John 9

Hendriksen

‹ Chapter 8 John — All Chapters Chapter 10 ›

-8 1 3 2 -9 1 0 0 0 0 13 96 -9 2 0 0 2 0 1 RVStyle2 � StyleNameNormal textFontNameArialUnicode Size Standard StyleNameDefaultFontNameTahomaUnicode Size Standard StyleNameJumpFontNameTahomaStylefsUnderlineColorclBlue HoverColorclMaroonHoverEffects rvheUnderlineUnicode Jump Size Standard StyleNameHeading - Module name SizeDoubleFontNameTahomaColorclMaroonUnicode SizeStandard StyleName"Heading small - Module descriptionFontNameTahomaColorclMaroonUnicode Size Standard StyleNameHeading - LinkFontNameTahomaColorclNavy HoverColorclPurpleUnicode Jump Size StandardCharsetANSI_CHARSET SizeDoubleFontNameTimes New RomanUnicode SizeStandardCharsetANSI_CHARSET SizeDoubleFontNameTimes New RomanStylefsBoldUnicode SizeStandardCharsetANSI_CHARSET SizeDoubleFontNameTimes New RomanStylefsUnderlineColorclBlueSubSuperScriptTypervsssSuperScriptUnicode Jump SizeStandardCharsetANSI_CHARSET SizeDoubleFontNameTimes New RomanStylefsItalicUnicode SizeStandardCharsetANSI_CHARSET SizeDoubleFontNameTimes New RomanStylefsBoldfsUnderlineColorclBlueSubSuperScriptTypervsssSuperScriptUnicode Jump SizeStandardCharsetANSI_CHARSET SizeDoubleFontNameTimes New RomanSubSuperScriptTypervsssSuperScriptUnicode SizeStandardCharsetANSI_CHARSET SizeDoubleFontNameTimes New RomanStylefsBoldfsItalicUnicode SizeStandardCharsetANSI_CHARSET SizeDoubleFontNameTimes New RomanStylefsUnderlineColorclBlueUnicode Jump SizeStandardCharsetANSI_CHARSET SizeDoubleFontNameTimes New RomanColorclBlue HoverColorclMaroonNextStyleNoUnicode Jump Size-9 2 0 0 2 0 2 RVStyle2 �BiDiModervbdLeftToRightTabs StyleNameCentered Alignment rvaCenterTabsStandardTabsStandardSpaceBefore SpaceAfterTabs-9 2 0 0 2 0 4 RVStyle2 -9 0 0 0 0 0 7 6 2 3 8 0 0 CHAPTER IX ) 9:1 7 ) 7 1 3 8 0 0 9 ) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 1 And as he was walking along, he saw a man blind from his birth. 2 And his disciples asked him saying, Rabbi, who sinned, this man or his parents, so that��) -2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 _ftnref1 8 1 -1 9 0 “#_ftn1” 51) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 �� he was born blind? 3 Jesus answered, Neither did this man sin nor his parents, but (this happened) in order that the works of God should be displayed in him.��) -2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 _ftnref2 8 1 -1 9 0 “#_ftn2” 52) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 �� 4 We, while it is day, must work the works of him who sent me. Night is approaching when no one can work. 5 As long as I am in the world, I am the light of the world. 6 Having said these things he spat on the ground and made mud with the saliva and daubed its mud on his eyes 7 and said to him, Go, wash in the pool Siloam (which, interpreted, means Sent). So he went away and washed and came (back) seeing. ) 7 1 3 8 0 0 9:1. And as he was walking along, he saw a man blind from his birth.) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 ) 6 1 3 8 0 0 As Jesus ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 walked along) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 or ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 passed by,) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 he saw a man afflicted with congenital blindness. This was rather common among the ancients, just as it is even today among those who do not use the necessary precautionary measures in connection with childbirth.��) -2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 _ftnref3 8 1 -1 9 0 “#_ftn3” 53) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 �� ) 6 1 3 8 0 “tw://bible.?id=44.3.0|AUTODETECT|” Neither the time nor the place of the event related in the present paragraph is recorded. There is, nevertheless, an interesting comparison between the man afflicted with congenital blindness and the one who was handicapped by congenital paralysis 14 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=44.3.0|AUTODETECT|” Acts 3) 6 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=44.3.3|AUTODETECT|” ). Both were beggars 14 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=44.3.3|AUTODETECT|” Acts 3:3) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 ). The latter was laid daily at the temple-gate called ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 Beautiful) 6 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=40.27.62-40.27.66|AUTODETECT|” . In view of the fact that many of the devout passed in and out of this gate, it was a natural place for the objects of pity and charity. Now also the present paragraph (9:1 7) establishes a close connection between the temple (8:59) and this beggar who had been blind from his birth. Hence, some are of the opinion that Jesus in leaving the temple found this man sitting at one of the temple-gates, begging. Others, however, point to the fact that the blind man was cured on a sabbath (9:14), and they consider it improbable that the Jews would have tried to stone the Lord (8:59) on that sacred day. However, it is probably not wise to limit too rigidly the number of crimes which Jews, beside themselves with anger and jealousy, permitted themselves to commit on the sabbath 14 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=40.27.62-40.27.66|AUTODETECT|” Matt. 27:62 66) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 ). We simply do not know whether the events recorded in chapters 8 and 9:1 34 happened on the same day. But if the blind man was not cured on the day when Jesus escaped being stoned to death, the miracle must have taken place very soon afterward (perhaps, the next day). Incorrect is the view that it occurred at the feast of the Dedication (in December). The time of that feast is not reached until 10:22. ) 6 1 3 8 0 0 We are not told how Jesus or his disciples discovered that this man had been blind ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 from his birth,) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 but this may have been a matter of common knowledge. See also on 5:6. ) 7 1 3 8 0 0 2. And his disciples asked him saying, Rabbi, who sinned, this man or his parents, sothat he was born blind?) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 It appears from this verse that the disciples had accompanied their Master to Jerusalem. To them this blind man presents a theological puzzle. They probably reasoned somewhat as follows: Back of every physical affliction or defect lies a sin, generally the sin of the afflicted one. But how can this be true if the man ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 is born) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 with a defect? In that case he cannot have brought it upon himself through his own misconduct, can he? Is he being punished, then, for the sin of his parents? And if so, is this fair? But no, there is another possibility: the individual who was born with a defect may, after all, be the cause of his own misfortune; for he may have committed acts of sin while he was still in the womb! ) 6 2 3 8 0 0 Weighing the two possibilities, the disciples ask the question, Rabbi for this term see on 1:38 , who sinned, this man or his parents, sothat he was born blind? ) According to Scripture (and the apocrypha) physical afflictions (defects, hardships, suffering, accidents, sickness, death) can be traced to various moral causes; such as: ) 6 1 3 8 0 “tw://bible.?id=45.5.12-45.5.21|AUTODETECT|” (1) The sin of Adam, in whom all have fallen and are by nature guilty before God. This is implied in ) 14 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=45.5.12-45.5.21|AUTODETECT|” Rom. 5:12 21) 6 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=1.3.17-1.3.19|AUTODETECT|” 14 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=1.3.17-1.3.19|AUTODETECT|” Gen. 3:17 19) 6 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=45.8.20-45.8.23|AUTODETECT|” ; ) 14 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=45.8.20-45.8.23|AUTODETECT|” Rom. 8:20 23) 6 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=46.15.21|AUTODETECT|” ; ) 14 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=46.15.21|AUTODETECT|” I Cor. 15:21) 6 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=46.15.22|AUTODETECT|” , ) 14 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=46.15.22|AUTODETECT|” 22) 6 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=49.2.3|AUTODETECT|” ; ) 14 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=49.2.3|AUTODETECT|” Eph. 2:3) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 ; and the apocryphal book Ecclus. 25:24). ) 6 1 3 8 0 “tw://bible.?id=2.20.5|AUTODETECT|” (2) The sins of the parents 14 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=2.20.5|AUTODETECT|” Ex. 20:5) 6 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=2.34.7|AUTODETECT|” ; ) 14 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=2.34.7|AUTODETECT|” 34:7) 6 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=4.14.18|AUTODETECT|” ; ) 14 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=4.14.18|AUTODETECT|” Num. 14:18) 6 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=5.5.9|AUTODETECT|” ; ) 14 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=5.5.9|AUTODETECT|” Deut. 5:9) 6 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=5.28.32|AUTODETECT|” ; ) 14 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=5.28.32|AUTODETECT|” 28:32) 6 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=24.31.29|AUTODETECT|” ; ) 14 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=24.31.29|AUTODETECT|” Jer. 31:29) 6 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=26.18.2|AUTODETECT|” ; ) 14 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=26.18.2|AUTODETECT|” Ezek. 18:2) 6 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=22.4.6|AUTODETECT|” . Cf. the apocryphal books Wisdom of ) 14 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=22.4.6|AUTODETECT|” Sol. 4:6) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 ; Ecclus. 41:5 7). ) 6 1 3 8 0 “tw://bible.?id=5.28.15-5.28.68|AUTODETECT|” (3) One s own personal sins 14 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=5.28.15-5.28.68|AUTODETECT|” Deut. 28:15 68) 6 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=24.31.30|AUTODETECT|” ; ) 14 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=24.31.30|AUTODETECT|” Jer. 31:30) 6 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=26.18.4|AUTODETECT|” ; ) 14 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=26.18.4|AUTODETECT|” Ezek. 18:4) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 ). ) 6 1 3 8 0 0 Cause (1) is ever presupposed by and qualifies causes (2) and (3). Hence, no one ever has a right to charge God with injustice. ) 6 1 3 8 0 “tw://bible.?id=18.4.7|AUTODETECT|” The Jews, however, had a tendency to exaggerate the importance of (2) and (3) out of all proportion to revealed truth. They traced each particular sorrow to a particular sin. Thus the friends of Job traced his afflictions to the sin of cruelty to the widow and the fatherless 14 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=18.4.7|AUTODETECT|” Job 4:7) 6 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=18.8.20|AUTODETECT|” ; ) 14 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=18.8.20|AUTODETECT|” 8:20) 6 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=18.11.6|AUTODETECT|” ; ) 14 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=18.11.6|AUTODETECT|” 11:6) 6 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=18.22.5-18.22.10|AUTODETECT|” ; ) 14 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=18.22.5-18.22.10|AUTODETECT|” 22:5 10) 6 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=42.13.2-42.13.5|AUTODETECT|” ); and in Jesus own day that kind of reasoning was still very prevalent 14 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=42.13.2-42.13.5|AUTODETECT|” Lk. 13:2 5) 6 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=43.5.14|AUTODETECT|” ). That Jesus himself did not approve of this disproportionate emphasis is clear from the last-mentioned reference and is not contradicted by ) 14 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=43.5.14|AUTODETECT|” John 5:14) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 (see on that verse). ) 6 1 3 8 0 0 When the disciples mentioned as one of their alternatives that the man, though ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 born) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 blind, was perhaps reaping the fruits of ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 his own) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 sin, they were probably not thinking of metempsychosis (transmigration of souls), though this construction is placed upon their question by Calvin and Beza, nor of the purely spiritual pre-existence of the soul 9 1 -1 9 0 0 On the Giants) 6 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=1.25.22-1.25.26|AUTODETECT|” , III, 12 15; some would add Wisd. of Sol. 8:20; however, this passage does not necessarily imply that doctrine), but of the rabbinic (overemphasis upon the) idea that babies are able to sin in the womb. From ) 14 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=1.25.22-1.25.26|AUTODETECT|” Gen. 25:22 26) 6 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=19.58.3|AUTODETECT|” 14 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=19.58.3|AUTODETECT|” Ps. 58:3) 6 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=42.1.41-42.1.44|AUTODETECT|” and ) 14 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=42.1.41-42.1.44|AUTODETECT|” Lk. 1:41 44) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 ) the rabbis concluded that in the womb Esau had tried to kill Jacob.