God could say, "I must." On his part there was no compulsion. He of his own accord undertook a life of consecration and self-denial. What he did he "must needs" do, for the fulfillment of the Divine purposes, for the satisfaction of the benevolent yearnings of his own heart, and for the salvation of mankind.
In our case there is a stringent moral obligation to serve God. As creatures, we are bound to obey a righteous Maker; as redeemed, emancipated freedmen, we are bound to glorify a Divine Deliverer. We are not our own. The duty that binds us to service is indeed a duty sweetened by grateful love, but a duty it cannot cease to be.
II. THE LIMITATION OF THE EARTHLY SERVICE. Our Lord condescended to accept the natural limits of human life. The day is for labor. Christ's day was from the dawn at Bethlehem to the evening on Olivet. There are those of his followers whose day is even shorter than his. There are many whose day is far longer.
But in the case of every one of us there are limits which we cannot pass overse There are the "twelve hours" of the day, to which we cannot add. From this language we learn that the day, the period for our work on earth, is:
1. A prescribed, unalterable period. We cannot add a cubit to our stature, a year to our life. There is "an appointed time" for man upon earth.
2. A period during which the light still shines upon our path. If a man walk in the day he stumbleth not, because he seeth the light of the world. Christians are favored with the light of revelation—with the light of the Spirit given during the gospel dispensation. It is for them to walk and to work while the daylight lasts.
3. A period during which strength is unspent. The laborer toils until the lengthening shadows tell him that the day's work is approaching the close. He needs repose with evening, but until the evening his vigor enables him to continue his efforts. Whilst the Christian lives, God gives him power to serve. God is not a hard Taskmaster; his demands do not exceed his gifts. The voice from eternity that speaks with authority bids us "work while it is day."
III. THE SPECIAL MOTIVE TO THE EARTHLY SERVICE. "The night cometh, when no man can work." There has never been spoken by human lips anything more solemn, and at the same time more precious, than this. We all, when we think upon the matter, feel this declaration to be so indisputably true. Yet we are all prone to overlook, sometimes almost anxious to forget it.
1. Consider this reflection as bearing upon Christ himself. He knew that the end of his earthly life and ministry was near. But he knew also that much remained for him yet to do and to suffer. There was a work for him to accomplish whilst he was still in this world—a work which he must accomplish within the swiftly closing day, or not at all. His advanced and final lessons to his disciples, his last assertions of supernatural power, his crowning revelation of majestic meekness and patience, his mysterious sufferings,—these all had to be crowded into his last brief days.
The cup had yet to be drained, the cross had yet to be borne. All must be finished before the twilight deepened into darkness. For the Father had given him all this to do; and he would leave undone nothing-that he had undertaken.
2. How powerfully does this reflection bear upon our own moral life! Every one of us who is alive to the real meaning of his existence, must feel, and does feel, that this short day of life is given us, not for pleasure, but for progress; not for ease, but for toil. If, through weakness and temptation, this feeling sometimes fails us, there is one effectual method of reviving it. "The night cometh!" Venit nox! There is much to be done that must be done before the sunset of life's day, if it is not to remain undone forever.
Here or nowhere; now or never! That the future life will be a scene of service is not to be doubted. But earthly service must be rendered upon earth. Here the gospel must be embraced; here the new birth to spiritual realities must commence the life that is Divine. Now is the day of salvation. The earthly service must be rendered in this life. The voice comes, "Go, work today in my vineyard.
" Neglect or refuse to obey that summons, and that piece of work will remain undone. Yet the time is very short, and night is very near. Labor, before the hand be palsied. Give, before the substance be beyond control. Speak, before the tongue be forever silent. Do all as looking forward, onward, to the end.
APPLICATION. Let the laborious remember that not all labor is wise and blessed. Work for self, and such work will be consumed in the fire that shall try all things. But work for God shall stand; no power can destroy it. Let the indolent remember that time unredeemed can only witness against them at the last. Let the young remember that, if a lengthened day be given them, the greater will be their responsibility and the larger their opportunity of commending themselves as faithful laborers to the just and gracious Master.
Let the aged remember that, near as is night for them, they have a witness yet to bear, and a memory of inspiration to leave behind. "Whatsoever thy hand findeth to do, do it with thy might."—T.
Spiritual sight contrasted with spiritual blindness.
In this instance, as in many others, the miracle is also the parable. The whole narrative is full of spiritual teaching and beauty. The candor and sagacity of the man who received his sight from Jesus are evident in the witness he bore—witness to what was within his own experience, witness which none other was so competent to bear as he. All who have felt Christ's spiritual power will adopt this language. Whatever they know not, this they know, that, whereas they were blind, now they see.
I. THE SPIRITUAL BLINDNESS OF SINFUL MEN.
1. This is compatible with keenness of natural vision and of intellectual discernment. Men "having eyes, see not." It is marvelous how far-sighted people may be in worldly affairs, and yet may lack spiritual vision.
2. It evinces itself in privation:
(1) Of true knowledge—the knowledge of self, and, above all, the knowledge of God.
(2) Of Divine guidance. In great darkness the blind man is led, not knowing whither he goeth. The spiritually unenlightened sees not the way of life, of safety.
(3) Of heavenly joys. Sight is the occasion of much natural pleasure; and they who see not Divine realities know nothing of the highest delights of which the soul is capable.
3. It is unconscious of its own loss. As the blind from birth are, whilst in their blindness, utterly unable to conceive how much they lose, so those whom the god of this world hath blinded say, "We see," and know not that they are blind and miserable.
II. THE MISSION OF CHRIST TO GIVE SIGHT TO THE SPIRITUALLY BLIND.
1. Observe the motive which animated him in the fulfillment of this beneficent work. It was pity. Common humanity pities the naturally blind; Divine love commiserates those who lack spiritual vision.
2. The power that effects this marvelous change. The poor man upon whom Christ wrought this miracle justly argued that his Benefactor must possess Divine authority. Spiritual enlightenment is the prerogative of God. He "hath shined into our hearts." And we are justified in attributing to a Divine Savior the many glorious miracles of spiritual illumination which our Lord has wrought for men.
3. The means by which Christ works. The provision of the gospel dispensation is all-sufficient for this purpose. On the side of man, there is faith exercised by the sufferer in the Healer, without which no soul is opened to the heavenly rays. On the side of God, there is the illumining Spirit, whose agency is indispensable, who sheds forth the light, and who cleanses the spiritual organ, and renders it susceptible to the quickening, celestial beams.
4. The manner of this enlightenment. It is immediate, thorough, and enduring.
III. THE SPIRITUAL SIGHT WHICH CHRIST CONFERS. The exclamation, "Now I see!" was an indication of present experience, and an earnest of future development. Christ, in bestowing the gift of spiritual vision, opens the eyes:
1. To self and sin.
2. To God himself—his attributes and his purposes.
3. To the meaning of life—its realities and opportunities.
4. To the unspeakable privileges of the Christian calling.
5. To the unseen realities of eternity.
APPLICATION. The language of the man who received his' sight is especially encouraging to those who are troubled in their mind because they have not consciously undergone changes of which others speak with confidence. It is neither the process, nor the time, nor the mode of enlightenment, which is of supreme importance. It is the fact that the change has taken place. Our natural state is one of spiritual blindness. If "now we see," then we have reason for rejoicing, and for grateful acknowledgment of our Savior's healing mercy.—T.
An appeal for disciples.
Admirable, indeed, were the bearing and the language of this poor man when in the presence either of Jesus or of the Pharisees. When confronted by the Lord's enemies, he was not worsted in the discussion, and he was silenced only by violence. If there was a shade of irony in this appeal, still there was justice in it. The language is such as may well be addressed, by those who have benefited by Christ and have attached themselves to Christ, to all whom their influence may reach.
I. THE CHARACTER OF THIS DISCIPLESHIP. There was reason in the designation "disciple," as applied to all who attached themselves to the Lord Jesus. Observe:
1. The Master and his lesson. Christ is supremely able to teach. There may be learned
(1) wisdom from his lips;
(2) holiness from his life;
(3) love and pardon from his cross;
(4) obedience from his throne.
2. The scholar and his spirit. On the part of him who would be Christ's true pupil, there must be
(1) reverence for the Master's authority;
(2) diligence in the study of his character, his words, and his life;
(3) subjection to all commands, however this submission may involve self-denial;
(4) perseverance in application to Divine lessons.
II. THE HINDRANCES TO THIS DISCIPLESHIP. There may be observed, as militating against such pupilage:
1. Pride, which flatters men that they need no teaching, that they are a sufficient lesson and law to themselves.
2. Irreligion, which assures men that other masters are as good as Christ, that there is no special faculty to instruct and to govern residing in him rather than in others who claim obedience.
3. Unspirituality, which too readily suggests that Christ's teaching is too holy, that his standard of goodness is too high, for human attainment. By these several formidable obstacles multitudes are kept from resorting to Jesus in that reverent, lowly, and teachable temper of mind which alone can secure their enlightenment and salvation.
III. THE MOTIVES TO THIS DISCIPLESHIP.
1. It is our nature and our need to learn.
2. None is so able to instruct us as is the great Teacher, the Divine Master.
3. To stand aloof from his teaching is to remain ignorant of what it most concerns us to know.
4. Christ is willing to receive and to welcome us into his school. There is no need, in order to become his disciples and to learn of him, to abandon lawful avocations; no need to dispense with human teachers who are not rivals to Jesus. The door of the school is open, and the great Master is waiting and ready.
