Down to Earth But Heavenly Minded

What does John Chapter 9 mean?

This passage of the gospel of John heightens the tension between Jesus and His followers, and the religious leaders who despise Him. In prior chapters, Jesus has confronted the hypocrisy of those who claim to understand Scripture, but who reject what it says. He has also challenged tradition by healing on the Sabbath day. In this chapter, Jesus will once again perform a miracle on the Sabbath, resulting in no small controversy. When the dust settles, local religious leaders will be thoroughly embarrassed not by Jesus, but by the man who has been healed.

John chapter 9 opens with Jesus passing by a man who has been blind his entire life. The disciples react to this situation with the typical worldview of their era. In their minds, suffering is always a punishment for something, so they ask Jesus whose sin this man is suffering for: his own or that of his parents. Jesus’ response proves that not all hardship is “our fault,” so to speak. While it’s true that our own choices have the greatest impact on our lives, it’s also true that bad things can happen to those who’ve done nothing to deserve those particular struggles (John 9:1–3).

Jesus heals the man by putting mud on his eyes and sending him away to wash. The end result is a man who can see, though he’d never been able to before. The ideas of light, sight, and blindness are often used in Scripture as symbols of spiritual knowledge. In this case, the man’s experience is a metaphor for the Christian experience. The “light” that comes when we are saved is something we never previously had, and never could have, until Christ chose to grant it to us (John 9:4–7).

This healing is also prophetic: the Old Testament speaks of the Promised One healing blindness (Isaiah 29:18; 35:5; 42:7). In all of Scripture, only Jesus is credited with miracles which give sight to the blind. This is not only proof of His identity, it symbolizes the unique way in which the Messiah grants understanding of the truth (Matthew 11:5; Matthew 12:22–23).

As with other miracles, Jesus’ critics are more interested in finding ways to debunk the miracle than to understand it. Even those who are not hostile to Jesus are still focused on knowing “how” Jesus performed the healing, rather than “why.” The Pharisees’ immediate reaction, predictably, is to condemn Jesus for not properly honoring their Sabbath tradition. This, for them, is stronger evidence than the miraculous healing of blindness. For his part, the formerly blind man only knows that whoever granted him sight must be from God. The man refers to Jesus—whom he has not actually seen, yet—as “a prophet” (John 9:8–17).

John uses the phrase “the Jews” as a reference to Jerusalem’s religious leaders and their most ardent followers. This includes the scribes and Pharisees, who have already decided that Jesus is a fraud to be rejected. At first, they don’t even believe that a healing has occurred. After questioning the once-blind man, they summon his parents. Their tactics are clearly meant to intimidate, hinting that the parents themselves might even be bending the truth about their son’s condition. These leaders have threatened to excommunicate anyone who supports Jesus, so the man’s parents are quick to point out that their son is capable of answering questions for himself (John 9:18–23).

The second attempt to interrogate the healed man ends in disaster for the scribes and Pharisees. After implying the beggar is lying and needs to tell the truth, they suggest Jesus is “a sinner,” meaning that He cannot really be performing godly miracles. The man’s response is a poignant explanation of the Christian experience. For all he does not know, what he does know is beyond doubt: “though I was blind, now I see!” The investigators repeat the same questions they have already asked. The formerly-blind man responds with sarcasm, openly mocking the religious leaders’ insincerity. They, in turn, heap insults and verbal abuse on him. In a dramatic turn, the beggar gives a brilliantly simple counter. He points out that God would not give a sinner the power to perform miracles which have never been done before! Having lost face, and the argument, the religious leaders hurl more insults and bar the man from the synagogue (John 9:24–31).

At this point, Jesus once again approaches the man. Presumably, the man realizes that Jesus is the one who has healed him. And yet, he does not fully understand to whom he is speaking. Jesus refers to the Son of Man, which Jews of that era would recognize as a Messianic figure. The man openly admits that he wants to believe, but does not know who he should turn to. When Jesus identifies Himself, the healed man responds with faith and worship. Jesus uses that reaction as an example of one aspect of His earthly mission: to separate those who are willing to believe from those who are willfully, spiritually “blind” (John 9:35–41).

The themes discussed in this chapter introduce the subject of Jesus’ next teaching, which heavily involves the symbolism of a shepherd. Those words are meant to be understood in the context of this chapter, where the Pharisees’ hypocrisy and failed leadership are on full display.

Chapter Context
Jesus has begun to actively confront the false teachings of local religious leaders. His most recent debate included a heated exchange with the Pharisees, where Jesus claimed to have existed before Abraham. This resulted in an attempted stoning for blasphemy. Here, Jesus continues to antagonize religious hypocrites by healing a man who was born blind. The ensuing ruckus further exposes Jerusalem’s religious leaders as shallow, prejudiced, and false. This event launches Jesus into another lengthy discussion of His ministry, recorded in chapter 10, including several crucial teachings on His role as Shepherd.

Verse by Verse

Verse 1. As he passed by, he saw a man blind from birth.