��) -2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 _ftnref4 8 1 -1 9 0 “#_ftn4” 54) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 �� ) 6 1 3 8 0 0 The other alternative which occurred to the minds of these disciples was that this unfortunate individual was the victim of parental transgression, perhaps the sin of a dissolute father (as is at times actually the case, even today). ) 7 1 3 8 0 0 3 5. Jesus answered, Neither did this man sin nor his parents, but (this happened) in order that the works of God should be displayed in him.) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 In this answer Jesus immediately rules out the man s personal sins and the sins of his parents as causes to which his blindness can be traced. If a cause must be mentioned, the sin of Adam, our representative head, would be the answer. However, Jesus is not even interested in this at the present time. For the backward look of the disciples he substitutes the forward look. They had asked, How did it come to be? He answers, It happened with a purpose; namely, that the works of God (miracles in which he shows his power and his love) should be displayed in him. ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 All) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 things even afflictions and calamities have as their ultimate purpose the glorification of God in Christ by means of the manifestation of his greatness (cf. 1:14; 5:19, 20). ) 7 1 -1 9 0 0 We, while it is day, must work the works of him who sent me) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 (the textual evidence furnishes no adequate reason to depart from this reading). ) 7 1 -1 9 0 0 Night is approaching when no man can work.) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 To the disciples a glance at this man suggested a theological puzzle. To Jesus a look in his direction presented a challenge, an opportunity for work. ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 They) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 reasoned: How did he get that way? ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 He) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 answered: What can we do for him? So there were two ways of looking at this man, and the latter was by far the better. ) 6 1 3 8 0 0 Note the emphatic position of the pronoun we in the answer which Jesus gives: ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 We,) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 while it is day, must work the works of him who sent me. This we refers, of course, to Jesus himself and his disciples, the men who have just asked the question. For Jesus and for these followers 9 1 -1 9 0 0 all) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 his followers) the rule holds: while it is day we must work the works of God. Essentially these works are ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 one) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 (cf. 5:17, 20; 14:12); they are kingdom-works, whose oneness is clearly evident from the phrase which Jesus uses in calling them the works of him who sent me. On sent see below, verse 7. ) 6 2 3 8 0 0 This teaching of our Lord is very striking, especially in the present connection. It is as if he intends to say: When someone crosses your path, you can react in a threefold manner: ) (1) If he excites your envy, ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 you can pelt him with brickbats) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 . Just now (or very recently) the Jews had tried to do that with reference to Jesus (8:59). The history of the world and, sad to say, also to some extent of the visible church furnishes examples of this general attitude. Some people never do anything constructively. Their life, from day to day, is a constant attempt to annihilate the object of their jealousy. The Jews are still with us. The sanhedrin also (at least its spirit) has not completely disappeared. ) 6 1 3 8 0 0 (2) If he arouses your desire for additional information, ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 you can try to gratify your curiosity) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 by asking questions about him, in order, perhaps, to solve a theological puzzle. The disciples were occupying themselves with that, as has just been shown (see on 9:2). Now curiosity has its legitimate place, and questions of a theological nature should be encouraged rather than discouraged. But there is a limit. One should not ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 only) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 ask questions; one should ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 also) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 perform deeds of love! In fact, that is where the emphasis should rest. Hence, ) 6 1 3 8 0 0 (3) ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 You should love him and help him!) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 That, says Jesus, as it were, must be ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 our) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 attitude: We, while it is day, must work the works of him who sent me. ) 6 1 3 8 0 0 The expression while it is day is explained in the very next verse by when I am in the world. When Jesus, having said It is finished, breathes his last, his ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 day) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 is done, his work of rendering an atonement for sin has been accomplished. Though it is true that even after his resurrection there were appearances, he is not in the world any more as he was formerly. The same holds with respect to the disciple: for him too there is a divinely-appointed time; namely, his life-time here below. Let him make the most of his opportunities. The mandate is urgent, for Night (that is, death) is approaching when no one can work. ) 7 1 -1 9 0 0 As long as I am in the world, I am the light of the world.) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 The particle which we have rendered as long as (E��) here, as in most other instances, refers to a rather indefinite time-relationship (Jesus is not saying just how long he will be in the world). It would appear from the present context that in this case the best translation is not whenever, as if Jesus wanted to refer to more than one act of coming into (and being in) the world, an idea wholly foreign to the present paragraph. The rendering as long as is suggested by the parallel in verse 4 while. For the meaning of the solemn declaration I am the light of the world, see on 8:12. It is true that here in 9:5 the definite article does not precede the noun ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 light,) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 but it is very doubtful whether any special significance must be attached to this omission. If a designation of the character of our Lord begins to be thought of as a proper name or title, the article is not always felt to be necessary. There is a certain latitude of usage. ) 6 1 3 8 0 0 It is clear that the saying I am the light of the world furnishes the key to the interpretation of what follows. The cure of the man born blind, about to be related, is an illustration of what Jesus is constantly doing in his capacity as the light of the world. ) 7 1 3 8 0 0 6. Having said these things he spat on the ground and made mud with the saliva and daubed its mud on his eyes.) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 Just why the Lord chose this particular method we do not know. The answers usually given fail to satisfy; for example, that he did this in order to impress upon the man that the healing power came from Jesus 9 1 -1 9 0 0 word) 6 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=1.2.16|AUTODETECT|” of Jesus take care of this?); or in order to make use of the healing qualities of saliva or of mud; or to make this blind man even more thoroughly blind (!) sothat he might appreciate the cure even more deeply; or to symbolize the fact that man was made from the dust of the earth; etc., etc. If an answer must be given, it may be said that the Lord probably used this method in order to induce the proper attitude of heart and mind; i.e., to bring about perfect obedience, that type of submission which carries out a seemingly arbitrary command. Cf. ) 14 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=1.2.16|AUTODETECT|” Gen. 2:16) 6 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=1.2.17|AUTODETECT|” , ) 14 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=1.2.17|AUTODETECT|” 17) 6 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=12.5.10|AUTODETECT|” . According to this answer, the mud had nothing whatever to do with the physical cure; it had no medicinal qualities, not any more than did the waters of Jordan into which Elisha bade Naaman to plunge himself seven times 14 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=12.5.10|AUTODETECT|” II Kings 5:10) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 ) in order to be healed of his leprosy. In both cases the command was a test of obedience. It must be borne in mind that ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 he) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 is at work here who calls himself ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 the light of the world,) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 and that in this particular case light is imparted not only to the body but also to the soul (9:35 38). ) 7 1 3 8 0 0 7. And (he) said to him, Go, wash in the pool Siloam��) -2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 _ftnref5 10 1 -1 9 0 “#_ftn5” 55) 7 1 -1 9 0 0 �� (which interpreted means Sent).) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 This pool reminds one of the one at Bethzatha , but while the latter was located to the north-east of Jerusalem see on 5:2 the Siloam pool was just inside the south-east portion of the city-wall. King Hezekiah had built a tunnel to carry the water of the Gihon Spring (now Virgin s Fount), located outside the wall, in a south-south-westward direction to just within the wall. The purpose had been to guarantee a water-supply in case of a siege. The original name of the pool was probably ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 Shiloah,) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 a proper name derived from the Hebrew passive participle meaning sent or conducted, given to it because through its tunnel water was 9 1 -1 9 0 0 is) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 even today) ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 conducted) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 from the intermittently flowing fountain to the pool; cf. our word aqueduct. ��) -2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 _ftnref6 8 1 -1 9 0 “#_ftn6” 56) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 �� ) 6 2 3 8 0 0 Some commentators reject the idea that Jesus attached symbolical significance to the meaning of the name of this pool. Nevertheless, three facts should be borne in mind: ) (1) This miracle is certainly symbolical, picturing Jesus as ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 the light of the world) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 (8:12; 9:5). ) 6 1 3 8 0 0 (2) In this Gospel Jesus constantly presents himself as the One who is ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 sent) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 by the Father (see on 3:17, 34; 5:36, 37; 6:57; 7:29; 8:18, 27, 29; etc.). Now the name of the pool is also Shiloah (changed to Siloam); i.e., ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 Sent) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 . Is it not very natural to connect the water of this spring and pool with the One who is the water of life (see 4:10; 7:37)? ) 6 1 3 8 0 “tw://bible.?id=23.8.6|AUTODETECT|” (3) The waters of Shiloah flow from the temple-hill and are even in the Old Testament regarded as symbolical of the spiritual blessings which issue forth from God s dwelling-place 14 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=23.8.6|AUTODETECT|” Is. 8:6) 6 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=26.47.1|AUTODETECT|” and cf. ) 14 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=26.47.1|AUTODETECT|” Ezek. 47:1) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 ). ) 6 1 3 8 0 0 Accordingly, when the man is told to go and wash in the pool Siloam, though it is certainly true that this must be taken in the most literal sense sothat he was actually expected to wash his eyes in that literal pool, the deeper meaning is surely this: that for spiritual cleansing one must go to the true Siloam; i.e., to the One who was ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 sent) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 by the Father to save sinners. ) 7 1 3 8 0 0 So he went away and washed and came (back) seeing.) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 In spite of the strange character of the command, the man does not copy the example of Naaman. He does not protest but he immediately obeys. To the pool he goes and with his hand he dips up some water. With this he washes the mud off his eyes. (The passage in no way implies that he jumped into the pool or bathed. We are dealing here with a blind man, not with a leper.) His obedience is immediately rewarded: he came back seeing. ) 6 2 3 8 0 0 9:8 12 ) 8 The neighbors, therefore, and those who had seen him before as a beggar��) -2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 _ftnref7 8 1 -1 9 0 “#_ftn7” 57) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 �� were saying, Is not this the one who used to sit begging? 9 Some were saying,��) -2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 _ftnref8 8 1 -1 9 0 “#_ftn8” 58) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 �� This is the one ; others were saying, No, but he resembles him. He was saying,��) 11 1 -1 9 0 0 58) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 �� I am the one. 10 In reply, they were saying to him, How then were your eyes opened? 11 He answered, The man who is called Jesus made mud and daubed my eyes and said to me, Go to Siloam and wash. So I went and washed and received (my) sight. 12 They said to him, Where is he? He said, I do not know. ) 7 1 3 8 0 0 9:8, 9.) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 The man was now able to see everything: the sun, the sky, the houses, and most interesting of all the people. It does not surprise us that, in all likelihood, he went to his home. When the neighbors saw him, they were looking at a man who seemed to differ very much from the familiar mendicant, known to almost everybody. The miracle had produced a change in his entire appearance and bearing. ) 7 1 3 8 0 0 The neighbors, therefore, and those who had seen him before as a beggar were saying, Is not this the one who used to sit begging? Some were saying, This is the one; others were saying, No, but he resembles him. He was saying, I am the one.) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 ) 6 1 3 8 0 0 At this point the story becomes very graphic. (Notice the many instances of the use of the imperfect tense: were saying. Cf. 7:11 13.) Opinions were divided. One would say, Is not this man the one who used to sit begging? An affirmative answer was expected, though there is in the question a tiny element of doubt borne of surprise. Another would answer with absolute certainty, This is the one. But a third person, unable to believe that one who was born blind could be cured, would again and again forcefully declare, No, but he resembles him. Perhaps the last speaker was somewhat deceived by the change that had taken place in the man s bearing and demeanor. The cured man put an end to the controversy by repeatedly declaring, I am the one. ) 7 1 3 8 0 0 10 12.) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 The neighbors are no longer in doubt with reference to the identity of the man. It is altogether natural that ) 7 1 -1 9 0 0 in reply, they were saying to him, How then were your eyes opened? ) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 The man gives a slightly condensed account of what had happened (cf. this with verses 6, 7 above), a report which was true in every detail. ) 7 1 -1 9 0 0 He answered, The man who is called Jesus made mud and daubed my eyes and said to me, go to Siloam and wash. So I went and washed and received my sight.) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 He even mentions the name of his benefactor someone must have told him but apparently does not realize that this miracle-worker is the world s Redeemer. In his report of his own actions a word is used (��) which means I recovered my sight ; but since this man had never enjoyed the blessing of sight, we may translate rather freely, I received (my) sight. The desire to see the man who had performed so great a miracle is altogether natural. ) 7 1 -1 9 0 0 They said to him, Where is he?) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 (just like in 7:11). ) 7 1 -1 9 0 0 He answered, I do not know.) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 In the nature of the case, he could not have known the whereabouts of Jesus. Remember also 8:59 in this connection. Just now and for good reasons Jesus was not showing himself to the public. ) 6 2 3 8 0 0 9:13 17 ) 13 They brought to the Pharisees the man formerly blind. 14 Now the day when Jesus had made the mud and had opened his eyes was a sabbath. 15 Again, therefore, the Pharisees also were asking him how he had received (his) sight. So he said to them, Mud he put on my eyes and I washed and I see. 16 In reply, some of the Pharisees were saying, This man is not from God for he does not keep the sabbath. Others were saying, How can a man who is a sinner do such signs? And there was a division among them. 17 Then they again said to the blind man, What do you say about him, seeing that he opened your eyes? He said, He is a prophet. ) 7 1 3 8 0 0 9:13. They brought to the Pharisees the man formerly blind.) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 ) 6 1 3 8 0 0 The section 9:13 34 contains the record of the man s examination by the Pharisees. The first question which occurs is this: ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 By whom) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 was this man examined: by a group of men meeting informally or by an official body in a formal examination? With respect to this question commentators are divided into two groups. On the one hand, there are those who defend a view which, barring minor variations, may be described as follows: ) 6 1 3 8 0 0 The man is brought before a group of Pharisees, ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 meeting informally,) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 perhaps in the home of one of them. These religious leaders, angered by the fact that Jesus had again violated their sabbath-regulations and even more by his increasing influence among the people try to discredit the miracle. They suspect that a fraud has been perpetrated. When they do not succeed in persuading the man to admit his guilt and when they come out second best in the argument, their anger flares up. Thoroughly enraged by what they regard as the man s brazen impudence they throw him out of the house or hall. ) 6 5 3 8 0 0 In support of their position (that the entire examination is informal and that no formal sentence of excommunication from the religious life of Israel is pronounced) these interpreters declare that the individual in question, a mere beggar, would have been considered too unimportant for any formal action, and also that the verb used in 9:34 is not the one employed in 9:22 ( would be unsynagogued ; i.e., expelled from the synagogue). ) On the other hand, there are those who look upon this incident as far more formal. We believe that they are right. It is true, of course, that the evangelist is not describing a plenary session of the great Sanhedrin (cf. 9:13), but this does not mean that the meeting and the sentence which was carried out were of an informal nature. In all likelihood these Pharisees were acting under orders from the Sanhedrin and knew that in expelling the man they were acting in accordance with the decision of that body. Either they had received power to act in this particular case, or else, having been appointed to examine this man, they knew that their action with respect to him would subsequently be approved by the Sanhedrin. We regard the verb in 9:34 to be a synonym for the one used in 9:22. ) We base this conclusion upon the following grounds: ) (1) It is clear from 1:24 (see on that verse) that the Sanhedrin would at times delegate a group of Pharisees to examine matters touching those who by some of the people were regarded as the Messiah.

If in that case, why not in this? Surely, the Pharisees would not only examine the alleged claimant but also those who by their stories of his miraculous deeds might seem to be in danger of bolstering that claim. ) (2) The fact that authority to act was sometimes given to a group of religious teachers seems to be borne out by the records.��) -2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 _ftnref9 8 1 -1 9 0 “#_ftn9” 59) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 �� Is it not possible that we are dealing here with the minor Sanhedrin or synagogue-court, of which there are said to have been two in Jerusalem? ) 6 4 3 8 0 0 (3) According to 9:22 the Sanhedrin had agreed upon expulsion from the synagogue for those who confessed Jesus to be the Christ. According to 9:28 the group of Pharisees which examines this man regards him as a disciple of Jesus; hence, a candidate for expulsion. It is true that at this point the man had not yet actually confessed Jesus to be the Christ (see 9:38), but it does not seem probable that the enemies of Jesus, in their exasperation, would make generous allowance for this difference. The man, after all, had confessed Jesus to be a prophet (9:17), a genuine miracle-worker, in a sense altogether unique (9:32), and a person who performed his miracles because of the extraordinary favor and power of God which rested upon him (9:33). Accordingly, when 9:34 now states, And they cast him out, it is altogether natural to regard this as actual expulsion from the synagogue. What is recorded in 9:22, 28, 32, 33 has certainly prepared the reader to expect nothing less than excommunication for this man. ) (4) The manner in which this group of Pharisees summons individuals (9:18, 24), the legal formality of its method of inquiry (9:19), and also the extreme caution exercised by the parents (9:21, 22), a caution resulting from fear, pleads in favor of a formal meeting before a group of authorized representatives of the Sanhedrin. ) (5) The importance which 9:35 ascribes to his expulsion also points in the same general direction. ) For the reasons given we shall, therefore, in our exegesis proceed from this point of view. ) 9 1 3 8 0 0 Who) 6 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=27.4.25|AUTODETECT|” brought this man to the Pharisees? Perhaps, the neighbors (see context, 9:8, 12). On the other hand, it is also possible that the third person plural active verb, followed by the object-pronoun should simply be regarded as the same in meaning as our third person singular passive verb preceded by the subject-pronoun , according to a familiar Aramaic style-characteristic 14 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=27.4.25|AUTODETECT|” Dan. 4:25) 6 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=27.4.22|AUTODETECT|” in English and in Hebrew. The reference in the Hebrew Bible is ) 14 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=27.4.22|AUTODETECT|” Dan. 4:22) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 ). In that case if we wish to retain the third person plural active construction, the pronoun they must be regarded as indefinite, like the German ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 man) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 9 1 -1 9 0 0 men) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 or French ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 on) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 ). ) 9 1 3 8 0 0 When) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 was he brought? Probably not on the sabbath but a little later. ) 9 1 3 8 0 0 Why) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 was he brought before the Pharisees? Was it because he had violated the sabbath-regulations which were esteemed so highly by the religious authorities? That is possible, but nothing with reference to the sabbath is mentioned before the time of the judicial inquiry. From the connection between verses 13 and 14 it would seem as if the Pharisees themselves bring up this point. ) 6 2 3 8 0 0 Another reason suggests itself: the Pharisees had been telling the people that Jesus was a deceiver. In fact, already the people were aware of the fact that a decision had been made by the Sanhedrin that anyone who should confess Jesus to be the Christ would be expelled from the synagogue (9:22). But what were the Pharisees going to say now? Did not this great miracle speak louder than any verdict of the Sanhedrin? Let the man in question be brought before the Pharisaic judges, so that they can hear the story from his own lips. Then will they still persist in their opinion about Jesus?