APPLICATION.
1. A question to answer for yourselves. "Will ye also be his disciples?" It is not the first time this question has been put to the hearers of the gospel; it is urged once again. It is not too early for any to begin discipleship. And it is not too late for any who may have delayed hitherto, now to respond to the summons.
2. A question to propose to others. This is the invitation which the Church is bound to address to the world. If one who had been a poor blind beggar could urge it upon his superiors; if he could speak for Jesus, though persecuted for his boldness; why should any Christian be deterred from witnessing and appealing to his fellow-men, either by the sense of his own unworthiness and insufficiency, or by the seeming unsuitableness and insensibility of those to whom the appeal is made?—T.
The attestation of Christ's works to his Divinity.
The natural good sense of the man born blind was sharpened by the experience through which he passed, and by the controversy in which he was involved. Hence it was that several of his sayings anticipate the mature arguments of the most thoughtful defenders of the Christian faith. The manner in which he here argues from the character of our Lord's works to his Divine commission and authority, is deserving of all admiration. This is an argument as valid as, and perhaps more effective now than, when it was first spontaneously propounded.
I. THE SPIRITUAL CHARACTER OF CHRIST'S WORK PROVES HIS DIVINE ORIGIN AND POWER. God is a Spirit; the realm of spirit is that which is to him of deepest interest. It is evident that if the Son of God has visited earth, it must have been in order to introduce principles of vitality and blessing into the spiritual existence of men.
This is exactly what Christ has undeniably been doing. To him men owe the enlightenment of the mind by spiritual truth; the new law of moral life; the new motive of Divine love; the great distinctive social principle of self-denying benevolence; the effective consolation for human sorrow; the true encouragement for those tempted to depression and hopelessness; the glorious prospect of the spiritual renewal of mankind; the mighty inspiration owing to the revelation of an immortal life.
II. THE INCOMPARABLE EFFICIENCY WITH WHICH THIS WORK WAS DONE IS PROOF OF CHRIST'S DIVINE ORIGIN AND AUTHORITY.
To appreciate this, we should compare the work of Christ with that of others, e.g. with that of the most renowned of earth—conquerors and kings, sages and religious leaders. How meager their sway! how transitory their dominion! How rapidly have they become merely a memory, a name! On the other hand, what moral significance has characterized the work of the Lord Jesus! During his ministry, what transformations of character he wrought, what extreme and desperate cases of sin and wretchedness he successfully dealt with] And, after his ascension," greater works "than these—which were yet equally his works—accompanied the preaching of his gospel.
Well might Julian the apostate exclaim, Vicisti, Galilaee! Well might Napoleon acknowledge that the empire of Christ transcended all earthly monarchies in true and lasting solidity and glory. If this Man were not Of God, could such results have attended and followed his earthly mission—fulfilled, as it was, upon a scene so limited, in a period so brief, and in circumstances so lowly?
III. THE WIDE EXTENT OF OUR LORD'S WORK IS EVIDENCE OF HIS DIVINITY. Even during his three years of labor, Jesus brought blessing, not to Israelites alone, but to Samaritans, Phoenicians, Greeks, and Romans.
And when Pentecost inaugurated the mission of the Church, then the descent of the Spirit and the utterances in many tongues were a prediction of a universal religion. The middle wall of partition was broken down. One new humanity was fashioned from diverse and seemingly discordant materials—from Jews and from Gentiles. And Christianity has from that time onward been proving its adaptation to man as man—to the barbarian and the civilized, to the East and the West, to persons of all ages, ranks, and characters. The Son of man is proving himself to be the Savior of man.
IV. THE DIVINE AUTHORITY OF CHRIST IS SUPPORTED BY THE PERPETUITY AND BY THE EVER-GROWING PREVALENCE OF HIS WORKS.
Other systems are for a period, for a generation, or for a century; "they have their day, and cease to be." But Christ's mighty works go forward as in an unbroken and ever-swelling procession, testifying to their Author. His power to save and bless is as yet undiminished, and it is reasonable to believe it to be inexhaustible. "This Man" has done, and is doing, all this! Who can he be but the Son of the Eternal?—T.
A heart made ready for faith.
In this interview the purposes of Christ's love with regard to this poor man were fully accomplished. The opening of his bodily eyes, the trials to which he was afterwards subjected, led up to the consummation desired by his Benefactor. By gradual stages he had come to that point, at which only a fuller revelation of the Lord was required, in order that his faith might be perfected.
I. A MOMENTOUS QUESTION ROUSES INTEREST AND HOPE. The man whose eyes had been opened had already acknowledged Jesus to be a Prophet. And now he, whose claims had hitherto been but partially understood, was about to advance them in such a manner as to elicit a full comprehension and a full admission of them on the part of the disciple.
Startled indeed must the poor man have been by the question, "Dost thou believe on the Son of God?" This language opened up before his mind a new vision, to behold which needed indeed a new illumination. It is clear that the man whose sight was restored had begun to see with the eyes of the spirit. Was he now prepared to owe all to Jesus—to see all in Jesus?
II. THE QUESTION IS MET BY AN INQUIRING, CANDID MIND, AND BY A READY HEART.
1. An inclination to receive teaching is apparent in the inquiry, "Who is he?"
2. A reverential submission to the qualified Instructor may perhaps be discerned in his deferential manner of addressing his Benefactor—"Lord!"
3. A resolve to follow out the dictates of reason and conscience is evident in the language, "that I might believe on him." Let him but know the Divine, and he would hasten to present his homage and his faith.
III. THE DIVINE SAVIOR REVEALS HIMSELF.
1. He declares that he is already actually seen and known. The Son of God, who was seen by the man whose eyes were opened, is, in a sense, seen and known, through his incarnation and advent, by all to whom his gospel comes.
2. He condescends to stoop to the level of our capacity and fellowship. He "talketh with" all who are willing to listen to his words, to welcome his conversation and counsel. There is marvelous condescension and grace in the revelation which Jesus makes of himself to all who are disposed to direct the eye of the soul to his presence, the ear of the soul to his voice.
IV. THE EAGER RESPONSE OF FAITH AND WORSHIP. The unhesitating confidence and confession here recorded were not unreasonable. Many causes concurred in bringing about this spiritual attitude. The benefit the man himself had received, no doubt disposed him to give his favorable attention to every representation made by Jesus of himself.
But the miracle was itself, at all events to him, conclusive evidence of the superhuman authority of his Benefactor. The queries, denunciations, and reproaches; of the Pharisees had made him think more profoundly upon the mission, the character, perhaps even the nature, of Jesus. And thus, when the Lord advanced his Divine claim, the poor man was prepared, not only to admit that claim, but to welcome and to rejoice in it.
He could not suspect such a Being of vain egotism or of falsehood. There was but one alternative. Jesus was what he declared himself to be—the Son of God. And, this being the case, what more natural and reasonable than his confession and his conduct? He believed; he worshipped. Less than this would not have been justifiable; more than this would not have been possible. For in his implicit confidence and in his devout homage this poor man anticipated the action of the Church of Christ throughout all time. Convinced by his own works of the justice of his claims, Christ's people delight to confess his lordship and to live to his glory.—T.
Enlightening and blinding power.
Christ's first coming to this world was not for judgment, but for salvation. Yet it appears, again and again in the course of his ministry, that judgment was a necessary incident of his teaching and authoritative action. By him "the thoughts of many hearts were revealed." There was a virtue of moral discrimination and separation in his ministry of which he himself was well aware. Hence his assertion that whilst he brought sight to some who were blind, the result of his coming was that some who boasted that they saw were proved to be spiritually blind.
I. CHRIST'S ENLIGHTENING POWER.
1. This power was exercised for the benefit of the ignorant, the sinful, the helpless. The blind man, whose story is told in this chapter, is an example. He needed not only physical but spiritual sight. His know- ledge was very limited; but it was in his favor that whatever knowledge he had, he used aright. The blindness which befell Saul of Tarsus, in the crisis of his spiritual history, was symbolical of that imperfection of spiritual vision of which he only became conscious when Christ met him by the way. These two examples are from two opposite extremes of society.
2. This power was exercised by the communication of truth, accompanied by the influences of the enlightening Spirit. Gradually did Jesus reveal himself to the man born blind; by signs, by words, by his own gracious character. Thus did light enter into that hitherto obscure nature, and penetrate all its recesses. A heavenly influence called forth faith and reverence, gratitude and love.
The mission of the Messiah, as foretold by the prophet, included the recovering of sight for the spiritually blind—a beneficent service which the Lord Jesus has been rendering from the time of his earthly ministry onwards until now. In his light his people learn to "see light."
II. CHRIST'S BLINDING POWER.
1. Although our Lord says that he came "that they which see might become blind," it must not be supposed that this was the aim of our Lord's mission to earth, in the same sense as were the diffusion of Divine light and the impartation of spiritual vision. He said on one occasion that he came, not to send peace on earth, but a sword; yet we know that the main object of his coming was that peace might prevail, although one necessary consequence of his work would be that men should be divided against one another.
2. The explanation of the blinding result of the Savior's ministry is to be found in the action of a law divinely appointed, according to which those who have good brought near to them, and who are indifferent to that good, have their indifference intensified into hatred. Neglect of privilege leads to deprivation of privilege. It is said that organisms secluded for generations from the light of day lose the organ of sight.