The timing of this event is not easy to determine. Scripture was originally written without chapter and verse divisions; the last event mentioned was Jesus escaping another murder attempt by local religious leaders (John 8:59). This could mean He saw this man immediately afterwards. Then again, ancient writers were far more concerned with general facts and themes, rather than most minor details. More than likely, there is some period of time between the events of chapter 8 and those of chapter 9.

This man will be the subject of Jesus’ sixth miraculous “sign” as recorded in the gospel of John. Almost every aspect of this story has spiritual implications, which is why John devotes an unusually long passage to the miracle and its immediate aftermath. The important detail is that this man is blind, a condition often used in Scripture as a metaphor for those who lack saving faith in God. The Old Testament predicted the Messiah would cure blindness (Isaiah 29:18; 35:5; 42:7). In all of Scripture, only Jesus is seen miraculously healing the blind—further proof of His identity (Matthew 11:5; 12:22–23).

It’s also key to notice that this man was born blind. He’s not about to regain something he lost at some point in the past. Jesus is going to give this man an ability that he has literally never had. This provides a powerful parallel to the role of God in bringing us to saving faith, and to salvation by grace. This man was never able to “see the Light,” until Christ stepped in.

Context Summary
John 9:1–12 contains the sixth of the gospel of John’s seven miraculous ”signs” of Jesus’ divinity. This miracle is the healing of a man who has been blind since birth. Jesus corrects His disciples’ misconceptions about sin and suffering, then grants this man an ability he has never had before. This will lead to more angry confrontations with local religious leaders, as they purposefully ignore the spiritual message being proven by Jesus’ works.

Verse 2. And his disciples asked him, “Rabbi, who sinned, this man or his parents, that he was born blind?”

In the disciples’ culture, sickness and suffering were often seen as a punishment for sin. In other words, those who suffered must have “deserved it,” or at least someone in their family did. The fact that this man was born blind, then, leaves the disciples with only two options: either the man somehow sinned before his birth, or he is being punished for something his parents did.

Jesus will directly counter this mistake in the next verse. His response will be that personal suffering is not necessarily linked to one’s own personal sin. In a broad sense, all suffering is a result of sin—aftershocks of the fall of man through Adam (Romans 5:12). It’s also true that most of the suffering we experience in this world is primarily the result of human sin. Everything from political unrest to poverty to hunger are grounded in humanity rejecting their created purpose. But, as this man’s example shows, not all suffering is directly deserved, in and of itself. In other words, not everything that happens to a person happens because they did something wrong. Hardship and suffering, including persecution, are not surefire signs of divine retribution. This directly counters the eastern idea of karma, which suggests that all current suffering is, in some way, that person’s own fault.

Verse 3. “Neither this man nor his parents sinned,” said Jesus, “but this happened so that the works of God might be displayed in him.

This verse counters a misconception common in Jesus’ era, and still part of “eastern” religions today. Jesus’ disciples assume that the man they’ve passed by (John 9:1–2) must be blind as a punishment for something. For them, this raises a difficult question: did the man somehow sin before he was born, or is he being punished for his parents’ sin? This suggests the concept of karma, which implies that all suffering in this life is payment, or punishment, for prior acts of wrongdoing.

Jesus’ answer clearly and definitively refutes these ideas. In a very broad sense, it’s true that all human suffering is the result of sin. Adam’s disobedience brought death and destruction to the entire human race (Romans 5:12). It’s also true that most of the pain we experience in life is caused by the sin of people—either ourselves or others. Violence, starvation, crime, broken homes, and other effects of sin can impinge on people who are not directly to blame. More specifically, though, Jesus’ words prove that not all suffering is punishment for sin. This man, in particular, did not experience blindness as any sort of judgment on sin, either his or someone else’s.

A classic interpretation of this verse is the man was born blind specifically so Jesus could perform this miracle. This would harmonize with verses such as 2 Corinthians 12:7–9 and Exodus 4:11. However, it’s also true that New Testament Greek was not written using punctuation. Based on the context, it’s also possible that Jesus meant His comments about sin and the parents separately from His remarks on the works of God. That is, one could reasonably punctuate this passage as “…or his parents. But, that the works of God might be displayed in him, we must work…” Either way, the emphasis here is refuting that the man’s sin was responsible for his condition.

Verse 4. We must work the works of him who sent me while it is day; night is coming, when no one can work.

Jesus has just clarified a common misconception held by those who hold to the idea of karma. This idea suggests that a person’s suffering is always, somehow, brought about by their own actions, even those of a former life. In the disciples’ case, their culture believed that all mishaps were divine punishment: either the man, or his parents, must have been guilty for the man to be born blind. Jesus refuted this in the prior verse, clearly indicating that this blindness was in no way caused by the man’s own sin, or that of his parents.

Here, Jesus uses metaphors which relate to His earthly ministry. In an era without electricity, nighttime was, by necessity, a time where less work could be done on account of darkness. The day was the most effective time to work, but it is also a limited time. As used by Christ here, “day” refers to the time left for Jesus to serve God’s will on earth. “Night” refers to the rapidly-approaching time when Jesus will die, ending His earthly work.