Or has some fraud been committed which they are able to uncover and expose? ) We are not sure that the suggested reason was the real one. It would, nevertheless, furnish a very natural explanation. ) 7 1 3 8 0 0 14, 15a. Now the day when Jesus had made the mud and had opened his eyes was a sabbath.) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 To make mud on the sabbath and on that day to cover a person s eyes with this mud was a violation of the regulations. Also, on the sabbath it was not permissible to practice the art of healing, except in cases of extreme emergency. With respect to the Pharisaic attitude toward the sabbath see on 3:1 and 5:9b 13. So the Pharisees 9 1 -1 9 0 0 all) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 of them, however; see on 9:16) probably reason somewhat in the following trend: a. Even if he did not actually perform a miracle, Jesus has in any case violated the sabbath; hence, b. he is an open sinner; but, c. ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 God) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 would never enable ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 open sinners) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 to effect a ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 real) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 cure; hence, d. this whole case looks very suspicious and requires thorough investigation. Is it a fraud perhaps? Cf. 9:18. ) 7 1 3 8 0 0 Again, therefore, the Pharisees also were asking him how he (had) received his sight.) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 Indeed, ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 again,) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 for this was not the first time the question had been asked. He had been bombarded with it. First it had come from the lips of the neighbors, who had voiced it again and again (9:10). And now ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 also) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 the Pharisees confront him with it. ) 7 1 3 8 0 0 15b. So he said to them, Mud he put on my eyes and I washed and I see.) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 Already the man appears to be wary. He weighs his words. Note how the report of the miracle is becoming more and more concise; cf. verses 6, 7; then 11; then 15b. ) 7 1 3 8 0 0 16.) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 The Battle of the Syllogisms) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 follows. It is continued to the end of the story. We have first: the syllogism of the predominant group of Pharisees (verse 16a); and next, the syllogism vaguely suggested by the question of the minority. This second syllogism is going to be used with telling force by the cured man himself (see on 9:31 33). Accordingly, we shall speak of ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 Syllogism A) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 and ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 Syllogism B) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 . ) 7 1 3 8 0 0 In reply, some of the Pharisees were saying, This man is not from God, for he does not keep the sabbath.) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 Here we have what we shall refer to as: ) 9 1 3 8 0 0 Syllogism A) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 ) 6 4 3 8 0 0 Major Premise: All people who are from God keep the sabbath. ) Minor Premise: This man (Jesus) does not keep the sabbath. ) Conclusion: This man is not from God. ) On the surface this looks like excellent reasoning. As a syllogism its validity must be granted. But this does not mean that the conclusion is ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 true) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 . There may be no flaw in logic in deriving a conclusion from a major and a minor premise, but if either of these premises be contrary to fact, the conclusion is no longer legitimate. In the present case ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 what these men mean in their) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 major premise is wrong. The Pharisees have identified their own trifling, hair-splitting sabbath-regulations with the law of God. Hence, their ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 real) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 major premise is, All people who are from God observe ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 our sabbath-regulations. ) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 The minor premise is also wrong, and for the same reason: confusion of concepts. And because these premises are false, the conclusion is no longer ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 dependable) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 . Whether in itself it is true or false is still another matter. But we know that the statement which forms the conclusion is wholly false, the very opposite of the truth. ) 7 1 3 8 0 0 Others were saying, How can a man who is a sinner do such signs?) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 Here we have: ) 9 1 3 8 0 0 Syllogism B Unimproved) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 ) 6 4 3 8 0 0 Major Premise: Only people who are from God (or: who are not sinners) can open the eyes of those born blind (or: can do such signs). ) Minor Premise: This man, Jesus, has opened the eyes of one born blind (or: has done such a sign). ) Conclusion: This man is from God (or: this man is not a sinner). ) Note, however, that this syllogism is cast in the form of a ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 question. At best,) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 it is merely suggested, but not definitely stated. These more mild-tempered Pharisees are confronted with a problem and they seek a solution. The problem is, How can a man who is a sinner do such signs? Even among this group there were probably several who would have rejected the proposition: Perhaps Jesus is not a sinner. For ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 them) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 Jesus is definitely a sinner. Hence, for ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 them) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 the whole matter is a profound mystery. For ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 them) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 Syllogism B has no reality whatever. Others, however, are beginning to see the light. The syllogism, then, is ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 the very most) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 that can possibly be derived from the question, and even then ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 it is only suggested) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 by the question. It is not a positive statement. ) 6 1 3 8 0 0 Is the vaguely suggested syllogism valid? As an exercise in logic its validity must be granted. The reasoning is as sound as a silver dollar fresh from the mint. But is the major premise ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 correct?) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 If not, then the conclusion though ever so correct as a historical fact is not legitimate. ) 6 1 3 8 0 0 To answer this question it must not be forgotten that those whose question suggests this syllogism (here in verse 16) are, after all, ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 Pharisees) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 . Call them the better, milder class of Pharisees, they remain Pharisees all the same. The type of reasoning that is here suggested fits into their scheme of thinking. One finds something resembling it in the following syllogism: ) 6 4 3 8 0 0 Major Premise: Only the wicked suffer physical affliction. ) Minor Premise: This man suffers physical affliction. ) Conclusion: This man is wicked. ) That such reasoning is out of harmony with reality has been shown in connection with 9:2. Hence, if among these Pharisees there are those who adopt ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 Syllogism B Unimproved) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 because they believe that the ability to perform ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 a) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 miracle 9 1 -1 9 0 0 any) 6 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=40.7.22|AUTODETECT|” miracle) is, in and by itself, always proof of divine approval, they are wrong, as is very clear to anyone who reads ) 14 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=40.7.22|AUTODETECT|” Matt. 7:22) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 . But we must be fair to them. As actually stated, the situation is slightly different. Among these milder Pharisees there must have been a considerable number who stressed ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 the exceeding greatness of this miracle) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 . Read the syllogism. They ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 had) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 something there, as is clear from 15:24. Jesus himself was going to say, If I had not done among them ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 the works which no one else did,) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 they would have no sin. From this it is clear that he himself viewed his own miracles as being (from a certain aspect) in a class by themselves, signs of his deity and of his divine mission. ) 6 1 3 8 0 0 One more element must be added, however, for Jesus himself added it. It is this, that not only were his miracles ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 unique in character) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 but also they were done ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 in answer to prayer;) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 hence, ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 with the purpose of glorifying God) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 . When ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 Syllogism B) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 is severed from its Pharisaic context and is given a distinctly Christian context, it is entirely valid. See on verses 31 33; also on 10:37, 38; 11:39 44; 15:24; and 20:30, 31. Jesus himself supplied this context when he said: This happened ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 in order that the works of God should be displayed in him) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 . We, while it is day, must work the works of him who sent me. This gives us: ) 9 1 3 8 0 0 Syllogism B Improved) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 ) 6 1 3 8 0 0 Major Premise: Only people who are from God (or: who are not sinners) can open the eyes of those born blind, ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 in order that by doing this they may display the works of God) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 . ) 6 1 3 8 0 0 Minor Premise: This man, Jesus, ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 with that purpose in mind,) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 has opened the eyes of one born blind. ) 6 1 3 8 0 0 Conclusion: This man is from God (or: this man is not a sinner). ) 7 1 3 8 0 0 And there was a division among them.) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 That is, among the Pharisees a sharp division or ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 schism) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 arises between the supporters of ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 Syllogism A) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 and the suggesters of ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 Syllogism B) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 Unimproved. The former, after a brief ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 direct) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 thrust at the conclusion of ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 Syllogism B,) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 a thrust in the form of a question (see verse 17), begin their ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 indirect) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 attack. Verses 18 26 contain the record of their attempt to demolish the conclusion by rejecting the minor premise. If they can show that this man, Jesus, has not done a great sign, they will have overthrown the suggested conclusion of their opponents. ) 6 1 3 8 0 0 In their embarrassment, unable to agree among themselves, the Pharisees turn again to the man who had just been cured of his blindness. ) 7 1 3 8 0 0 17. Then they again said to the blind man, What do you say about him, seeing that he opened your eyes?) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 It is clear from verse 18 that those who favored ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 Syllogism A) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 (Christ s bitter opponents) were in the majority, as we also could have expected. In the light of that fact it is clear, of course, that when the Pharisees (probably both parties) now ask the man, What do you say about him? the causal modifier seeing that he opened your eyes does not imply any admission, on the part of the majority, as if ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 they) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 now were willing to grant that Jesus had actually performed this astounding miracle. The clause is elliptical for seeing that ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 you have declared that) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 he opened your eyes. ) 7 1 3 8 0 0 He said, He is a prophet.) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 The man is advancing in knowledge. He also shows courage. He knew that, through Jesus, God had revealed himself to him by means of this miracle. And surely one who in such a remarkable manner reveals God must be a prophet! ) 6 2 3 8 0 0 9:18 23 ) 18 However, the Jews did not believe concerning him that he had been blind and had received (his) sight, until they called the parents of him who had received (his) sight, 19 and asked them, saying, Is this your son whom you say was born blind? How then is it that he now sees? 20 Then his parents answered and said, We know that this is our son and that he was born blind. 