So is it in spiritual relations. Such was the ease with those Pharisees who boasted of their spiritual discernment, but who in fact loved darkness rather than light, and abode in darkness until their spiritual vision was quenched in blindness and the night of impenetrable gloom.—T.
HOMILIES BY B. THOMAS
The blind man and the sight-giving Savior.
Notice this blind man—
I. IN RELATION TO THE DISCIPLES.
1. To them he was a notorious object of retributive justice. His blindness they regarded as a special punishment for some particular sin; they looked upon him, as Lot's wife of old, as a standing monument of iniquity, only with this difference, he was alive, bearing his punishment on this side. Their notion is, upon the whole, correct. Sin is punished, and sometimes in this world.
2. An object of speculative curiosity. Suggesting a problem not easily solved, and a difficulty which they wish to be removed. In the light of popular Jewish teaching and also in that of heathen teaching the difficulty stared them. Of one thing they were certain, that his blindness was a retributive punishment for sin—the sin of his parents or that of his own. But which? That it should be on account of the sins of his parents they could easily understand; but if on account of his own, how could this be when he was born blind?
3. An advantageous object to present the question for solution to Jesus. The blind man was probably well known to them, and they had often before discussed this aspect or' his blindness, with various results; but now here is an opportunity of a final solution of the difficulty. They have full confidence in Jesus' ability and readiness to clear the matter forever, and they lost no time, but asked, "Master, which did sin," etc.?
4. An object who did not excite in them any practical sympathy. They regarded him as the religious teachers of the nation generally would regard him—as the child of sin, a monument of retributive justice, a subject for curious speculation; and, as far as they were concerned, they would leave him with feelings of proud contempt, and satisfaction with their own state as compared with his.
II. IN RELATION TO JESUS.
1. To him he was an object who attracted his special attention. "As he passed by, he saw a man," etc. How many passed by without seeing him at all, and how many saw him with indifference! And probably the disciples did not notice him before they saw the Master's attention fixed upon him. He saw him first, and saw him as no one saw him before. He had many eyes fixed upon him, but never such as these; he had many a gaze from passers-by, but not one containing such feelings, sentiments, and meaning as the one which was on him now.
2. To him he was not an object of retributive justice, but a specially befitting one or, whom to manifest Divine operations. While fully admitting the law of retribution, he excludes this case from the category, and at once removes the disciples' question
(a) from the speculative to the practical,
(b) from the human standpoint to the Divine.
And although the blindness of this man could not be viewed entirely apart from sin, yet to Christ it appeared as a special occasion to manifest Divine operations.
(1) The operation of Divine mercy. Where there is no misery, no mercy is needed; and the greater the misery, the greater and Diviner the mercy which relieves. This was a special case of human misery, advantageous to a special display of Divine mercy. The man was blind from his birth.
(2) The operation of Divine power. Where human skill is helpless, the power which helps must be Divine. To restore this man to sight no human doctor could, nor even would sincerely make the attempt. His restoration was evidently and gloriously the work of God.
(3) The operation of Divine grace. He had a mind requiring enlightenment, a soul in need of salvation, and this popular child of sin presented a glorious opportunity for the display of redeeming grace.
(4) In this man Divine operations were signally manifested. God works continually, in giving sight to men at first, and in an infinite variety of ways, but his operations are unseen and unobserved; but in this man they shine and blaze, so that all must see them but the totally blind. They were manifested to the man himself, and through him to others.
(5) This man restored by Christ was a most convincing and attractive specimen of Divine operations. He was so well known as being helplessly blind from his birth, and was now about to be even better known as perfectly restored by Jesus. Thus he who was popularly thought to be a monument of sin and its terrible consequences, becomes the popular monument of Divine power, the convincing specimen of Divine mercy, and the notorious advertisement of redeeming grace in Christ. Still, he was only a specimen, extraordinary only in the manifestation, but quite ordinary in this course of Divine operations. It is only the work of God, what he ever performs in Christ.
3. To Christ this man was an object who vividly reminded him of his mission on earth.
(1) As a mission of real and untiring activity. "I must work," etc.
(2) As a mission involving a great variety of activities. "The works." Not one or a few, but many and various—as various as the physical and spiritual wants of the human family.
(3) As a mission which is Divine and representative in its character. "The works of him," etc. He never forgot the Divine and representative character of his mission, involving special duties, obligations, and responsibilities in relation to him who sent him.
(4) As a mission which must be performed in due season. "While it is day," etc. He had only a day, and with regard to his earthly life this was short. Even in this hour of his triumph and brilliancy, in giving sight to the blind man, he was reminded of its brevity. This very act hastened the approaching night, Those who shine brightly on the night of the wicked world cannot expect a long day.
(5) As a mission which his disciples had to share. "We" (the proper reading) "must work," etc. The Master and the disciples were one, and their mission one. He came not only to work himself, but also to teach them to work. They were as yet apprentices, but row it was time to begin to break them in under the yoke and remind them of their duty, and all the more as day was drawing to a close.
(6) As a mission the necessity of its fulfillment was felt by him with increasing force. "We must," etc. This came from his Divine commission, from human woe, from the greatness and importance of the work, and the brevity of the time. From above, around, and from within came the inspiration of his work, which found appropriate expression in "We must work," etc.
4. To Jesus this man was an object on whom he would give a practical illustration of his mission. "When he had spoken these things," etc. The speech ended in action, and the action was in perfect keeping with the speech—a grand but most natural and touching peroration. Christ taught his disciples by practical illustrations. The miracle was a full answer to their question, and a practical specimen of his mission.
(1) Means were used in the performance of the miracle. Sometimes he would exercise his Divine power without the use of means at all, even without a word, only the fiat of his will; but here very few words are used—it is all action. "I must work."
(2) The means used were in themselves utterly inadequate to produce the ultimate end. Clay and spittle and washing in the pool of Siloam. These means, however efficacious in popular esteem, were utterly futile to give the man his sight.
(3) These means, nevertheless, were suitable to answer the end Jesus had in view. He knew when and when not to use means, and knew as well what means to use. He never thought that these would bring the man to see outwardly, but they would help him to see inwardly. They served best to strengthen his faith and give due publicity to the miracle. He could not go to and return from Siloam without attracting attention. Jesus caused every movement to serve some useful purpose; thus the man began at once to manifest the works of God.
(4) The faithful use of the prescribed means answered the ultimate end of Divine mercy and human want. The man's faith was strong and prompt. He was not promised his sight, only told what so do; the rest he inferred. He believed and obeyed, and the Divine energy came with the obedience, lie washed, and came seeing. He was born first blind, he was born now seeing, and some saw the Divine glory flashing from his eyes.
LESSONS.
1. There are full compensations for all evil in the Divine economy. If there is misery, there is Divine mercy. If some are born blind, their blindness will answer some benevolent purpose. There is One born to help and give sight. Evil must ultimately serve goodness, and misery must glorify mercy. Divine compensations are seen now, but to a greater extent hereafter.
2. The fact of human sin and misery is not for curious speculation but for practical sympathy. The life of Christ was one of benevolent activity rather than of idle speculation and theory. What right-minded man, when a house is on fire, will stop to know its cause before doing all in his power to put it out? Rather than idly inquiring into the origin and mystery of human evil and misery, by every possible effort let sin be destroyed, and misery and sorrow be alleviated, and with and after the effort will crone satisfaction, and ultimately full light.
3. God answers better than we ask. Our requests may be idle and wrong, but the answers are right and Divine. Still let us ask, and our mistakes will be rectified in the Divine answers. We are glad that the disciples asked respecting the man's blindness. The full reply is found in Christ's miracle of Divine mercy and might.
4. The humblest means are not to be despised if prescribed by Christ. From the human side Divine means are apparently very inadequate, and even contemptible. The spittle and clay and washing in the pool of Siloam for Jesus and the blind man were very humble beginnings, but led to a glorious result. Faithful use of divinely prescribed means were the channel through which Divine energy came to the man which resulted in his sight, and through the same channel of faith and obedience Divine illumination will ever come to the soul.—B.T.
A noble defense.
Notice—
I. A MARVELLOUS IGNORANCE. "Why herein is a marvelous thing," etc. Their ignorance of the origin and history of Jesus was marvelous considered in reference to the persons themselves. Ignorant:
(a) While they really knew so much. The sum of their general religious knowledge must be considerable.
(b) While they professed and were supposed to know so much. They professed to know all about the Divine communications to Moses; professed to know the less, but profoundly ignorant with regard to the greater.
(c) While they ought to know so much. From their religious training and position as the religious leaders of the people, they ought to know much. Their ignorance was marvelous when considered in relation to the case before them, very marvelous indeed in the light of the following considerations so lucidly and cogently brought under their notice by the man that was blind.
1. The testimony of the miracle.
(1) The miracle was an unquestionable fact. As proved by the man himself, by his parents, by his neighbors; and the genuineness of the miracle was admitted by the council.
(2) It was an unquestionable fact, unquestionably involving the exercise of Divine power. This was generally admitted. Admitted by the opponents themselves. "Give glory to God."
(3) The Divine power was unquestionably exercised by Christ. "He opened mine eyes." This connects him most intimately with the Source of Divine power, if it does not point to him as that Source.
2. The usual way of God's impartation of his Divine power.
(1) It was imparted in answer to prayer. This was the law by which God's extraordinary power was imparted to the prophets and seers of old. In answer to prayer.