That parallel makes Jesus’ use of the term “we” very important. Jesus knows He has a finite amount of time to “work” in His earthly ministry. Likewise, we as Christian believers have only the days of our earthly lives to accomplish the work God has assigned us in that time. Rather than simply saying, “I must work…” Jesus places an obligation to be responsible with our time by saying “we must” do so—meaning all who serve God.

Verse 5. As long as I am in the world, I am the light of the world.”

In ancient Hebrew philosophy, “light” was the ultimate ideal, representing both knowledge and morality. This is one reason Scripture uses blindness as a spiritual metaphor. Those who are blind are incapable of seeing light, even when it’s presented to them. Those who are “spiritually blind” reject God, making it literally impossible for them to perceive His truth.

In chapter 8, Jesus referred to Himself as “the Light of the world” (John 8:12). That comment was in a slightly different context than this reference. There, Jesus implied His role in salvation. Here, Jesus is speaking of “light” in a more general sense, which explains His use of the phrase “as long as I am in the world.” In the prior verse, Jesus made careful use of the word “we” in describing those who needed to work while they had the opportunity. He pointed out that He, like any other man, had a limited earthly life with which to follow God’s will (John 9:4). This reference to light describes the way Christ will be the bearer of the gospel up until His death and resurrection—at that point, His apostles and their disciples will become the “lights” bringing truth to the world.

Verse 6. Having said these things, he spit on the ground and made mud with the saliva. Then he anointed the man ‘s eyes with the mud

Jesus has encountered a man who was born blind. His first order of business was to explain to the disciples that the man’s condition was not, at all, a punishment for sin (John 9:1–3).

Blindness is often used in Scripture as an analogy for those who reject God, making them incapable of seeing the truth. This is a reason why Scripture predicts that the Messiah will cure blindness (Isaiah 29:18; 35:5; 42:7), and why only Jesus was able to miraculously restoring eyesight (Matthew 11:5; 12:22–23). Further, the fact that the man was born in this condition means Jesus is not restoring some lost ability—He is about to give this man a perception he never had before. Both are important points in this particular miracle, the sixth of John’s seven miraculous “signs” of Jesus’ divinity.

Jesus’ use of muddy clay carries several deeper meanings. First, Jesus is shown healing blindness in several New Testament passages. However, His methods vary considerably. Here, Jesus uses clay and applies it to the man’s eyes. In Mark 8:22–26, He only uses spit. In Matthew 9:27–31, He heals by simple touch. This variation helps remove any suggestion that Jesus healed the blind through advanced natural medicine, or some kind of magical formula. It confounds this chapter’s repeated questions about “how” Jesus accomplished the act: the only explanation is divine power.

Second, the use of muddy clay hints at man’s ultimate origin: as a being formed by God out of the dust of the earth (Genesis 2:7).

Third, this interaction happened on the Sabbath (John 9:15). Jesus has already made a point of deliberately challenging the Pharisees’ legalism regarding the Sabbath (John 5:18), which this miracle does twice over. Not only is Jesus “working” through His miracle, He does so by “kneading clay”—an act explicitly forbidden on the Sabbath by the Pharisee’s expansive oral traditions!

One could also say there is a practical side to Jesus’ use of clay on this man’s eyes. His instructions, given in the next verse, are for the man to go and wash the mud off his eyes. Unlike spit, or a touch, this meant the man could not sit idly by and wait for the miracle: he had a role to play. He also had an incentive, since having mud caked on one’s eyes is not likely to be comfortable.

Verse 7. and said to him, “Go, wash in the pool of Siloam” (which means Sent). So he went and washed and came back seeing.

Jesus is performing the sixth of seven miraculous “signs” recorded in the gospel of John. In this case, the miracle is giving sight to a man who was born blind. This state is unique for several reasons. First, it means Jesus is about to grant this man an ability he does not naturally possess (John 9:1–2). Second, it corresponds to Old Testament predictions that the Messiah would give sight to the blind (Isaiah 29:18; 35:5; 42:7)—this is a miracle Scripture credits only to Christ (Matthew 11:5; 12:22–23). Third, Jesus uses this moment as an example to teach the disciples that not all suffering is punishment for sin (John 9:3–4). Lastly, this miracle occurs on a Sabbath day (John 9:14), further irritating the Pharisees, whom Jesus seems to be deliberately antagonizing.

Jesus is recorded as healing blindness in several instances (Matthew 9:27–28; Mark 8:22–26), but in each case His methods differ. This dispels any suggestion that Jesus was using some form of ritual magic, or advanced medicine. It also prevents modern people from claiming that they can achieve the same results by using “the Jesus method.” Here, the use of mud not only reflects man’s creation by God (Genesis 2:7), it also directly contradicts the Pharisee’s traditional law which forbade mixing clay on the Sabbath. Further, having gritty clay packed into one’s eye-sockets is hardly comfortable, giving the man ample motivation to obey Jesus’ command to wash it out.

The result of this action is a miracle that becomes a signature moment for Jesus’ public ministry. Until Jesus resurrects Lazarus, this will be seen by many as the primary evidence of His power (John 11:37).

Verse 8. The neighbors and those who had seen him before as a beggar were saying, “Is this not the man who used to sit and beg?”