21 How it is that he now sees we do not know, and who opened his eyes we do not know. Ask him; he is of age; he will speak for himself. 22 His parents said these things because they were afraid of the Jews, for already the Jews had agreed that anyone who should confess him to be the Christ would be expelled from the synagogue.��) -2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 _ftnref10 8 1 -1 9 0 “#_ftn10” 60) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 �� 23 It was for that reason that his parents said, He is of age; ask him. ) 7 1 3 8 0 0 9:18, 19. However, the Jews did not believe concerning him that he had been blind and had received his sight, until they called the parents of him who had received his sight, and asked them, saying, Is this your son whom you say was born blind? How then is it that he now sees?) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 ) 6 1 3 8 0 0 In their attempt to destroy the conclusion of suggested ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 Syllogism B) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 the Pharisees had failed to receive the co-operation of the man most directly concerned. Well, then if the direct method fails, they will try the indirect method: destroying the conclusion by attacking the minor premise. Moreover, if ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 the son) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 will not help them in their efforts to produce this result, they will seek the aid of ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 his parents!) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 ) 6 1 3 8 0 0 The opponents of Jesus are here called the Jews (see on 1:19). How is it to be explained that they (the Pharisaic majority) did not believe that this man had been blind and had received his sight? There are, of course, several possibilities: a. the mendicant may not have been as well-known to the religious leaders as he was to the common people; b. they may have doubted that ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 this) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 was that familiar beggar. Perhaps they thought that the ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 really) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 blind man had been kidnapped and that his double (in every respect except blindness) had been substituted for him; c. or, finally, they may have concluded that the well-known mendicant had been fooling everybody by acting as if he were blind. ) 6 1 3 8 0 0 Ill-will toward Jesus played its role, of course. To believe that this man had been blind and had been cured of his blindness would have been ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 the first step) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 toward crediting Jesus with a remarkable miracle. This step they did not want to take. Just as one often believes what he wishes to believe, so also one often disbelieves what he wishes to disbelieve. ) 6 1 3 8 0 0 They disbelieved that this man had been blind and had received his sight, ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 until they called his parents) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 . Did they believe these two facts afterward? It is true that the word until does not necessarily imply this. Nevertheless, it is hard to believe that even after the parents had given their testimony, the disbelief (with respect to the aforementioned two facts) continued. Verse 34 certainly implies that they then believed that this man had been born blind (as a punishment for sin). That he had been cured of his blindness was so evident that it could not be denied. ) 6 1 3 8 0 0 But it is one thing to accept the fact that this man was cured of his blindness. It is another thing to ascribe this cure to Jesus. To do justice to the truth the hostile Jews would have had to take ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 four steps) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 . They would have had to admit. a. This man was cured of congenital blindness. b. It was Jesus who cured him. c. The cure was effected through the power and love of God, ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 resting upon Jesus,) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 and not through the power of the prince of demons, working in Jesus. d. This shows that Jesus is, indeed, a man from God. In fact, it indicates that he is all he claims to be. Now verse 18 simply teaches that before the parents had been summoned, the hostile Jews had not even taken step Number 1. ) 6 1 3 8 0 0 Verse 19 implies that the Jewish leaders had heard a rumor to the effect that these parents had been talking about the cure of their son. On the basis of this information the examiners now ask ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 two) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 questions.��) -2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 _ftnref11 8 1 -1 9 0 “#_ftn11” 61) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 �� First, they wish to know whether this is that widely discussed son who by the parents was said to have been born blind; secondly, they desire information with reference to the fact and manner of his cure. ) 7 1 3 8 0 0 20, 21. Then his parents answered and said, We know that this is our son and that he was born blind.) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 By this open declaration identifying this man as their son and testifying that he was, indeed, born blind, these parents are forcing the Jews to take that dreaded ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 first step) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 (see on 9:18, 19) toward crediting Jesus with a remarkable miracle. Whether they (the majority, the men who evidently take the leading part) ever took the second step, admitting even mentally that it was Jesus who cured him, is debatable. Verse 26 does not necessarily imply this. ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 Openly) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 they never took this step but opposed it (see on 9:24). They definitely never took steps three and four. ) 7 1 3 8 0 0 How (it is that) he now sees we do not know, and who opened his eyes we do not know. Ask him; he is of age. He will speak for himself.) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 The parents shy away from the second question. They also lie. They ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 do) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 know how it is that their son now sees. He has certainly told them all about the miracle. Verse 22 implies that they also knew who had performed it. It was lack of courage, selfish cowardice, which caused them to say, We do not know & we do not know & Ask him; he is ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 of age) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 9 1 -1 9 0 0 of age);) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 he will speak for himself. At a decisive moment, when they should have spoken, they were guilty of passing the buck. Nevertheless, we must not be too hard on them. The question must always be asked, What would we have done in similar circumstances? The threatened punishment was most terrible! See on verses 22, 23. It is possible that the intimate knowledge which these parents had with respect to the talents and character of their son his ability to defend himself, ready wit, and courage had something to do with their desire ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 to let him speak for himself) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 . The main reason why they spoke as they did is, however, stated in the passage which follows: ) 7 1 3 8 0 0 22, 23. His parents said these things because they were afraid of the Jews, for already the Jews had agreed that anyone who should confess him to be the Christ would be expelled from the synagogue. It was for that reason that his parents said, He is of age; ask him.) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 ) 9 1 3 8 0 0 Fear of the Jews) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 is a common theme in John s Gospel; see on 3:2 and 7:13. Already 9 1 -1 9 0 0 formally) 6 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=42.6.22|AUTODETECT|” condemned as being worthy of death) the hostile Jewish authorities had agreed (i.e., made a formal Sanhedrin-decision) that anyone of his followers who would recognize in him the Messiah, God s Anointed, should be unsynagogued (�� ). To read back into this account the later regulations regarding the minor ban (for thirty, sixty, or ninety days) and the major ban (for all time) is probably not warranted. The account surely reads as if the excommunication here intended was final and terrible. For other references to the application of this rule see 12:42; 16:2. Note that in the last reference expulsion from the synagogue and killing are juxtaposed. The one who was unsynagogued was virtually cut off from the religious and social life of Israel 14 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=42.6.22|AUTODETECT|” Lk. 6:22) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 ). From every point of view social, economic, religious the results were frightening, and this especially for people who were so poor that their son had to make his living by begging! Hence, although we cannot ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 justify) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 these parents in shirking their duty, we can ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 understand) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 them. How often has not courage been lacking in the case of those who should have shown it when the Sanhedrin or its equivalent under some other name threatened to ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 put out) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 those who were defending the truth of God! Church History is full of examples! ) 6 2 3 8 0 0 9:24 34 ) 24 So for the second time they called the man who had been blind, and said to him, Give glory to God; we know that this man is a sinner. 25 He answered, Whether he is a sinner I do not know. One thing I do know: that though I was blind, I now see. 26 In reply they said to him, What did he do to you? How did he open your eyes? 27 He answered them, I already told you, but you did not listen. Why do you wish to hear it again? It surely cannot be that you too wish to become his disciples? 28 And they reviled him and said, ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 You) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 are this fellow s disciple, but ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 we) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 are disciples of Moses. 29 We know that God has spoken to Moses; but as for this fellow, we do not know where he hails from. 30 The man answered and said to them, Why this is an astonishing fact, that you do not know where he hails from, and yet he opened my eyes! 31 We know that God does not listen to sinners, but if anyone is God-fearing and does his will, to him he listens.��) -2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 _ftnref12 8 1 -1 9 0 “#_ftn12” 62) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 �� 32 Since the world began it was never heard of that anyone opened the eyes of a man born blind. 33 If this man were not from God, he could do nothing. ��) -2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 _ftnref13 8 1 -1 9 0 “#_ftn13” 63) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 �� 34 They answered and said to him, You were wholly born in sin, and you would teach us? And they threw him out. ) 7 1 3 8 0 0 9:24. So for the second time they call the man who had been blind, and said to him, Give glory to God; we know that this man is a sinner.) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 ) 6 1 3 8 0 0 The Jews were trying in every possible way to prove that Jesus was not the One who had opened the eyes of the man born blind. They were engaged in an attack on the minor premise of ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 Syllogism B) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 Unimproved (see on verse 16), in order to annihilate the conclusion: Jesus is from God. But in this attempt they had failed to receive any help from the parents, who, driven by fear, had refused to commit themselves in any way with respect to the manner in which their son had received his sight. ) 6 2 3 8 0 0 In fact, the parents testimony had made the case even more difficult for the Pharisees, for it had left them without any excuse for thinking that there had been no miracle at all. And they fear lest within a very short time in the mind of everyone the name of Jesus will be linked with this miracle. And that must be prevented by all means. ) Hence, these leaders decide to resummon the man formerly blind, in order to exact from him a promise that he will never again give Jesus the credit for the great benefit which he has received. They say to him: Give glory ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 to God; we) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 know that ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 this man) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 is a sinner. The most simple explanation of this declaration is the following: Glorify God by ascribing the miracle to ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 him,) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 and not to anyone else. Do not give that man (Jesus) the credit for it, for we have his number: ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 we know) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 that he is an open sinner. Surely, such a man could not have performed so great a deed! ) 6 1 3 8 0 0 Notice how, in this argumentation, ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 Syllogism A) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 is beginning to bear fruit! Its conclusion has become the minor premise of another syllogism, on this order: ) 9 1 3 8 