(2) It was imparted only in answer to the prayer, of the devotional and obedient. Notorious sinners are not in the habit of prayer, and their prayers as such would not be answered. If they prayed so as to be answered, they would cease to be notorious sinners. "God heareth not sinners: but if any man be the worshipper," etc.
(3) This rule of Divine impartation of power was well and generally known. "We know," etc. As if he were to say," Even I know this, much more you."
(4) Ignorance of the Divine character and origin of Christ was marvelous. "He opened mine eyes."
3. The uniqueness of the miracle.
(1) It was unique in relation to the general experience of that age. Such a miracle was never witnessed by any one present, nor by any one then living.
(2) Unique in relation to the oral and written history of the world. "Since the world began was it not heard," etc. History, oral or written, ancient or modern, does not furnish such an instance of Divine power in sight-giving as this.
(3) Unique in relation to the miraculous performance of the great men of the past. As compared with theirs, it stands alone and singular. "It was not heard that any man." Jewish history could boast of the names of great men who through God performed works of wonder and might; but this eclipsed them all. Not even Moses nor Elijah performed such an act with regard to sight.
(4) Unique in its peculiar character and originality. An equal amount of power had been displayed before, but not in the same way. Defective sight had been restored, and total blindness had been removed; bat never a man who had been born blind had his eyes opened. This was reserved for Jesus. This original and new miracle was reserved for a new dispensation—a dispensation of spiritual insight and Divine illumination. And if Christ was a sinner, he was more original, eminent, and Divine than the most illustrious and boasted saints of all past ages.
4. The temporal circumstances of Christ. These were such as to be most unfavorable to impress the public and gain a personal reputation. Temporal circumstances are generally favorable and productive of this. Such as:
(1) An illustrious lineage. To come down upon society in the splendor of an illustrious descent goes far with it. But this Jesus did not. He appeared as the Son of Joseph and Mary. True, he descended from David; but this was scarcely known, and the connection was so distant that the effect would be little.
(2) Great wealth. This has a great influence. This Jesus had not. He was the reputed Son of a poor carpenter, and was a poor Carpenter himself, and as such appeared before the public and was known by them.
(3) The patronage of the great. This goes very far in gaining popularity and reputation. But Jesus had not this. From his first public appearance the aristocratic element of the nation was against him, and the social and religious leaders of the people were his deadly foes.
(4) The fame of learning. This is a most powerful element of success; but Jesus had not this. He was not brought up in any of the celebrated schools of his nation, nor sat at the feet of any illustrious rabbi. It is not known that be ever enjoyed the advantage of any school besides that of home, and he was notorious as a Teacher who had no human learning.
From the poor village and the common workshop he emerged as the teacher of his nation. All his outward circumstances were against him, so that it was well said, "If this man were not of God, he could do nothing." But, in spite of his disadvantage, his doings far eclipsed those of his most eminent predecessors, which plainly and irresistibly leads to the inference of the man that was born blind that he was of God—he was indeed Divine.
II. THE MOST OBSTINATE RELIGIOUS BIGOTRY, Their marvelous ignorance was the offspring of the heart rather than of the head, of the will rather than the understanding. It was the offspring of the most obstinate religious bigotry whose character their conduct here reveals.
1. As most bitter in spirit. "Thou wast altogether," etc. This language is:
(1) Most slanderous. A slander on the man, on his parents, on the Creator who made him, and on the Savior who healed him. The charge was not true.
(2) Extremely mean. To upbraid the man with a calamity for which he was not responsible, and to rake up in his breast the painful reminiscences of a misery which he had so long endured, but which happily now had passed away.
(3) Most irrelevant. It is not to the point. What mattered it whether the man was born in sins or not? That had nothing to do with the fact of the miracle, and the character and claims of him who had performed it.
2. As most proud in spirit. "And dost thou teach us?' The spirit evinced here is:
(1) Most contemptuous. "Dost thou," etc.? Contempt of all who dare to differ from their opinion is characteristic of bigots. This man not only differs from the council but teaches them; their contempt is unbounded.
(2) Most proudly self-satisfying. "Teach us!"
(3) Most unphilosophic and unprogressive. What philosopher worthy of the name would disdain to listen with respect to one who was the object of such a wonderful operation, in whose eyes were still rays of Divine light, and in whose soul was still burning the inspiration of such an experience? Where is the man in his right mind who would not listen with attention and due deference to such a talc? The members of the Jewish council listened with consummate pride and seething contempt, proving themselves to be most unphilosophic, ungodlike, unprogressive, and blind to the greatest and most brilliant light.
3. As most intolerant in spirit. "And they cast him out." And for what? For exercising the right of private judgment, and respectfully expressing his honest convictions and defending the truth. Their conduct was:
(1) Most weak. Mentally and morally weak. They could not refute his arguments nor stand the light.
(2) Most unreasanable and unjust. A Church has a right to exclude those who are immoral, and violating its fundamental principles. But this was not the case here. A coming Messiah was the most fundamental doctrine of the Jewish Church. This man was excluded for accepting him.
(3) Most cruel.
(4) Most fatal. When a Church begins to persecute, it begins to cease to exist; when it excludes the light of truth, it cannot last long.—B.T.
A happy meeting.
We have in this passage—
I. JESUS IN SEARCH FOR THE OUTCAST.
1. He had lost sight of him for a while. He had not seen him since he went on the path of duty and obedience to the pool of Siloam. It was well that they should be apart for some time. Important purposes were thus answered. But neither Jesus nor the man was idle. Jesus was about his Father's business; and the man that had been blind, according to Christ's statement, was busily manifesting the works of God. Establishing the miracle and pointing to the claims and Divinity of its wonderful Performer.
2. Jesus sought him. If out of sight, he was not out of mind. "Jesus heard that," etc. He listened for him; his ear was on the watch for intelligence respecting him. If you listen attentively you will hear soon. Jesus sought him in distress, when his need was greatest.
3. He found him. "Seek, and ye shall find." Jesus knew this law and obeyed it. No one sought so sure to find as be. He never gave up the search till it resulted in finding, whether for the lost, piece of silver or for the wandering sheep. Why did he seek this man?
(1) There was a fellow-feeling. He heard that they had cast him out. By the law of sympathy he looked out for him. He was an outcast from the synagogue himself; he had now a companion.
(2) The man sought him. We are not told this by the recorder, but we know it. He was full of Christ since he had received his sight. He could scarcely see nor talk of anything else. His mind and heart yearned for him. Especially now in his distress and persecution.
(3) Jesus was anxious to succor and help him. To give him his soul's want and his heart's desire—what would make him satisfied and happy. He knew that he needed and desired a spiritual Guide and a Savior, and he hastened to give to him himself. Jesus is a Friend in need, and the need of the guilty and weary soul.
II. JESUS' DEMAND FOR FAITH. "Dost thou believe," etc.?
1. This is the reasonable and natural demand of the miracle. Faith in its great Performer. It was a Divine act of mercy, and was eminently calculated to inspire faith—to open the eye of the soul to see the spiritual, the eternal, and the Divine. Christ looked out for fruit after cultivation and sowing.
2. A most worthy Object of faith is introduced. "The Son of God." The human soul should have an object of faith suitable to its spiritual condition and wants, and worthy of its native dignity and high capacities. Such an Object is here introduced—the Son of God, who also is the Son of man, whom faith can grasp, and being grasped will elevate the soul and fill it with satisfaction and joy.
3. A simple test of adherence is only required. "Dost thou believe," etc.? The memory is not taxed, the understanding is not burdened, but the willing acceptance of the heart, or faith, is made the test of adherence and the bond of union. It is very simple and easy, and yet most effective. "Dost thou believe?"—that is all.
III. FAITH IN PRAYER. This was the prayer of faith inspired by the demand of Jesus.
1. The prayer is to the proper object. "Lord." Although the man's knowledge of Jesus was limited, yet he knew sufficient to appeal to him for more light. He felt confident that he who opened his eyes could, and would give him greater illumination still.
2. The prayer is for a necessary revelation. "Who is he?" The elementary exercise of faith requires some elementary knowledge of its object. We are not expected to believe on a Savior we know nothing or but little of. Christ requires faith, and faith requires knowledge, and no sooner is it born than it begins to ask questions respecting its object, and the first is, "Who is he?" He is worth inquiring after. The choice of the object of faith is most important; this man very properly prays for light to choose.
3. The prayer is made in the proper spirit. The spirit of reverence, importunity, and readiness to believe and accept. "Who is he, that I might believe?" Not that I might consider and think over it; but let me know the Son of God, and I will believe in him. He prayed for knowledge for a practical and for the highest purpose—to believe.
IV. FAITH'S PRAYER ANSWERED.
1. It was answered at once. The man was fortunate enough to ask the question respecting the Son of God, "Who is he? "to the Son of God himself, and who could answer it so well and so readily. There is no delay in the transmission of the prayer, nor in the return of the reply. The prayer was eager, and the answer quick.
2. The answer was very modest. "Thou hast both seen him, and it is he that," etc. Modesty is ever characteristic of true greatness, and was characteristic of Jesus. Often he preferred the third person to the first in speaking of himself. In heavenly and Divine society he thought it not robbery to be equal with God, but in the form of a servant he naturally felt and manifested the modesty of a servant, especially in revealing to the soul his real glory and position as the Son of God and the Savior of the world.
Genuine faith feels modest in the presence of its genuine object, and its genuine object feels modest in the presence of genuine faith. The mutual recognition produces the natural and modest blush of virgin love.