Jesus has just given eyesight to a man who was born blind—a powerful metaphor for how God grants faith and belief to those who would otherwise never have it. This incident included Jesus’ explanation that not all suffering is caused by the hurting person’s own sin (John 9:1–4). Jesus also breached the Pharisee’s traditions by not only healing on the Sabbath (John 9:14), but by mixing clay (John 9:6): a crime according to their oral laws.

When Jesus healed the lame man at the Pool of Siloam (John 5:1–9), His subject would have been well-known for his condition. It was not some unknown, possibly staged actor. Here, the same idea is true. This man’s lifelong blindness was common knowledge, removing any possibility of this being a mere trick. The questions raised about this man’s identity are not all expressions of doubt—they’re mostly declarations of surprise. The people know exactly who this man is, and precisely what his problem was. For that specific person to suddenly have sight is a shocking experience.

Of course, as in all cases, there will be hardened skeptics. As shown in the next verse, some in the crowd try to explain away the miracle by suggesting that this is not actually the blind beggar, but an uncanny lookalike. Despite the man’s own claims, and the witness of the crowd, there were those who chose not to accept the evidence of a miracle. This is a common occurrence, even today, and another example of why “show me a miracle and I’ll believe” is not an honest response to the gospel.

Verse 9. Some said, “It is he.” Others said, “No, but he is like him.” He kept saying, “I am the man.”

Confused responses by the people of Jerusalem are understandable. We tend to recognize people not just by their faces and voices, but also by their clothes or their surroundings. When we see the same person in very different circumstances, we might find it jarring, and even wonder if it is the same person. In prior verses, Jesus created such a situation by healing a man who had been blind from birth (John 9:1–7). The people who regularly saw this man begging, and now witnessed him able to see, are understandably surprised. Most seem to recognize that this is the same man—their follow-up question in the next verse strongly supports this.

Others, it seems, prefer to believe that this is a close look-alike. In other words, they reject the man’s own claims, and the witness of others, choosing instead to believe that this is some kind of scam. This is a common human response: what we believe is first determined by what we want, and only after that by what we see (John 7:17). When something challenges our preferences, our first instinct is to find excuses. This is exactly why Scripture reminds us that those who refuse to believe unless they see a miracle are fooling themselves. Such people won’t believe, no matter what (Luke 16:19–31).

The controversy over the healing is made worse by the fact that the formerly blind man doesn’t know where—or even who—Jesus is. The last time he spoke with Jesus, he was still blind and had his eyes covered in mud. The combination of arguments over this man’s identity, and the mention of Jesus, is probably what leads the crowd to take him to the Pharisees (John 9:13). They will demonstrate extreme skepticism about the man’s healing, refusing to believe any part of it until speaking with the healed man’s parents.

Verse 10. So they said to him, “Then how were your eyes opened?”

Jesus’ choice of this particular man for His sixth miraculous “sign” is no accident. In chapter 5, Jesus chose to heal a man who had been crippled for nearly 40 years (John 5:1–9). This meant there could be no doubt about the miraculous nature of the healing. The man would have been known for his condition, and his condition would have been known to be permanent. In this case, the man Jesus healed with muddy clay (John 9:6) had been born blind (John 9:1–2). He was easily recognized by the people of Jerusalem as a beggar (John 9:8). It’s the fact that the man is so well-known for being blind that some in the crowd resist believing that he’s been cured (John 9:9).

Despite some doubters, most people accept the obvious: this is the same man once known as a blind beggar. Their response question makes perfect sense: “if you’re the one who used to be blind, what happened to make you see?” On the other hand, this same question will be repeated no less than four times (John 9:10, 15, 19, 26). These questions assume some kind of natural, mechanical answer. The people are so concerned with those details that they’re missing the message of the miracle!

This presents an important perspective on Christian testimony. Through the rest of this chapter, the formerly blind man will be challenged to explain, re-explain, and repeatedly explain his story. Each time, his response is sincere, simple, and honest. What attracts others to his message is not his own charisma, or some deep philosophical idea. People are drawn because they see something powerful and want to know what caused it. The man’s answer, consistently, is simply to tell other that it’s Jesus who changed his life. Fancy speech and complex ideas are fine, in the right context, but neither are required to spread the “good news” to other people.

Verse 11. He answered, “The man called Jesus made mud and anointed my eyes and said to me, ‘Go to Siloam and wash.’ So I went and washed and received my sight.”

This particular miracle provides us with many valuable lessons. One, first hinted at here, is the simplicity of our testimony. The man speaking was born blind (John 9:1–2), but was miraculously granted sight by Jesus (John 9:6–7). When pressed about what happened to so drastically change his life, the man has a simple answer: Jesus put mud on my eyes and said to wash, so I did, and now I can see. This man will be interrogated by the Pharisees, and yet he will consistently give the same answer. In fact, when pressed to give a deeper explanation, he will respond with a classic statement: “One thing I do know, that though I was blind, now I see” (John 9:25).

God does not expect us to have deep, advanced knowledge in order to be saved. Nor do we need to have extensive experience or a well-polished story in order to reach others for the sake of Christ. In most cases, our most potent tool is to give a simple explanation of what God has done for us (Mark 5:19). Not only is this personal and real, but it’s undeniable: we know what we have experienced!