0 0 Syllogism A (2)) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 ) 6 4 3 8 0 0 Major Premise: Only people who are from God can open the eyes of those born blind. ) Minor Premise: This man (Jesus) is not from God. ) Conclusion: He cannot have opened the eyes of one born blind. ) Let it be granted then, so reason these Pharisees, that Jesus did actually cover the eyes of this man with mud and that he sent him to Siloam. When the man came to Siloam and washed the mud off his eyes, it was ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 God) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 not Jesus who performed the miracle. Hence, the man should give ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 God) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 the glory! ) 6 1 3 8 0 0 This explanation is in harmony with the entire context. Note how the words ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 God) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 and ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 this man) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 are contrasted! Not this man but God must receive the honor. ) 6 1 3 8 0 “tw://bible.?id=6.7.19|AUTODETECT|” There is another interpretation on which we wish to comment briefly. It is to this effect, that the expression, Give glory to God, is a kind of standard phrase, meaning Glorify God by confessing your sin. According to these commentators, the Pharisees have not yet given up the idea that the whole thing is a fraud, which they now ask the man to confess. These interpreters usually refer to ) 14 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=6.7.19|AUTODETECT|” Josh. 7:19) 6 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=43.9.24|AUTODETECT|” in defence of the position that also here in ) 14 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=43.9.24|AUTODETECT|” John 9:24) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 the disputed expression has this meaning. However, one can ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 glorify God) 6 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=9.6.5|AUTODETECT|” in more ways than one: a. by acknowledging one s sins, to be sure; but also by bringing a conciliatory offering 14 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=9.6.5|AUTODETECT|” I Sam. 6:5) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 ); or, as here in 9:24, by giving God the thanksgiving and the praise for the inestimable privilege of physical eyesight. We, therefore, abide by the interpretation of 9:24 as we gave it. ) 7 1 3 8 0 0 25.) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 As the story progresses it becomes increasingly clear that this man is not an ordinary individual. He is not easily shaken. Evidently the vaunted ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 knowledge) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 of these eminent judges has failed to impress him. ) 7 1 -1 9 0 0 He answered, Whether he is a sinner I do not know. One thing I do know: that though I was blind, I now see.) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 Boldly he places both his I do not know and his I do know over against their we know. We say over against, for instead of assenting to the proposition This man is a sinner, he openly declares that ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 he,) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 the one formerly blind, is not aware of this; but that he is very definitely aware of the fact that, though blind, he is now fully able to see! Between the lines of his terse saying one can surely read this much: Over against your ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 mere say-so) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 I place this ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 one great fact of experience:) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 though I was blind, I now see. ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 Facts) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 are more stubborn than unsupportable ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 opinions. ) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 ) 7 1 3 8 0 0 26.) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 Clearly, the Pharisees are being crowded against the wall. Having come out second best in their interview with the parents, they have failed even more wretchedly in their conversation with the son! They seem to be in a quandary. So, ) 7 1 -1 9 0 0 In reply, they said to him, What did he do to you? How did he open your eyes?) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 Having exhausted their mental resources, they now return to the questions asked previously (see on 9:15), perhaps because they can think of nothing else to do. It is also possible that they were trying by means of this procedure to weary the man, so that by forcing boredom upon him they might cause him, in an unguarded moment, to make an inconsistent statement. How often the man had heard those questions: from the lips, first, of the neighbors, and that repeatedly; then, of the Pharisees; and now ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 once more,) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 of the Pharisees! It was the same thing over and over again: What did he do to you? How did he open your eyes? ) 7 1 3 8 0 0 27. He answered them, I already told you, but you did not listen.) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 Clearly, the man is losing his patience. He is becoming disgusted with this stalling procedure. That, in itself, is not at all surprising. What ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 is) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 surprising is the fact that he is not at all afraid to express his marked displeasure in words that are clear and forceful. He had not inherited his parents timidity. Moreover, he brandishes the weapon of irony so delicious to him, but so distasteful to them and he does it in such a manner that the intended victims would never forgive or forget. Says he, ) 7 1 -1 9 0 0 Why do you wish to hear it again? It surely cannot be that you too wish to become his disciples?) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 The last words constitute a skillfully expressed question which anticipates a negative answer, to be sure, but leaves the door slightly ajar for a positive one; as if one were saying, This is, of course, impossible & yet, one can never tell what you Pharisees might do! If this is not scorching satire, it is at least the next thing to it. How some commentators can imagine that this man was ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 actually) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 of the opinion that the Pharisees (especially those who predominated) were seriously considering the idea of becoming disciples of Jesus is more than we can understand. ) 7 1 3 8 0 0 28, 29. And they reviled him and said, ) 12 1 -1 9 0 0 You) 7 1 -1 9 0 0 are that fellow s disciple, but ) 12 1 -1 9 0 0 we) 7 1 -1 9 0 0 are disciples of Moses. We know that God has spoken to Moses; but as for this fellow, we do not know where he hails from.) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 ) 6 1 3 8 0 0 Under the circumstances this reaction of the Jewish leaders is entirely understandable. They were not the kind of people who would admit defeat. Moreover, they feel deeply insulted and humiliated. A mere beggar has defied their authority. He has made sport of their dignity and superior position. What, ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 they) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 about to become disciples of Jesus? His very ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 name) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 is poison to them, so that they refuse to take it upon their lips. They prefer to call him that one or that fellow. ) 6 1 3 8 0 0 You are that fellow s disciple, they say. They seem to regard the title ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 disciple of Jesus) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 to be a crowning insult. They can think of nothing worse to call the beggar. They do not even dream that they are bestowing upon him the highest possible honor. With self-satisfied arrogance they refer to themselves as disciples of Moses (see on 5:45, 46; 6:32; 8:5), not realizing that Moses was going to condemn them! They know that God spoke to Moses. Yes, they know the divine origin of the laws and ordinances which Moses instituted. What they do not know is that the One whom they hate with such devilish hatred has the right to say, Moses spoke ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 of me. ) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 ) 6 1 3 8 0 0 When, in this connection, they affirm, But as to this fellow, we do not know where he hails from, they are not denying what they (or their friends) have said previously with respect to the parentage of Jesus (6:42; 7:27). What they mean is: We do not know from what source ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 he,) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 in distinction from Moses, derives his authority. Now Jesus had answered that question again and again. But they had refused to accept his answer. ) 7 1 3 8 0 0 30. The man answered and said to them, Why, this is an astonishing fact that you do not know where he hails from, and yet he opened my eyes!) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 And, it was, indeed, astonishing to hear these dignified men say, We do ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 not) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 know. They were so used to saying, We ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 know ) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 (9:24, 29; and cf. 6:42; 7:27), that it came as a shock that here for once they actually admitted ignorance with respect to a certain matter; and such an important matter! It concerned the One who had bestowed the blessing of vision upon a man ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 born) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 blind! About this most remarkable miracle-worker these wise men know almost nothing. They do not even know the source of his authority. The man born blind takes full advantage of the situation. To use a colloquialism, ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 he rubs it in!) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 Says he, Why,��) -2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 _ftnref14 8 1 -1 9 0 “#_ftn14” 64) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 �� this is an astonishing fact 9 1 -1 9 0 0 in this is the marvel)) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 that you (who pretend to know so much) do not know where he hails from 9 1 -1 9 0 0 where he is from),) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 and yet (see on 1:5, footnote with respect to ��) he opend my eyes! ) 7 1 3 8 0 0 31, 32, 33.) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 The healed man continues, ) 7 1 -1 9 0 0 We know that God does not listen to sinners, but if anyone is Godfearing and does his will, to him he listens. Since the world began it was never heard of that anyone opened the eyes of a man born blind. If this man were not from God, he could do nothing.) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 ) 6 1 3 8 0 0 Here ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 Syllogism B) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 returns in strengthened form ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 (essentially) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 the same as ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 Syllogism B Improved)) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 . Verse 31 is the major premise; verse 32, the minor; verse 33, the conclusion. See on 9:16. ) 6 4 3 8 0 0 Major Premise: Only people who are from God i.e., who are God-fearing and do his will are heard by God, so that they can open the eyes of those born blind. ) Minor Premise: This man, Jesus, was heard by God, so that he opened the eyes of one born blind, and thus performed a miracle so great that since the world began it was never heard of. ) Conclusion: This man is from God. If he were not, he could do nothing. He is definitely not a (flagrant) sinner. ) Note that by speaking as he does this man is employing the Pharisaic type of argumentation. He is defeating the Pharisees with their own syllogistic reasoning. This in itself is very remarkable: ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 a beggar defeating a Pharisee with the Pharisee s own weapon!) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 But the man is doing even better than that: he takes the Pharisaic syllogism, and improves it, not only by stating positively what before was only a hint (cf. 9:31 33 with 9:16b) but also by giving it a definitely scriptural setting. The man regards the miracle as ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 an answer to prayer!) 