3. The answer revealed the Son of God as nearer to the man than he perhaps expected. We say "perhaps," for there was but a thin veil between him and the full recognition of Jesus. Doubtless he believed him already to be the greatest prophet that ever lived, but had not as yet known him as the Son of God and the promised Messiah, and scarcely expected to find him so near. Faith often finds its object nearer than expected. When faith is intense and eager, the Son of God, the Savior, is present then, and reveals himself.
V. FAITH'S CONFESSION.
1. It is very prompt. If Christ's revelation of himself surprised the man at all, the surprise was most agreeable and sweet. The revelation did not damage the interest of Jesus nor retard the movements of faith, but rather improved the one and hastened the other. There was not a moment's hesitation, but straight and swift as an arrow's course faith flew to embrace and confess Jesus as the Son of God and her sovereign Lord. "Lord, I believe."
2. It is very short. All the questions and answers which passed between our Lord and the man were characteristically brief. It was business and not talk. Intense faith, being the concentrated sentiments and a decoction of the truest feelings of the heart, occupies but little time and language in expression. Some of the most important transactions between faith and her fondest object are very brief. Intense earnestness wastes not itself in words.
3. It is very decisive and fall. "Lord, I believe." In an ocean of language you may not find a drop of thought, while in a few drops of language you may find an ocean of meaning and reality. This man's confession of faith is as short as it can well be, but is quite as comprehensive and hearty. This short confession contains a long and a full faith. It is full of heart and soul, fall of submissive and willing obedience, and, better than all, it is full of Christ.
VI. FAITH WORSHIPPING. "And he worshipped him."
1. An act of overwhelming gratitude.
2. An act of the profoundest reverence.
3. An act involving the highest exercise of faith.
L'uomo non poteva più parlare, il suo cuore era troppo pieno per parlare. Solo l'atteggiamento della preghiera si addice alla sua condizione e solo esprime i suoi sentimenti; e, oberato dallo splendore e dall'amore del Figlio di Dio e dalla gioia di trovarlo, si prostra davanti a lui e adora. Lo lasciamo lì volentieri e non lo disturbiamo. Volentieri lasciamo la fede ai piedi del suo Signore nel bagliore della devozione, nella gloria del culto e nelle estasi della comunione divina. Ciò che è passato tra l'anima e il suo Salvatore era troppo sacro per essere registrato nei nostri Vangeli, ma è stato fedelmente registrato nel Vangelo della vita eterna.
LEZIONI .
1. Gli eventi relativamente banali sono spesso le occasioni dei più grandi risultati . L'espulsione di quest'uomo, nato cieco e guarito da Gesù, è stata l'occasione della fondazione della Chiesa cristiana. A questo emarginato Gesù si è rivelato prima come l'Oggetto universale della fede, e la fede in lui come la prova dell'adesione e della comunione. In senso stretto l'emarginato era il primo membro della società cristiana.
La Chiesa ebraica non è riuscita a compiere la sua missione e ad abbracciare il proprio Messia e il Salvatore del mondo, da qui l'istituzione della società cristiana e la definitiva secessione di Cristo e dei suoi seguaci dagli ebrei per sempre.
2. Quella che all'epoca era considerata una perdita dolorosa potrebbe in definitiva rivelarsi il più grande guadagno . L'espulsione pratica di quest'uomo dai privilegi religiosi dell'ebraismo fu per lui senza dubbio una grande prova e un grave svantaggio, ma quando trovò Cristo trovò infinitamente più di quanto aveva perso. Scacciato dalla nave del giudaismo in un mare infuriato per cogliere l'occasione, ma le onde impetuose lo gettarono sulla "Roccia dei secoli" - uno scambio molto felice, da una nave che affonda a una roccia alta e solida.
3. Quando Gesù è alla ricerca della fede , e la fede per lui , quando si incontrano si fa un rapido patto . Questo è stato il caso qui.
4. La fede spesso ottiene molto di più della sua più alta aspettativa . Quest'uomo difese Gesù di Nazaret, ma trovò in lui il Figlio di Dio. Ci sono dolci sorprese nell'esperienza della fede e felici fortune nelle merci spirituali. In breve tempo questo pover'uomo trovò una fortuna eterna. —BT
OMELIA DI GEORGE BROWN
L'Operaio supremo e la sua opportunità.
"Devo compiere le opere di colui che mi ha mandato, finché è giorno: viene la notte, quando nessuno può lavorare". Questo, come tanti dei memorabili detti di nostro Signore, è incidentale, derivante dalle circostanze dell'ora. In un giorno di sabato in autunno, l'ultimo autunno della sua vita terrena, nostro Signore si fermò mentre passava per le strade di Gerusalemme per guardare un mendicante cieco, noto per essere cieco dalla sua nascita.
La vista era già abbastanza triste, ma invece di suscitare la pietà dei discepoli di Gesù, sembra aver solo risvegliato la loro curiosità speculativa. Dando per scontato, come era consuetudine ai loro tempi, che una sofferenza speciale dovesse essere una punizione per un peccato speciale, posero al loro Maestro la domanda: "Chi era da biasimare per la cecità di quest'uomo?" È stato mandato al mondo senza occhi per qualche colpa sua, o soffriva per le trasgressioni dei suoi genitori? Nostro Signore mise da parte la domanda poco saggia.
I discepoli erano lontani dal segno. C'era una filosofia della sofferenza più ampia e più profonda di quanto essi stessero sognando, e per la calamità davanti a loro c'era una ragione più che sufficiente in questo, che la cecità dell'uomo doveva essere ora l'occasione della significativa misericordia di Dio. Cristo, quindi, rifiuta di essere trascinato in discussioni inutili e inutili sull'origine del male sia fisico che morale.
Questa non era la sua missione nel mondo. Era venuto in mezzo a noi per trionfare sul male, non per spiegarlo, e così dice ai suoi discepoli: "Devo compiere le sue opere", ecc. fare. Prima di poterle pronunciare, deve aver "svuotato se stesso della sua gloria e preso su di sé la forma di un servo". Ci sono stati momenti, infatti, nel suo ministero in cui ha usato un linguaggio che poteva diventare solo Figlio di Dio, come quando parlava della gloria che aveva presso il Padre prima che il mondo fosse.
Ma qui parla con altrettanta semplicità come il Figlio dell'uomo, in tutte le cose reso simile ai suoi fratelli. Non possiamo mai dimenticare che la missione di Cristo nel mondo non ha eguali, anche se è solo nella sua relazione con il Padre. Tuttavia, era nella nostra natura che compisse tutta questa sua opera. Non sembrava essere un uomo, era "l' Uomo Cristo Gesù". Queste parole, dunque, ci rivelano lo spirito, il motivo, il principio, dell'unica vita umana perfetta che sia mai stata vissuta, ed è a questo riguardo che ce la presentano come nostro Esempio.
I. IL NOSTRO SIGNORE QUI DISTINTAMENTE RICONOSCE A VOLONTÀ SUPERIORE DI SUA PROPRIA , e ci dice che nel gettare la sua vita terrena, tale volontà è stata la sua stella polare. Aveva tutta la sensibilità di un essere umano senza peccato. Non solo conosceva per esperienza le urgenze della fame e della sete, e desiderava il riposo dalla fatica estenuante, ma amava la società congeniale come quella della famiglia di Betania.
Come deve essersi tirato indietro davanti alla contraddizione dei peccatori! Con quanta delicatezza deve essersi rifuggito dal contatto con il vizio e lo squallore! Ma non permetteva a tali sentimenti naturali, puri com'erano, di regnare sovrani tra i suoi motivi, o di interferire con il lavoro della sua vita. "Anche Cristo non si è compiaciuto". "Sono disceso dal cielo", disse, "non per fare la mia volontà, ma la volontà di colui che mi ha mandato". Qui, sicuramente, ci sono grandi, anche se semplici, lezioni per tutti noi.
Nella nostra vita quotidiana sentiamo la forza di cento motivi diversi. Siamo influenzati dai nostri gusti, dall'esempio e dalle opinioni degli altri, dalla forza delle circostanze esteriori; ma vediamo sorgere al di sopra di tutti questi, e trafiggerli, e illuminarli, la volontà del Padre nostro che è nei cieli? Siamo mandati nel mondo con doni e capacità differenti. Ci troviamo collocati in stazioni e sfere molto diverse.
Ma abbiamo preso a cuore che Dio ha uno scopo nel metterci qui, e che questo misterioso dono della vita non è come una proprietà libera, un possesso indipendente, né tanto meno come un giocattolo con cui possiamo fare ciò che ci piace, ma che è una fiducia dall'alto, una gestione sotto il suo Donatore? Chiaramente questa era la visione della vita di Cristo, e rivelarci questo in luce e chiarezza, con l'esempio e con il precetto, era un grande fine per il quale Egli venne nel mondo.
Egli infatti è venuto non solo per espiare i nostri peccati e per riconciliarci con Dio, ma anche per mostrarci, come non si era mai visto prima, il senso e lo scopo della vita, collegandola tutta con una volontà perfettamente santa e giusta. . Moltitudini senza numero hanno realizzato questo nella propria esperienza, e. così le vite più umili sono state nobilitate, e le vite più occupate consacrate da un motivo e da un'influenza non di questo mondo.