Another helpful perspective here is to consider what would have happened had the man refused Jesus’ command. In this particular case, Jesus didn’t instantly heal, He gave the man a task to perform. This is not an uncommon tactic by God, even when it comes to healing (2 Kings 5:1–14). Putting muddy clay on the man’s eyes certainly gave him an incentive to wash, and God often uses “pressure” in our lives to encourage us in certain directions. But this man’s blessing was effectively on hold until he acted in obedience. Not all of God’s work in our lives is this way, and we certainly can’t presume that God “owes” us when we do certain things. However, we should also recognize that God does not expect us to be passive (John 9:4; Matthew 5:16), and sometimes His commands are for our own benefit.

Verse 12. They said to him, “Where is he?” He said, “I do not know.”

This verse again highlights key lessons from this story. Jesus has given sight to a man who was born blind (John 9:1–7). To do so, Jesus put clay on the man’s eyes (John 9:6), then told him to go and wash it off. This means the formerly blind man has not, yet, actually seen Jesus! He’s not even in the same place he was when Jesus encountered him. Though others doubt what has happened (John 9:8–9), the evidence is clear. This man was once blind, but now he can see.

The man’s ability to give this message to a crowd is not caused by his own abilities. He’s not using eloquence or drama. He’s not demonstrating deep thinking or skilled debate. He is—in literal terms—telling others the truth about what God has done for him. And it’s the powerful impact of God in his life that makes people want to ask in the first place.

Defending our faith is not only useful, it’s a command given to all believers (1 Peter 3:15–16). That being said, Christians do not have to be expert philosophers. We do not have to earn academic degrees, or become full-time ministers, in order to effectively tell others about Christ. And we don’t have to have all of the answers. What we need is what we know, an idea this same man will summarize beautifully when interrogated later on: “One thing I do know, that though I was blind, now I see” (John 9:25).

Verse 13. They brought to the Pharisees the man who had formerly been blind.

Jesus chose a man who was blind from birth (John 9:1–2) and granted him sight (John 9:6–7). This echoes the way in which God, through His grace, offers salvation to those who would otherwise never have had it. It also gives a potent example, proving that not all suffering is a punishment for that person’s wrongdoing (John 9:3–5). The people of the city recognize the man and are shocked that he is now able to see. Though a few doubt that this is the same person (John 9:8–9), most are more interested in knowing how he came to be healed. The man—who left Jesus to wash his eyes while still blind—knows little about how his eyes were cured, other than the fact that it was Jesus who spoke to him (John 9:11).

If the man’s sudden change in condition wasn’t controversial enough, referring to Jesus certainly was. This is likely one reason the people bring the formerly blind man to the Pharisees. Jesus has had some recent arguments with these religious leaders (John 5:18; 7:32; 8:39–41). This miraculous healing not only defies their legalism surrounding the Sabbath (John 9:14), it violates their traditional interpretation which forbade mixing clay on those days.

As with other incidents, it’s important not to automatically condemn everything the Pharisees do, just because. As the religious leaders of their people, these men are supposed to investigate these kinds of incidents. As was the case with John the Baptist, the Scribes and Pharisees are completely justified in asking what has happened, and why. The problem is not in the asking of questions—it’s in the hardened hearts and hypocritical attitudes which they bring. And there are those within this sect who are more open to the truth (John 7:43; 9:16; 10:19).

Context Summary
John 9:13–34 describes the Pharisees’ reaction to Jesus’ healing of a man born blind. Rather than being swayed by an obvious sign of divine power, they look for excuses and criticisms. Seeking to discredit the miracle, they interrogate the man’s parents, who timidly defer back to their son. The healed man knows nothing more than this: ”though I was blind, now I see.” His matter-of-fact responses to the Pharisees highlight their obvious prejudice. As a result, they excommunicate the healed man from the synagogue. Jesus will meet with the man in the next passage to give more context for the miracle.

Verse 14. Now it was a Sabbath day when Jesus made the mud and opened his eyes.

The Pharisees were an extremely orderly, pious sect. They created an entire list of oral traditions and secondary laws, meant to “protect” the laws of Moses. At the time of Jesus’ earthly ministry, these traditions were being treated with the same level of authority as the Word of God itself. The most sacred of these rules was that of honoring the Sabbath. In confronting religious hypocrites, Jesus seems to deliberately use their misunderstanding of the Sabbath in order to provoke conversations. This has included performing healings on the Sabbath day (John 5:18).

Jesus’ most recent miracle is the sixth of seven “signs” recorded by John in this gospel. In this case, the miracle was to give sight to a man born blind (John 9:1–7). Not only was this done on a Sabbath day, as this verse indicates, it involved something the Pharisees considered taboo. Jesus was described as making clay from mud and saliva. According to traditional Pharisaical laws, this was one of the forms of work explicitly forbidden. Jesus’ actions not only challenge their shallow views of spirituality, He highlights their unreasonable legalism.

Verse 15. So the Pharisees again asked him how he had received his sight. And he said to them, “He put mud on my eyes, and I washed, and I see.”