6 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=9.8.18|AUTODETECT|” He says, If anyone is God-fearing and does his will, to him he (God) listens. That position is entirely correct. It is Scriptural. The idea that God hears the prayers of the righteous but rejects the prayers of the wicked is found everywhere in the Bible: ) 14 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=9.8.18|AUTODETECT|” I Sam. 8:18) 6 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=18.27.9|AUTODETECT|” ; ) 14 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=18.27.9|AUTODETECT|” Job 27:9) 6 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=18.35.12|AUTODETECT|” ; ) 14 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=18.35.12|AUTODETECT|” 35:12) 6 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=19.18.41|AUTODETECT|” ; ) 14 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=19.18.41|AUTODETECT|” Ps. 18:41) 6 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=19.66.18|AUTODETECT|” ; ) 14 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=19.66.18|AUTODETECT|” 66:18) 6 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=20.1.28|AUTODETECT|” ; ) 14 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=20.1.28|AUTODETECT|” Prov. 1:28) 6 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=20.15.29|AUTODETECT|” ; ) 14 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=20.15.29|AUTODETECT|” 15:29) 6 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=23.1.15|AUTODETECT|” ; ) 14 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=23.1.15|AUTODETECT|” Is. 1:15) 6 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=23.59.2|AUTODETECT|” ; ) 14 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=23.59.2|AUTODETECT|” 59:2) 6 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=24.11.11|AUTODETECT|” ; ) 14 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=24.11.11|AUTODETECT|” Jer. 11:11) 6 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=24.14.12|AUTODETECT|” ; ) 14 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=24.14.12|AUTODETECT|” 14:12) 6 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=26.8.18|AUTODETECT|” ; ) 14 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=26.8.18|AUTODETECT|” Ezek. 8:18) 6 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=33.3.4|AUTODETECT|” ; ) 14 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=33.3.4|AUTODETECT|” Mic. 3:4) 6 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=38.7.13|AUTODETECT|” ; ) 14 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=38.7.13|AUTODETECT|” Zech. 7:13) 6 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=43.8.21|AUTODETECT|” ; ) 14 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=43.8.21|AUTODETECT|” John 8:21) 6 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=44.10.35|AUTODETECT|” ; ) 14 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=44.10.35|AUTODETECT|” Acts 10:35) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 . Moreover, miracles 9 1 -1 9 0 0 such) 6 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=44.2.22|AUTODETECT|” miracles; see on 15:24) performed in answer to prayer and in order to display the works of God, do have evidential value 14 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=44.2.22|AUTODETECT|” Acts 2:22) 6 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=44.4.31|AUTODETECT|” ; ) 14 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=44.4.31|AUTODETECT|” 4:31) 6 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=47.12.12|AUTODETECT|” ; ) 14 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=47.12.12|AUTODETECT|” II Cor. 12:12) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 ). ) 6 1 3 8 0 0 The Pharisees have suffered a humiliating defeat. They have been driven into a corner. Meanwhile, the beggar has made definite progress in his confession. He is no longer saying, Whether he (Jesus) is a sinner, I do not know (9:25). By this time he ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 knows) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 that Jesus is not a sinner, but the recipient of God s favor in a very high degree. ) 7 1 3 8 0 0 34.) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 Having lost the argument, the Pharisees resort to arrogant, glaring abuse. ) 7 1 -1 9 0 0 They answered and said to him, You were wholly born in sin, and you would teach us?) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 But even this abuse contains the evidence of their defeat, for by implication they now admit that this man who stands before them clear-sighted was born blind. The position recorded in verse 18 ( Now the Jews did not believe concerning him that he had been blind and had received his sight ) has been abandoned. The miracle has actually occurred. So much is now clear to all. The very idea, however, of ascribing it to Jesus, as the One on whom the favor of God rests, is so obnoxious to them, that they regard the one who entertains it as wholly born in sin (his blindness being regarded by them as a punishment for sin; see on 3:2). That such a base fellow would actually take it upon himself to teach such worthies as themselves is disgusting! ) 7 1 -1 9 0 0 And they threw him out;) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 i.e., out of the building and out of the religious fellowship of Israel. See on 9:13. ) 6 2 3 8 0 0 9:35 38 ) 35 Jesus heard that they had thrown him out, and having found him he said, Do ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 you) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 believe in the Son of man? 36 He answered and said, And who is he, sir, (tell me) in order that��) -2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 _ftnref15 8 1 -1 9 0 “#_ftn15” 65) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 �� I may believe in him? 37 Jesus said to him, You have seen him; in fact the One who is speaking to you is he. 38 He said, I believe, Lord, and he worshiped him. ) 7 1 3 8 0 0 9:35. Jesus heard that they had thrown him out, and having found him he said, Do ) 12 1 -1 9 0 0 you) 7 1 -1 9 0 0 believe in the Son of man?) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 Jesus, the Good Shepherd (see chapter 10), is interested not only in the body but also in the soul of those whom he saves (see also on 5:14). So, having heard that this man had been expelled from the synagogue, the Lord seeks and finds him. Having located him, Jesus asks, Do ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 you) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 believe in the Son of man? It is probable that the pronoun ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 you) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 received a certain emphasis, so the import of the question is, Do ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 you,) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 like a true disciple and in distinction from the unbelieving Jews, believe & ? ��) -2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 _ftnref16 8 1 -1 9 0 “#_ftn16” 66) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 �� The context clearly shows that the expression ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 believe in) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 in the present instance indicates true faith; in other words, Do you rely entirely for life and death on the Son of man? Do you trust him, and do you entrust yourself wholly to him with reference to the present and the future, for your physical and for your spiritual needs? For �� see also on 1:8; 3:16; 8:30, 31a. Jesus asked whether this man believed in ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 the Son of man) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 . For this term see on 12:34. The textual support for the reading ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 the Son of God) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 is definitely weaker; in fact, there are no good reasons to accept that reading. ) 7 1 3 8 0 0 36. He answered and said, And who is he, sir, (tell me) in order that I may believe in him?) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 Before being able to answer the question, the man feels the need of knowing who this Son of man this Messiah might be. Hence, the question begins with the conjunction ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 And,) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 which anticipates additional information. Note that the Greek word �� has been translated ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 sir) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 here (verse 36) but ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 Lord) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 in verse 38. The reason is, of course, that in the present verse the once blind man is addressing someone whose identity has not yet been clearly revealed, though he may have surmised that it was Jesus; but in verse 38 the man is worshiping the One whom he now fully recognizes for what he is. See also on 1:38. On ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 believe in him) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 see verse 35. ) 7 1 3 8 0 0 37. Jesus said to him, You have seen him; in fact, the One who is speaking to you is he.) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 Literally the answer of Jesus is, You have both seen him, and the One who is speaking to you is he, but we believe that in English the translation which we have given is a little clearer without changing the sense in any way. In words that are almost identical to those found in 4:26 (see on that passage) Jesus reveals himself to this man as the true Messiah, even the Son of man. ) 7 1 3 8 0 0 38. He said, I believe, Lord, and he worshiped him.) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 Being now fully aware of the fact that the One who has addressed him is the very One who has also healed him, namely, Jesus, on whom with wide-eyed wonder he fixes his gaze (what a privilege it is to be able to see!), and recognizing in Jesus the Messiah, the very Son of man, who is also Son of God and therefore the proper object of worship, the man falls down on his knees and renders religious worship (not merely respect or even reverence) to his Benefactor. In the Gospel of John the verb always indicates divine worship (see also 4:20, 21, 22, 23, 24; 12:20). ) 6 2 3 8 0 0 9:39 41 ) 39 And Jesus said, For judgment I came into this world, in order that those who do not see may see, and that those who see may become blind. 40 Some of the Pharisees near him heard these things, and they said to him, Certainly, we too are not blind, are we? 41 Jesus said to them, If you were blind, you would have no sin;��) -2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 _ftnref17 8 1 -1 9 0 “#_ftn17” 67) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 �� but now that you say, We see, your sin remains. ) 7 1 3 8 0 0 9:39. And Jesus said, For judgment I came into this world.) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 When Jesus sees this man on his knees in the attitude of genuine worship, and compares this humble and confiding condition of heart and mind with the hostility and stubbornness of the Pharisees, he sees that his coming into this world has two diametrically opposed effects. Some receive him with joy and are rewarded. Others reject him and are punished. This reward and this punishment is his judgment (��; see on 3:17) upon those who come in contact with him. It is for that reason that he can say, For judgment I came into this world. See on 3:18 21. He came with the very purpose of pronouncing and carrying into effect this authoritative verdict upon these two sharply contrasted groups. On the expression came into this world as a characterization of the Messiah see 1:9. ) 6 1 3 8 0 0 The rewarding aspect of this judgment is expressed in the words: ) 7 1 -1 9 0 0 in order that those who do not see, may see;) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 i.e., in order that those who lack the light of salvation (who are without true knowledge of God, righteousness, holiness, joy), and regretting their condition have by God s preparatory grace been made anxious to receive the light, may be placed in full possession of it. The man who had been blind from his birth but was now able to see both physically and spiritually illustrates the point. Then follows the punitive aspect of this judgment: ) 7 1 -1 9 0 0 and that those who see may become blind;) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 i.e., and in order that those who are constantly saying, We see (9:41), but who deceive themselves by rejecting the light, may at last be completely separated from it (cf. on 7:34). Think of the Pharisees, who harden themselves more and more. ) 7 1 3 8 0 0 40, 41.) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 Did some of the Pharisees (see on 1:24) gather around him in order to find fault? It seems so, for we read ) 7 1 -1 9 0 0 Some of the Pharisees near him heard these things. And) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 with arrogant scorn and disdain ) 7 1 -1 9 0 0 they said to him, Certainly, we too are not blind, are we?) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 Does Jesus mean to place them in the category of the accursed rabble that knows not the law (see on 7:49)? Are ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 they,) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 the devout disciples and interpreters of Moses, in a class with ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 the people of the soil) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 who know nothing? ) 7 1 -1 9 0 0 Jesus said to them, If you were blind, you would have no sin;) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 i.e., if you were not only without the light (the true knowledge of God, holiness, righteousness, joy) but also conscious of this deplorable condition and anxiously yearning for God s salvation, no charge could be brought against you. He continues: ) 7 1 -1 9 0 0 But now that you say, We see, your sin remains.) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 In other words, If you do not see the greatness of your sins and miseries, you cannot enjoy true comfort. Your ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 sin) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 remains, for you have rejected God s ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 salvation) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 . ) 9 1 3 8 0 0 Synthesis of Chapter 9) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 ) 6 1 3 8 0 0 See the Outline on p. 2. ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 The Son of God Healing the Man Born Blind, to Whom in Love He Reveals Himself as the Son of Man. His Enemies Have Decided to Unsynagogue Those Who Accept Him) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 . ) 6 1 3 8 0 0 The story may be outlined as follows: ) 9 1 3 8 0 0 I. A Jerusalem beggar is healed of his congenital blindness (9:1 7)) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 ) 6 1 3 8 0 0 Jesus, on leaving the temple or shortly afterward, saw a man born blind. The disciple asked whether the man s own sin or that of his parents had caused this blindness. Jesus by implication criticized the question, and substituted the forward look for the backward, the deed of mercy for the merely theoretical speculation. He said, Neither did this man sin nor his parents, but (this happened) in order that the works of God should be displayed in him. Thus ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 moral and spiritual insight) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 was given to the disciples by him who called himself ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 the light of the world) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 (9:5). He then further illustrated this light-giving activity by imparting ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 physical light) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 to the eyes of this blind man. He did this after covering the man s eyes with mud and sending him to the pool Siloam to wash it off. ) 9 1 3 8 0 0 II. He is questioned by the neighbors (9:8 12)) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 ) 6 1 3 8 0 0 Among the neighbors opinions were divided: some were sure that this was the man who was born blind; others were almost sure; still others saw close resemblance. The man himself put an end to all this by stating definitely, I am the one. In answer to their further questions he related the manner of his cure and declared that he did not know the whereabouts of his benefactor. ) 9 1 3 8 0 0 III. He is interrogated and expelled from the synagogue by the Jewish leaders (9:13 34)) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 ) 6 1 3 8 0 0 In an official interview the man was questioned. When he related what had happened to him, there arose a division among the Pharisees: both factions drawing logically valid conclusions from false premises! When the parents were called in, they damaged the cause of the enquirers by answering in such a manner that only one conclusion was possible: a miracle had really occurred. For fear of the authorities who had already decided that those who accepted Jesus as the Messiah must be expelled from the synagogue, the parents refused to say how or by whom their son had been healed. The once blind man, resummoned, refused to answer the questions which he had answered before. With ill-concealed humor he asked whether the Pharisees possibly wished to become disciples of Jesus. Which a slur upon his birth the authorities expelled him from the room and from religious fellowship. ) 9 1 3 8 0 0 IV. He is found by Jesus, who, in his capacity as the Son of man, reveals himself to him (9:35 38)) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 ) 6 1 3 8 0 0 In this connection Calvin s commentary contains a beautiful thought. It is this: if the man had been allowed to remain in the synagogue, he would in course of time have become estranged from Christ. The very fact that he was cast out made him more receptive for the grace of God. Similarly, when the pope expelled Luther and others from the Roman synagogue, and thundered his anathemas upon them, Christ reached out his hand, and revealed himself fully to them. Hence, the best thing for us is to be as far as possible removed from the enemies of the Gospel, in order that Christ may draw so much closer to us.��) -2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 _ftnref18 8 1 -1 9 0 “#_ftn18” 68) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 �� ) 6 1 3 8 0 0 With tenderness the Good Shepherd asked him, Do ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 you) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 believe in the Son of man? Salvation is ever a ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 personal) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 matter. When, in answer to the man s question, Jesus revealed himself as being the Son of man, the full light of heaven shone into the soul of the beggar. He said, I believe, Lord, and he worshiped him, Thus, the works of God (his power, love, grace) were displayed in this man (cf. 9:3). ) 9 1 3 8 0 0 V. He is contrasted with the willfully blind Pharisees (9:39 41)) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 ) 6 2 3 8 0 0 Jesus, in this connection, reveals the twofold purpose of his coming into the world in order that those who do not see may see, and that those who see may become blind. Some Pharisees, standing near, resented what they felt to be an uncomplimentary reference to themselves. They said, Certainly, we too are not blind, are we? Jesus rebuked their smug complacency by saying, If you were blind, you would have no sin; but now that you say, We see, your sin remains. ) Thus, the light shone in the darkness, but the darkness did not appropriate it.& To his own home he came, but his own people did not welcome him. But as many as did accept him, to them he gave the right to become God s children. ) -2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 _ftn1 8 1 3 8 0 “#_ftnref1” 51 ) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 On 5�� see Vol. I, pp. 46, 49. ) -2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 _ftn2 8 1 3 8 0 “#_ftnref2” 52 ) 6 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=43.9.3|AUTODETECT|” Or: but in order that the works of God may be displayed in him we must work the works of him who sent me, while it is day. See W. H. Spencer, ) 14 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=43.9.3|AUTODETECT|” John 9:3) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 ExT) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 , 55 (1944), 110. ) -2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 _ftn3 8 1 3 8 0 “#_ftnref3” 53 ) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 See article ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 Blindness) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 , in D.C.G. ) -2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 _ftn4 8 1 3 8 0 “#_ftnref4” 54 ) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 See S.BK. II, pp. 527 529. ) -2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 _ftn5 10 1 3 8 0 “#_ftnref5” 55 ) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 The genitive is either appositional (the pool Siloam) or possessive (the pool of i.e., belonging to Siloam). In the latter case the name Siloam designates the entire water-system: spring, tunnel, pool; and we are told that the pool in which the blind man must wash belonged to this system. ) -2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 _ftn6 8 1 3 8 0 “#_ftnref6” 56 ) 6 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=12.20.20|AUTODETECT|” See further W.H.A.B., pp. 50, 98, and Plate XVII B. Also ) 14 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=12.20.20|AUTODETECT|” II Kings 20:20) 6 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=14.32.4|AUTODETECT|” ; ) 14 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=14.32.4|AUTODETECT|” II Chron. 32:4) 6 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=14.32.30|AUTODETECT|” , ) 14 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=14.32.30|AUTODETECT|” 30) 6 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=14.33.14|AUTODETECT|” ; ) 14 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=14.33.14|AUTODETECT|” 33:14) 6 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=16.3.15|AUTODETECT|” ; ) 14 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=16.3.15|AUTODETECT|” Neh. 3:15) 6 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=23.8.6|AUTODETECT|” ; ) 14 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=23.8.6|AUTODETECT|” Is. 8:6) 6 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=42.13.4|AUTODETECT|” ; ) 14 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=42.13.4|AUTODETECT|” Luke 13:4) 6 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=43.7.2|AUTODETECT|” ; ) 14 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=43.7.2|AUTODETECT|” John 7:2) 6 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=43.7.37|AUTODETECT|” , ) 14 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=43.7.37|AUTODETECT|” 37) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 ; Josephus, ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 Antiquities) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 , VII, xiv, 5. For the Siloam Inscription see article ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 Siloam) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 , in W.D.B., and also art. ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 The Siloam Tunnel) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 , in M. S. & J. L. Miller, ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 Encyclopedia of Bible Life) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 , New York and London, 1944, p. 430. ) -2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 _ftn7 8 1 3 8 0 “#_ftnref7” 57 ) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 Literally, ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 that) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 he was a beggar. Declarative E�� is not unusual after this verb of seeing; cf. 4:19; 12:19. It is not necessary, therefore to view this E�� is causal in the present instance. ) -2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 _ftn8 8 1 3 8 0 “#_ftnref8” 58 ) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 On E�� in both of these instances see Vol. I, pp. 54, 59. ) -2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 _ftn9 8 1 3 8 0 “#_ftnref9” 59 ) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 S.BK. IV, p. 298. ) -2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 _ftn10 8 1 3 8 0 “#_ftnref10” 60 ) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 Literally: that if anyone should confess him to be the Christ, he would be expelled from the synagogue. IIIA3; see Vol. I, pp. 42, 43. ) -2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 _ftn11 8 1 3 8 0 “#_ftnref11” 61 ) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 Many commentators are of the opinion that there are essentially ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 three) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 questions, though only two are definitely expressed. These three, as they see it, are the following: a. Is this your son? b. Was he born blind? c. How is it that he now sees? But we cannot agree with this view. Rather, the Jews are saying, in substance, Is this that son of yours about whom you are telling everybody that he was cured of congenital blindness? If so, how is it that he now can see? It is true that in the ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 answer) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 given by the parents there are ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 three) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 (or four!) parts. But one should not confuse the question with the answer. ) -2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 _ftn12 8 1 3 8 0 “#_ftnref12” 62 ) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 IIIB1; see Vol. I, pp. 42, 44. ) -2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 _ftn13 8 1 3 8 0 “#_ftnref13” 63 ) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 IIA; see Vol. I, p. 41. ) -2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 _ftn14 8 1 3 8 0 “#_ftnref14” 64 ) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 Note emphatic sense of �� in exclamations, like our ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 why!, but really!, indeed!) 6 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=44.4.16|AUTODETECT|” See the following passages for this use of the particle: ) 14 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=44.4.16|AUTODETECT|” Acts 4:16) 6 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=44.4.34|AUTODETECT|” , ) 14 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=44.4.34|AUTODETECT|” 34) 6 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=44.8.31|AUTODETECT|” ; ) 14 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=44.8.31|AUTODETECT|” 8:31) 6 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=44.16.37|AUTODETECT|” ; ) 14 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=44.16.37|AUTODETECT|” 16:37) 6 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=44.19.35|AUTODETECT|” ; ) 14 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=44.19.35|AUTODETECT|” 19:35) 6 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=46.5.3|AUTODETECT|” ; ) 14 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=46.5.3|AUTODETECT|” I Cor. 5:3) 6 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=46.11.22|AUTODETECT|” ; ) 14 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=46.11.22|AUTODETECT|” 11:22) 6 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=55.2.7|AUTODETECT|” ; ) 14 1 -1 9 0 “tw://bible.?id=55.2.7|AUTODETECT|” II Tim. 2:7) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 . ) -2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 _ftn15 8 1 3 8 0 “#_ftnref15” 65 ) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 On 5�� see Vol. I, pp. 46, 47, 49. ) -2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 _ftn16 8 1 3 8 0 “#_ftnref16” 66 ) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 We base this probability not on the presence of the pronoun (see Vol. I, pp. 63, 64) but on its position at the very beginning of the question. ) -2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 _ftn17 8 1 3 8 0 “#_ftnref17” 67 ) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 IIA; see Vol. I, p. 41. ) -2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 _ftn18 8 1 3 8 0 “#_ftnref18” 68 ) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 John Calvin, ) 9 1 -1 9 0 0 op. cit.,) 6 1 -1 9 0 0 p. 192: Si retentus fuisset in synagoga, periculum erat ne paulatim a Christo alienatus in idem eum impiis exitium mergeratur & Hoc idem et nostro tempore experti sumus. Nam quum Lutherus et alii similes initio crassiores Papae abusus reprehenderunt, vix tenuem habebant puri Christianisimi gustum. Postquam in eos fulminavit Papa ac terrificis bullis a Romana synagoga eiecti sunt, manum illis porrexit Christus ac penitus illis innotuit. Ita nobis nihil melius quam ab Evangelii hostibus longissime abesse, ut ipse propius ad nos accedat. )

New Testament Commentary (Baker)

William Hendriksen (1900–1982) was a Dutch-American Reformed theologian and professor at Calvin Theological Seminary. His New Testament Commentary series, later completed by Simon J. Kistemaker, covers the entire New Testament and is one of the most highly regarded Reformed commentary sets of the …

View all chapters →

Old Testament

New Testament

MAT MRK LUK JHN ACT ROM 1CO 2CO GAL EPH PHP COL 1TH 2TH 1TI 2TI TIT PHM HEB JAS 1PE 2PE 1JN 2JN 3JN JUD REV

‹ Chapter 8 John — All Chapters Chapter 10 ›