Oh! se lavorassimo senza diventare schiavi del nostro lavoro, se godessimo della nostra libertà senza esserne irretiti, possiamo farlo solo come servi di Dio. Hai imparato questa grande lezione di vita da Cristo? Nessuno dica che poiché l'opera di nostro Signore era necessaria per la redenzione del mondo, quindi la nostra non ha alcuna conseguenza. Al contrario, è tanto importante per noi fare la volontà di Dio nella nostra sfera quanto lo è stata per Cristo farla nella sua, e certamente impartirà il suo Spirito a tutti coloro che vengono a lui nella fede e prendono il suo giogo su loro.
E come faccio queste parole di Cristo: "Io devo lavorare", ci parlano della sacralità del dovere! Mostrano che l'idea dell'obbligo era distintamente presente nella sua mente. sentiva che era giusto obbedire al suo Dio e Padre che lo aveva mandato, e invece di essere fastidioso o gravoso questo sentimento, era una fonte della sua forza spirituale. "Si rivestì di giustizia come una corazza.
" On the one hand his love to God did not make his obedience seem superfluous, and on the other hand t he idea of duty never chilled nor lessened his love. lie showed how love and obedience are like two fair blossoms which spring from the same root. And what is that root? It is the life of God in the soul of man. Here, again, "let the same mind be in you which was also in Christ Jesus." Seek to cherish and cultivate the spirit of loving obedience.
If Christ, by his infinite sacrifice, has reconciled you to God, redeemed you from the curse of the Law, it is that you may serve his Father and yours from the heart. If he has stripped obligation of its terrors, he has strengthened instead of weakening its power. "This is the love of God, that ye keep his commandments."
II. The text teaches us that CHRIST FELT THE PRECIOUSNESS OF OPPORTUNITY AND THE VALUE OF TIME. He calls his earthly life day, and its termination he calls the coming might, when no man can work.
This language of his cannot be mistaken. He foresaw, indeed, with perfect clearness the glory which awaited him, and the unending work which he was to accomplish by his Spirit in the ages to come; but his life-work here below was the necessary and divinely appointed preparation for it all. The seedtime was essential to the harvest, and it was a limited seed-time, not to be repeated. It was only in the present that Christ's words of life, fresh from his human lips, could be spoken; that his acts of personal kindness and compassion could be performed; that his example, destined to be so infinitely fruitful, could be set forth.
And therefore he prized that present, the day allotted to him, and not in feverish haste, but in all the calmness of spiritual strength, he took possession of it, and used it for his Father's glory. "The night cometh, when no man can work." Taken by themselves, these words only express a simple fact which no one would think of proving or dream of denying. Life comes but once to each of us, and however we may spend it or misspend it, no portion of it will return to be spent over again.
We cannot prolong it at will, or persuade it to linger. Relentlessly it moves like the hand of a clock or the shadow on the sun-dial. All our earthly activities, our duties, our charities, our services in the cause of God and man, must needs be included in it. When the night cometh they must cease. Every man who has any earnestness of purpose about him has felt the stimulus of such thoughts as these.
Whatever his pursuits may be, whether the objects he takes an interest in are of a lower or higher kind, his heart often whispers to itself, "Whatsoever thy hand findeth to do," etc. Nay, further, many an idler has been rebuked into activity, and many a dreamer wakened up out of his useless reveries, just by the thought fastening itself upon him that he is allowing life, with all its opportunities, to slip away, and that it will never return.
Now, if you have entered on the life of Christ's disciples, does this motive lose its force? Surely not. You have learned from your Master the true worth and importance of life, and you have been taught to spend it under the eye of "the Father who, without respect of persons, judgeth according to every man's work." Whatever be your station or sphere, this is the case. Here and now, within the narrow limits of the present, you have your opportunities of service allotted to you, your only sphere for "works of faith and labors of love.
" And these opportunities, if wasted or let slip, can never be recalled. Why should they be lost? These words contain a motive which no Christian can afford to lose. Does any one say, "It does not apply to me or to the multitudes who are already tasked to the uttermost by the necessary cares of life and the stern demands of business"? Ah! God is not like a hard master, reaping where he has not sown, and gathering where he has not strawed.
If your necessary toil is performed in a Christian spirit, in the spirit of a faithful servant, it will be accepted as a free-will offering. Even to the slaves at Colosse the Apostle Paul says, "Whatsoever ye do, do it heartily as to the Lord, and not to men Ye serve the Lord Christ." Yet surely in the busiest life there is room for deeds of kindness and words of sympathy, for giving the cup of cold water, for proffering the timely advice, for doing many things for Christ's sake which no man can require at your hands.
But especially those whose position in the world is independent, and who have much freedom of choice as to how they shall employ, their time, should lay these words to heart. It is you who are most of all tempted to lead a desultory life. Society, as it is called, seems to expect it of you. People suppose that you must have time for every trifling engagement, and it is so much easier to let each day be passively surrendered in this way than to redeem the time for any definite purpose.
But how should this one thought, "the night cometh," help you resolutely to resist or break through such petty distractions! It is but a portion, alter all, of this brief life that you can call your working day. Necessary cares, needful rest, and relaxation must have their share. Sickness may at any time swallow up you know not how much of the remainder. See that you consecrate your yet unbroken daylight to the service of God and man.
You have every motive to do so, and you may well be stimulated and encouraged by the example of many around you; but oh, how affecting the thought that your Master, when he dwelt on earth, said to his disciples, "I must work the works of him that sent me, while it is day: the night cometh, when no man can work"!—G.B.
Spontaneous judgment and self-enacting verdict.
"And Jesus said, For judgment I am come into this world, that they which see not might see," etc. If the words of the wise are as goads, and as nails fastened in a sure place, we need not wonder that the words of Christ himself should sometimes be startling in their sharp-ness-should pierce like a two-edged sword. The text before us is an example of this, and though it contains a paradox which in substance occurs frequently in the Bible, it is expressed here with peculiar point and severity.
I. First of all, LOOK AT THESE WORDS IN THE LIGHT OF THE OCCASION WHICH CALLED THEM FORTH. They are the solemn verdict of our Lord on the opposite effects of the work of mercy which he had just wrought in Jerusalem.
He had opened the eyes of a blind beggar by sending him to wash at the pool of Siloam. The miracle had excited attention, wonder, discussion, and ere long the thoughts of many hearts were revealed by it. On the man himself the immediate effect of the miracle was remarkable. It brought out the simplicity of his character, and his loyalty to his Benefactor and to truth. He already knew Jesus by name, and in the joy and wonder of his heart he rightly concluded that the common report was true, and that Jesus was a Prophet.
But a severe ordeal awaited him. The great religious guides of his nation summoned him into their presence, and with all the skill of practiced casuists they urged him to disown his Benefactor or deny his Divine power. Still the man stood firm, and rather than prove false to his conviction that Jesus was a Prophet, he submitted to the terrible sentence of excommunication. Ere long our Lord heard of this good confession, sought out and found the man who made it, and revealed to him the mighty secret that he was the Son of God.
And at his words the smoking flax of true faith burst into flame in the poor man's heart, and he fell down and worshipped the Messiah. Thus, in a spiritual as well as a- natural sense, Jesus gave sight to the blind. But now what was the effect of the same miracle on the Pharisees? Had they known nothing of Jesus before, it was surely enough in itself to awe their minds and prepossess them in his favor.
Common generosity, common fairness, would have required this. But, in fact, Jesus had been before them for well-nigh three eventful years, so that they were far from ignorant of his character and career. He bore all the marks of a prophet, and more than a prophet. He spake as never man spake, and they knew it. He healed the sick, cleansed the lepers, raised the dead, cast out devils, and they knew it.
His life was one of perfect moral loveliness and unapproachable moral grandeur, so that none of them dared to reply when he said, as he had a right to say, nay, as he was bound to say, "Which of you convinceth me of sin?" Yet, with some exceptions, these Pharisees had shut their eyes to this great Light that had come into the world, and each new exhibition of it made them blinder still. They had even said, "He casteth out devils through Beelzebub, the prince of the devils." And see how they dealt with the work of mercy which had just been wrought in their streets. They had sifted and resifted all the circumstances, and it was well they did so.
"Truth, like a torch, the more 'tis shook it shines."
But when the great fact had become patent to all, they willfully shut their eyes to its meaning, and wreaked their hatred of the Holy One on the lowly object of his mercy; and all the time these Pharisees boasted that they had the key of knowledge, and in their own esteem were the clearest-sighted men of their day. And now the two parties stood before our Lord—the poor blind beggar who had entered the kingdom of light, and the supercilious Pharisees who were drifting further and further away from it. Thus is explained the seeming paradox of the text, "For judgment," etc.
II. EVER SINCE CHRIST AND HIS GLORIOUS GOSPEL CAME INTO THE WORLD THESE WORDS HAVE BEEN RECEIVING FRESH FULFILMENTS.
Among his greatest titles are these, "the Light of the world," "the Sun of Righteousness;" and one of the greatest objects of his mission is to give light to them that sit in darkness, to deliver men from pernicious error and bewildering doubt, to clear up and answer the questions that are alike urgent for the old and the young, for the learned and the unlearned, declaring to us why we are placed here, and what destiny awaits us, and above all showing us the path of life.
I need only add that our Lord's claims to do this are partly based on the great open standing wonder of his life and death and resurrection, and partly on the intrinsic power of his gospel itself—his words, which are "spirit and life." But how do people deal with this great light that has come into the world? Some accept it gladly in early life, even in the first dawnings of intelligence; and some are sooner or later brought to accept it, after much providential discipline and many mental struggles.