This is the second time that a man, born blind but healed by Jesus, has been asked to explain “how” he was healed (John 9:10). He’ll be asked yet again in this story, by these same Pharisees (John 9:26), and after his parents are posed the same question (John 9:19). His answer is consistent, and truthful: Jesus put mud on his eyes and told him to wash, resulting in sight.

The Pharisees’ reaction to this miracle illustrates the dangers of self-centered, tradition-bound spirituality. According to the prior verse, Jesus’ healing occurred on a Sabbath day. The Pharisees were famous for their elaborate, rigid set of rules and laws. These developed from tradition, in an effort to ensure obedience to the laws of Moses. The Pharisees claim that Jesus’ actions directly violate their traditional interpretations of holiness—and they’re right. Jesus’ actions do conflict with their traditions. This, in fact, seems to be the point, as Jesus purposefully tries to show that their shallow approach is not what God intends (John 7:22–24).

The following verse also shows how easily human beings choose to equate their own opinions with those of God. John includes seven “signs” in this gospel. These are seven miracles meant to prove that Jesus is, in fact, the Messiah. The Old Testament predicted that the Promised One would heal blindness (Isaiah 29:18; 35:5; 42:7), and only Jesus is credited with this ability in Scripture. However, the Pharisees cannot accept that Jesus’ work is divine—because He isn’t in agreement with their specific doctrine.

Verse 16. Some of the Pharisees said, “This man is not from God, for he does not keep the Sabbath.” But others said, “How can a man who is a sinner do such signs?” And there was a division among them.

Jesus’ miracles are meant to prove that He is the Promised One—the Messiah. In the Old Testament, curing blindness is given as one such sign (Isaiah 29:18; 35:5; 42:7). Jesus has done just that, granting sight to a man who has been blind his entire life (John 9:1–7). Many in the crowd are shocked, even doubting whether or not the now-seeing beggar is the same person (John 9:8–9). Since this event is sensational, and occurred on a Sabbath day (John 9:14), the people bring the man to be interviewed by the Pharisees (John 9:15).

In Jesus’ day, the Pharisees actually had a very positive reputation. They were extremely moral, living by a strict set of rules which had grown out of their traditions. Those traditions were aimed at “protecting” obedience to the law of Moses. In practice, however, the Pharisees treated those traditions as if they were equal to the actual Word of God. Not only did this result in a cold legalism, it led to the arrogance of an “us-versus-them” version of spirituality.

As a result, even when faced with a miracle, these men define right and wrong, and good and evil, according to whether or not the messenger agrees with their interpretations. Unfortunately, this is not an uncommon problem even today. Many groups choose a particular “pet doctrine,” such as a particular day of worship, or a translation of the Bible, and use that as the first test of truth. Those who disagree with that stance are immediately dismissed as sinners, heretics, or false prophets. In effect, this makes that tradition, or doctrine, the real “god” of that sect, blinding them even to miraculous evidence of the truth.

Verse 17. So they said again to the blind man, “What do you say about him, since he has opened your eyes?” He said, “He is a prophet.”

The Pharisees are interrogating a beggar who was born blind (John 9:1–2), but now is able to see thanks to a miraculous intervention by Jesus (John 9:6–7). These supernatural actions are intended to prove that Jesus is, in fact, divine, and is the Promised One predicted by Scripture. In fact, the Old Testament specifically refers to restoring the sight of the blind as part of the Messiah’s ability (Isaiah 29:18; 35:5; 42:7). Unfortunately, the Pharisees are more concerned with their own traditions and interpretations than obvious evidence. Among their most sacred beliefs is a strict approach to the Sabbath. Jesus’ miracle not only occurred on this day (John 9:14), it involved making clay, which oral traditions specifically forbade on the Sabbath, as a form of work. Many of the Pharisees, despite the miracle, refuse to believe that a man who does not accept their traditions can be from God (John 9:16).

At this point, the interrogators continue to press the formerly blind man for answers. Throughout this story, the once-blind man is consistent, sincere, and honest. He does not pretend to know anything other than what has actually happened. His conclusion, stated here, is common sense. Jesus has done something profoundly good, and supernaturally powerful. Therefore, the man believes that Jesus is “a prophet.” Since he hasn’t actually seen or spoken to Jesus since being told to wash mud off of his then-still-blind eyes (John 9:11–12), this is as much as he can really assume.

What happens next proves how hard-headed and stubborn religious skeptics can be. People in the crowd realize this is a man who was born blind (John 9:8–9). Even those who doubt have to admit that he certainly looks like the same person—suggesting some explanation other than a miracle. The Pharisees, on the other hand, are so cynical that they want to interview the man’s parents, just to confirm that this is, in fact, the same beggar everyone recognizes!

Verse 18. The Jews did not believe that he had been blind and had received his sight, until they called the parents of the man who had received his sight

Jesus has miraculously given eyesight to a man born blind (John 9:1–7). This not only fulfills prophecies of the Messiah (Isaiah 29:18; 35:5; 42:7), it also occurred on a Sabbath day (John 9:14), further irritating the religious leaders of Jerusalem.