But one thing is very noteworthy. Both the former and the latter accept it humbly and thankfully. They give to God in Christ all the praise. The very light they receive reveals to them by contrast the natural darkness of their minds, and they know how that darkness would again enwrap them were they left to themselves. Hence, so far from being proud of their spiritual vision, they habitually pray "that the eyes of their understanding may be enlightened," and they at least can set their seal to this word of Christ, "I am come … that they that see not might see.
" Surely there is grace and truth in this saying of Christ for each one who feels how blind he is by nature to the mystery of God's light and love. Is it strange that some consciousness of this blindness—sad and painful as it is—should be the beginning or the accompaniment of a good work in you? It is not, it cannot be, a state to rest in—"a land of darkness and of the shadow of death"—but it brings you practically within the sweep of Christ's mission.
He came "to open the blind eyes, to bring the prisoners out of the prison, and them that sit in darkness out of the prison-house." Yours is a case for the great Physician, for the mighty Deliverer and Restorer. Go to him in the simplicity of faith and prayer; for this is the method of his grace, to be found of them that seek him. You have heard how he hath revealed himself to others. Tell him that a cloud you cannot sweep away, a veil you cannot lift, comes between you and him.
He will be faithful to his promises. For you also "he will destroy the face of the covering cast over all nations, and the veil that is spread over all people." "With thee, O Lord, is the fountain of life; in thy light we shall see light," But, sad to say, there is another alternative. Too many continue unconscious of their darkness. We may put aside for the present open scoffers and presumptuous sinners, who make no secret of it that they hate the light and love the darkness, and who can scarcely keep their tempers when sacred things are mentioned in their presence.
There is no need to speak of such as glory in their shame, and sport themselves with their own deceivings, and sear their consciences as with a hot iron. The text does not apply probably to these, but to a different class. There are men who are neither attracted nor gladdened by the Light of the world, and in whose case the chief reason is that they turn a cold and critical and unhumbled eye on the Object of faith.
Ah! were they to listen to some of the graver whisperings of their own consciences, which we believe are the strivings of God's Spirit within them, they might become conscious of want and darkness; but they cannot bear this. Dismissing such feelings as unworthy of them, they persist in saying, "We see!" Instead of looking up to Christ with the reverence due to One who is so immeasurably exalted above them, and who, in all that he is and all that he has done, is so wondrous an exception to the whole human race, they rather seek to weigh him in their own poor balances and assign him a place in their own narrow system.
They must needs find some explanation of his miracles which would then be no miracles, and of the mysteries of his kingdom which would then be a mere province of the kingdom of nature. And is it at all wonderful that the gospel should be foolishness to such, and that the more they cherish such a state of mind the less fit they should be to profit by the great Light which yet shines around them? By an inevitable consequence (if God prevent not) their prejudices become stronger and their eyes become blinder.
When God's hand is lifted up, they will not see. When his Spirit works in the hearts and lives of others, some explanation—perhaps a very shallow one—suffices for them. Conversion they will call a reaction from one extreme to another; heavenly tempers, even happy death-beds, the effects of a sanguine temperament; the spread of Christ's kingdom the mere contagion of enthusiasm. But thus the words of Christ are still verified, "I am come … that they which see might be made blind.
" For there is such a thing as being "wise in our own eyes, and prudent in our own sight." It is an old warning, "Let not the wise man glory in his wisdom, neither let the mighty man glory in his might, let not the rich man glory in his riches." Ah, if the pride of wealth is a blinding thing, so that it is hard for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of heaven; if the pride of power or social position is a delusion and a snare;—so it is with the pride of human wisdom.
Strange to say, it is not seldom found among men who, by whatever standard you estimate them, are no wiser than their fellows; just as, on the other hand, some of the greatest minds have been the humblest. But wherever this pride of fancied wisdom reigns, it blinds the eye to the glory of the Redeemer. If you think you can look down, as it were, from above on Christ and his grace; if your ambition is to
"Sit as a god holding no form of creed,
But contemplating all;"
you must needs be in a false and perilous position. It is not thus that you can hold communion with the Holy One. Christ has no blessing for the self-sufficient, no healing for the whole. Remember his words, "I thank thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them unto babes." Hence—
III. THESE WORDS TEACH US THE GRAVE RESPONSIBILITY OF HAVING TO DO WITH CHRIST. "For judgment he is come into the world." Not yet for final judgment and retribution; that is reserved for the last day.
But one inevitable result of his appearing among men has ever been to test and prove them, and to manifest the secrets of their hearts. And this must be so; for he is the supreme Revelation of God—of his holiness and truth, of his grace and love, of all that makes up his glory. Even in the depths of his humiliation this was the case. Think of the day when he stood arraigned as a Prisoner before the Jewish and the Roman tribunals; surely it was he, betrayed and forsaken as he was, who sat in reality on the judgment-seat, while Annas and Caiaphas, and Herod and Pilate, and priests and people, passed in review before him, and were weighed in his balances and found wanting.
And so it must ever be as each human soul is brought face to face with Jesus Christ. Ah! some of you may think that you are judging him, but all the time it is he that is judging you. If you will not humbly acknowledge your poverty and ignorance, and thankfully accept his grace, it is a righteous thing that he should leave you to become blinder than before. His glorious gospel cannot leave you as it found you.
It must be the savor of life unto life, or the savor of death unto death. And hence the solemn words which Jesus spoke of some of the men of his day, "If I had not come and spoken to them, they had not had sin: but now they have no cloak for their sin." This must be so. You cannot escape from Christ. His love and grace cannot be trifled with. "God is not mocked." You remember that the declared purpose of his mission is one of infinite mercy. "God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved."—G.B.
HOMILIES BY D. YOUNG
Manifesting the works of God.
Jesus had just been, as we should reckon, in danger. If a furious crowd had taken up stones to cast at us, we should have been too much concerned for our safety to notice people by the way. Of course Jesus was in no real danger. His time was not yet come. His whole demeanor was worthy of the sublime utterance, "Before Abraham was, I am." Notice—
I. WHAT SORT OF OBJECT ATTRACTED THE ATTENTION OF JESUS. A blind man, blind from birth, so known possibly from a label on his breast. Such a one might not attract attention from the disciples, at least not at first. As strangers comparatively in Jerusalem, their attention would be arrested by the splendors and novelties of the capital city.
We remember how they were impressed by the huge stones with which the temple walls were built. Jesus did not go about the world as a sight-seer; he went about as a Doer of good. The blind man was to Jesus a far more interesting sight than any building. We may be sure Jesus looks down on the world in the same spirit today. And surely we also, if we claim to have any abundance of the Spirit of Jesus in us, will also note all such as are here represented by the man blind from his birth. We must note the blind rather than those that see, the crushed and sorrowing rather than those who are full of life's natural enjoyments.
II. THE QUESTION OF THE DISCIPLES. The question no doubt seems to us, upon first looking at it, to have neither wisdom nor consistency in it; yet there is this merit about the disciples, that they did ask a question. The blindness of this man was not to be taken as a matter of course, like the rising of the sun or the blossoming of the flowers.
Note where the emphasis lies in the question. It lies on the word "born," not on the word" blind." The disciples did not profess to be in utter darkness on the point. Either the man himself must have sinned, they thought, or else his parents, that he should be born blind. Probably they had some belief in the transmigration of souls. They would think he had existed already in some other state, where perhaps he had been a dreadful sinner, and so now for his sins in that former state he would be born into this present life blind.
The alternative supposition, and a very natural one, was that his parents had sinned. For the sins of the fathers are visited on the children. "The fathers have eaten sour grapes, and the children's teeth are set on edge." So the question of the disciples was partly excusable. On the other hand, they narrowed the field of inquiry, nor was there anything practical in their question. They were dwelling on the irrevocable past. How different is the spirit in—
III. THE ANSWER OF JESUS.
1. Ere takes off all blame from the man and his parents. They had quite enough burden to bear already. Consider what a charge and grief a blind child must have been to its parents. They may have been to blame, but even where blame is, it is not the first thing to be thought of. Jesus came, not to condemn, but to save. A physician goes none the less readily to the bed of a sick man because his sickness has come through his own reckless and vicious ways.
2. Jesus points out one good result of this man's blindness. He looks not so much at the past as at the present and the future. The blind man is to have no more years of privation, idleness, and emptiness. Here a great compensation came to him, that a work of God should be manifested in him. Jesus wants us to face the misery of the world in all its magnitude, meaning that we should have the same comforting reflection with Paul, that where sin abounds grace much more abounds.
We have a Physician who never shakes his head, saying he can do nothing, and then goes empty away. We should say boldly of every evil now afflicting men that it is here to give occasion for manifesting the works of God.—Y.
The limits of opportunity.
Here is a universal illustration. We need no investigation of the local and the ancient to comprehend its meaning. We all understand the difference between night and day in respect of opportunity for work. Not but what civilization has made considerable encroachments on the realm of night in this particular. It is now true, not only of the astronomer and of the ardent student, but of many besides, that "night is the time for toil.
Eppure, anche con tutto l'aumento del lavoro notturno del mondo, c'è da sperare che tale lavoro sarà sempre l'eccezione e non la regola. La notte è il modo in cui la Natura annuncia il suo sabato quotidiano. Il giorno è particolarmente la stagione per lavoro utile, per occupazioni oneste; prendersi troppo del giorno per il riposo è, in una certa misura, sprecarlo. La notte è particolarmente la stagione del riposo, e coloro che sono fuori in essa devono essere in qualche modo speciale, forse qualche disonesto Il giorno è la più grande opportunità che l'uomo onesto possa ottenere, la notte è la più grande opportunità per il ladro.