The gospel of John uses the term “the Jews,” in most cases, as a reference to the scribes and Pharisees of Jerusalem. These are the spiritual and religious leaders of the nation of Israel, as well as those who follow their leadership. Here, as in other instances, Jesus’ harshest critics and greatest resistance come from the very people who ought to know better.

The fact that this man had always been blind, and was known to be blind, leads to extreme skepticism. The religious leaders of Jerusalem simply refuse to believe that this man has been given sight, so they summon his parents. Their goal is to confirm—or, in their case to hopefully disprove—that this is the same man who was known as a blind-from-birth beggar. The skepticism of these leaders is not entirely unjustified. Their role is to shepherd the people of Israel, and that includes investigating spiritual claims. Where they go wrong is not in asking questions; their error is in taking their skepticism to such extreme levels that they refuse to believe, no matter what.

Verse 19. and asked them, “Is this your son, who you say was born blind? How then does he now see?”

The parents of the man born blind are being interrogated by local religious leaders—referred to in the gospel of John as “the Jews.” When Jesus grants the man eyesight, the skeptical scribes and Pharisees want to be sure that the now-seeing man is, in fact, the same person who was known as a blind beggar.

Questioning a spiritual claim is not a problem. These men are charged with leadership over the people of Israel, and they are supposed to investigate these kinds of events. Where they go wrong is not in being thorough. Their error is being insincere; these men have no actual interest in the truth. They are looking for reasons to reject Jesus and His miracles.

The way these leaders phrase their question to the blind man’s parents betrays that prejudice. Rather than simply asking, “is this really your son?” they suggest that the parents themselves might be lying. The healed man is referred to as the one “who you say was born blind.” The hidden suggestion is that, perhaps, the man was not really blind, or not always blind, giving these men further opportunity to discredit Jesus.

This disrespect also includes a sense of intimidation. As further verses show, these same religious leaders had already declared that those who supported Jesus would be excommunicated (John 9:22). The formerly-blind man’s parents answers will show they’re fearful of the Jewish leaders and want no part of this controversy.

Verse 20. His parents answered, “We know that this is our son and that he was born blind.

These parents have been called before a council of Jerusalem’s religious leaders. In the gospel of John, this cadre of scribes and Pharisees, and those who follow them, are referred to as “the Jews.” The reason for their summons is a miracle Jesus has performed: giving sight to a man who had been blind from birth (John 9:1–7). In an effort to investigate—and hopefully to discredit Jesus—the religious leaders interrogate the man’s parents to see if the person claiming to have been healed really is their son, and if he really was blind his entire life.

The parents’ response is timid and short for a reason. Verse 22 will explain that the religious leaders of Jerusalem have already declared a punishment for anyone who follows Jesus: excommunication. The formerly-blind man’s parents seek to tell the truth, but they’re clearly not willing to say anything beyond the bare facts which they, themselves, can know. Their testimony will continue in the next verse, including their plea for the interrogation to focus on their son.

Verse 21. But how he now sees we do not know, nor do we know who opened his eyes. Ask him; he is of age. He will speak for himself.”

After Jesus gives sight to man born blind (John 9:1–7), controversy erupts. This healing, as were many of Jesus’ miracles, occurred on a Sabbath day (John 9:14). The local religious leaders, referred to as “the Jews” in the gospel of John, have made it clear that anyone who supports Jesus is subject to excommunication (John 9:22). As part of their effort to debunk Jesus’ miracle, the scribes and Pharisees have summoned the parents of the formerly-blind man, asking if he was really their son, and really born blind. The parents have already testified to both of those facts.

Here, the parents respond to some of the other questions raised by Jesus’ miraculous act. The scribes and Pharisees repeatedly ask “how” Jesus has accomplished this feat. This shows their inherent prejudice: they cannot accept that Jesus is healing with divine power, so they seek some other explanation. The meaning of the miracle—the message behind the “sign”—is lost on them, since they refuse to believe in Jesus and His words (John 5:39–40).

The parents pointedly state that they don’t know “who” healed their son. While this is almost certainly true, it might also be part of their effort to avoid trouble. As the next verse states, those who identify Jesus as the Messiah would be cast out of the synagogue. The healed man’s parents are being extremely careful not to cross that line. The parents are also careful to point out that the man in question is a legal adult; he is capable of answering these questions for himself, so there is no reason to require testimony from his parents.

Verse 22. (His parents said these things because they feared the Jews, for the Jews had already agreed that if anyone should confess Jesus to be Christ, he was to be put out of the synagogue.)

This verse is often presented in parentheses, since it’s a footnote inserted by John into the story. After Jesus healed a man born blind, local religious leaders began to interrogate the healed man’s parents. Their answers, given in the prior verses, are brief, fact-based, and clearly show that these people want no part of this controversy. In modern speech, they seem to be saying, “he’s our son, who was born blind—other than that, we have no comment.”

“The Jews”—John’s term for the religious leaders of Jerusalem and their followers—have asked repetitive questions about this miraculous incident. They often ask “who” has done it, in part to see if people are going to identify Jesus as the Messiah. They also ask “how” the miracle was done. They refuse to believe that Jesus is the Promised One, so these scribes and Pharisees looks for any other explanation for what has occurred.