I. APPLICANO LE LIMITI DELLA POSSIBILITA QUELLO IL CASO DI GESÙ STESSO . Certo, è vero solo in un senso particolare che venne a Gesù una notte in cui non poteva lavorare. Ma in quel senso c'era una grande importanza nella verità.
C'erano certe cose che Gesù poteva fare in carne e ossa, ma lo lasciò passare nel corpo spirituale, e quelle cose diventano impossibili. Quando furono scritti i resoconti della sua vita, quei resoconti dovevano essere riempiti con esempi di benevola industria. Ogni giorno lo trovava alla ricerca di ogni possibilità di fare un buon lavoro. Nessuno può addebitare a Gesù l'accusa di essere uno che ha parlato molto e ha fatto molto poco.
Ogni essere umano viene in questo mondo per compiere un'opera di Dio, sebbene la stragrande maggioranza non sembri mai comprendere la missione. A maggior ragione Gesù, quindi, dovrebbe manifestare che è venuto nel mondo per agire. Altri erano impegnati nel proprio lavoro e, per quanto lunga potesse essere la vita, sarebbe stata troppo breve per completare i loro obiettivi. E così Gesù sentì che la vita doveva essere piena di lavoro utile, faticoso, manifestante Dio.
II. LA LEZIONE DI US DA LA BREVE LIMITI DI LAVORO TEMPO . Sprechiamo gran parte della vita non sfruttando al meglio le opportunità. Qui c'erano i discepoli che speculavano pigramente su come fosse avvenuta una certa cosa.
Non c'era modo di saperlo, e nessun risultato pratico poteva venire dall'inchiesta. Non che Gesù ci avrebbe distolto da speculazioni e congetture; non può esserci alcun danno nell'immaginare le cause di ciò che è; nessun danno nell'indovinare le possibilità e le probabilità del futuro. Ma in questo mondo di bisogno c'è così tanto da fare , che non dobbiamo mai lasciare che nulla si frapponga tra noi e il fare.
Sapere cosa hanno pensato gli uomini va benissimo; e facciamo bene a meditare su ogni possibile causa e origine di ciò che è male; ma possiamo meditare così tanto da diventare semplici scettici, sospesi nell'incertezza tra la fede e l'incredulità. Quando la vita si sarà chiusa e il suo ultimo giorno svanirà nell'ovest, la domanda sarà: "Che cosa hai fatto? " Questa vita di carne e sangue è data per servire i nostri giorni e la nostra generazione. — Y.
Scomunica.
Ecco un'arma che attacca la religione in nome della religione. Qui ci sono persone che i fatti più semplici indurrebbero a confessare Gesù come il Cristo, se solo fossero lasciate a se stesse. La verità com'è in Gesù è da una parte; minacce di gravi conseguenze dall'altro; e la verità soffre per il momento dei poteri ecclesiastici costituiti.
I. SUPERSTITION AS CONTRAPPOSTO AL GESÙ . Ecco un nemico speciale, al di là dei nemici ordinari con cui Gesù ha a che fare. Non si può congetturare se una vera confessione di Gesù sarebbe venuta dai genitori del cieco, se fossero stati lasciati a se stessi. Ciò che scoraggia uno non scoraggia un altro.
Ci sono persone che non sarebbero dissuase dal confessare Gesù da qualsiasi quantità di dolore fisico. Possono elevarsi al di sopra di quello; è semplicemente una cosa del corpo; qualcosa di specifico e misurabile. Ma le stesse persone, se arrivasse una minaccia di scomunica, inizierebbero subito a esitare. Facciamo bene a studiare le difficoltà che il Vangelo ha mai incontrato attraverso la superstizione, proprio perché sono difficoltà estranee alla maggior parte di coloro che sono cresciuti in una terra cristiana.
Non è probabile che veniamo minacciati né dal cristianesimo né dall'esterno. Ma senza dubbio ci sono molte parti del mondo in cui la paura di qualche terribile conseguenza spirituale opera per impedire a molti persino di guardare le affermazioni di Gesù. Quanto è diverso lo spirito della vera religione dallo spirito dei falsi! I preti della superstizione devono usare ogni mezzo disponibile per tenere sotto controllo i loro creduloni.
II. IL SUCCESSO DI QUESTE MINACCE SPIRITUALI . Mentre dobbiamo deplorare gli ostacoli al Vangelo che derivano da queste istruzioni e tradizioni errate, dobbiamo anche rallegrarci del bene che c'è nel male. Non è del tutto malvagio ciò che prova la presa del soprannaturale sull'umanità.
III. IL FALLIMENTO DI QUESTE MINACCE SPIRITUALI . Nel caso dei genitori la minaccia ha avuto successo; nel caso del figlio fallì. Ci saranno sempre alcuni, in ogni caso, che nessun possibile incentivo potrà trattenere dalla fedeltà alla verità. La paura di perdere il proprio posto nella vera grande assemblea è un motivo più potente di quello di mantenere la connessione con qualsiasi sistema ecclesiastico visibile.-Y.
La testimonianza della benedizione individuale.
I. IL RESTO RISPONDE ALLE CRITICHE DI GES . Ecco i rappresentanti appropriati di quella vasta moltitudine che in tutte le epoche si è sforzata di disprezzare il Nome di Gesù. "Lo sappiamo", dicono. Era proprio così che parlava Nicodemo quando andò da Gesù. È venuto con il patrocinio sulla sua lingua: "Sappiamo che sei un Maestro venuto da Dio.
«Così leggiamo anche di alcuni di Gerusalemme che erano sicuri che Gesù non potesse essere il Cristo, poiché nessuno sapeva da dove sarebbe venuto il Cristo, ma quanto a Gesù sapevano di dove fosse. bene nel non incontrare l'argomentazione con l'argomentazione.Che gli avversari di Gesù portino avanti la conoscenza in cui sono così fiduciosi, quelli che danno loro la migliore risposta che può indicare qualche indubbio cambiamento nella propria esperienza.
Il cristianesimo è propagato dalla testimonianza piuttosto che dall'argomentazione. Molte persone sono abbastanza capaci di apprezzare le prove che rimarrebbero completamente sconcertate all'inizio di una discussione. La controversia, a cui alcuni sono così affezionati, ha fatto poco per la causa di Cristo. Ma la testimonianza ha fatto molto , anche quella che è stata presentata qui: testimonianza dei sensi.
Colui che era visto come un cieco ora è visto con piena capacità di visione. Ecco un cambiamento gradito, un cambiamento di cui si deve tener conto , non per quanto riguarda la disposizione che lo produce, ma per quanto riguarda il potere. Deve essere un potere gentile e grazioso che dà la vista al cieco nato. se fosse accaduto il contrario, se l'uomo vedente fosse stato accecato, ciò avrebbe bisogno di essere spiegato, anche come accade realmente nel caso di Elima ( Atti degli Apostoli 13:11 ).
Lì, naturalmente, la spiegazione è a portata di mano in sede giudiziaria e ammonitrice. Beati coloro che, quando vengono presentati loro argomenti capziosi e presuntuosi contro la fede in Gesù, possono ricorrere alla testimonianza della propria esperienza. È successo loro qualcosa di buono che credono che Gesù abbia prodotto.
II. LA FORTEZZA DI UN CRISTIANO 'S FEDE . Il cristiano non è obbligato a rispondere alle domande, ai dubbi, alle argomentazioni degli altri, a meno che non si sia prefissato il compito di convincerli. Se vogliamo conquistare le persone a Cristo, dobbiamo essere tutto per loro, e incontrare una discussione con una discussione, se questo farà del bene.
Ma a volte domande e dubbi possono sorgere nella nostra mente, e la vera risposta a loro sta nell'andare ai fatti e nell'osservare come coloro che una volta erano ciechi ora sono venuti a vedere. Un cristianesimo vivo, risultati effettivi e manifesti del vangelo, queste sono le nostre roccaforti quando arriva la lotta.
III. A DOMANDA COME PER LA NOSTRA PROPRIA ESPERIENZA . Tutte le nostre conclusioni intellettuali su Gesù sono vane se non c'è stata una profonda esperienza personale. Non importa quanto attenta sia la ricerca, non importa quanto sia solido il ragionamento, è tutto vano. Molti hanno scritto per sostenere Gesù come il Cristo, ma quando leggiamo tra le righe, vediamo come tutti i loro discorsi provengano dall'esterno.
Possono raccomandare Gesù ad altri, ma è abbastanza chiaro che non l'hanno accettato per se stessi. Come possiamo conoscere veramente Gesù, come possiamo essere sicuri della nostra presa su di lui, a meno che non ci sia stato un profondo cambiamento benefico in noi stessi? Per ognuno di noi è possibile un'esperienza molto più profonda di quella che ha vissuto quest'uomo. Di tutti quelli nati naturalmente ciechi, solo a pochi è stata aggiunta la visione naturale: i pochi, cioè, di cui si è occupato Gesù. Ma di quelli nati spiritualmente ciechi, io . e . tutti noi, è l'intento Divino che tutti dovremmo dire a tempo debito: "Mentre ero cieco, ora vedo". —Y.