This verse explains why the once-blind man’s parents are so timid. The religious leaders of Jerusalem have made up their minds—therefore, they promise to excommunicate anyone who thought Jesus was the Messiah. These parents are making a conscious effort to avoid that kind of trouble.

Verse 23. Therefore his parents said, “He is of age; ask him.”

This verse repeats the statement given in verse 21. The parents of a man Jesus healed of lifelong blindness (John 9:1–7) have testified before the local religious leaders (John 9:18). They clearly want no part of the controversy, which verse 22 helps to explain. These local leaders have promised to excommunicate those who accept Jesus’ claim to be the Messiah. The healed man’s parents respond with “no comment” as much as possible. Instead of speculating, they point out that their son is old enough to give his own legal testimony.

Of course, the formerly-blind man has already been interrogated. During that first examination (John 9:13–17), the scribes and Pharisees rejected the man’s claim that he’d been cured by Jesus. They had already made up their minds not to accept Jesus’ message (John 5:39–40; 7:17), so the meaning of the miracle was lost on them. From their perspective, there had to be some other way to explain what had happened.

Verse 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.”

This is the second time that local religious leaders have questioned a man whom Jesus healed of lifelong blindness (John 9:1–7). The man’s initial claims were brushed off as impossible, since the scribes and Pharisees had already decided that Jesus was a fraud (John 5:39–40). The investigators then turned to the man’s parents, hoping to debunk some part of the story. Instead, they confirmed that this man had, in fact, been born blind. The parents, fearing backlash from the religious leaders (John 9:22), had said very little and reminded everyone that their son was old enough to speak for himself.

The command “give glory to God” here is a way of demanding that a person speak the truth. Typically, using it implies that the other person needs to confess some sin or deception (Joshua 7:19; 1 Samuel 6:5). In modern speech, this is somewhat like a judge telling a defendant, “come, now, tell the truth…” The religious leaders further prove their prejudice by stating “we know…” Jesus is a sinner. This echoes their initial rejection of the miracle: they refused to accept it because they had already decided that Jesus didn’t agree with their traditions (John 9:16). By hinting that the man is lying, and claiming to “know” that Jesus is false, the scribes and Pharisees are trying to intimidate the formerly-blind man into changing his story.

This effort will backfire spectacularly. In the following verses, the healed man will produce a profound summary of saving faith, and his simple, common-sense approach to facts will embarrass the hard-headed, willfully ignorant religious leaders.

Verse 25. He answered, “Whether he is a sinner I do not know. One thing I do know, that though I was blind, now I see.”

When Jesus first approached him, this man had been blind from birth (John 9:1–1). After applying mud to his eyes, Jesus’ instructions were for the man to go elsewhere to wash off (John 9:6–7). As a result, to this point, the formerly-blind man has still not physically seen the One who healed him. There is no indication that this man sought Jesus out, or knew anything about Him prior to this incident. Local religious leaders cannot accept that Jesus has performed a miracle, so they have been interrogating the man and his parents, insisting that Jesus must be a sinner.

The man’s response here is an excellent summary of how saving faith operates. Scripture often uses sight—or light—as a metaphor for faith. This man is not a trained scholar, or wealthy, or well-read. He knows nothing about Jesus’ prior ministry, or the details of Jesus ministry. But what he does know, he knows for sure: he had been blind, and now he can see! The profound, inexplicable change brought by an encounter with Christ was beyond debate. For Christians, this is the cornerstone of our testimony: the influence of Christ in our own lives. This is what opens our conversation with others about the reality of the gospel (Mark 5:19), and which leads into all of our other evidence and arguments (1 Peter 3:15–16).

Verse 26. They said to him, “What did he do to you? How did he open your eyes?”

Jesus’ healing of a man born blind is clearly miraculous (John 9:1–7). It corresponds to Old Testament prophecies of the Messiah (Isaiah 29:18; 35:5; 42:7). And yet, Jesus’ religious critics refuse to accept that He is acting with divine power (John 9:16). They go so far as to threaten those who accept Jesus’ claims with excommunication (John 9:22). In an effort to debunk the miracle, the scribes and Pharisees of Jerusalem interrogated the healed man (John 9:13), as well as his parents (John 9:18).

This is part of a second round of questioning of the formerly-blind man. Asking the same questions more than once is a common interrogation tactic. The questioner is looking for inconsistency, or other signs that the story is a lie. These men have already asked the healed man what happened, and he has already answered. Rather than simply repeating his story, the man takes a bold, brave, and incredibly effective approach. The following verses show how his sincere honesty embarrasses the prejudiced, conniving religious leaders.

Verse 27. He answered them, “I have told you already, and you would not listen. Why do you want to hear it again? Do you also want to become his disciples?”

The religious leaders of Jerusalem are looking for any excuse to reject Jesus and His miracles. They have already interrogated the subject of Jesus’ latest healing (John 9:13), as well as the man’s parents (John 9:18). When no damning evidence results, they once again summon the formerly-blind man and ask him some of the same questions again, suggesting that he is lying (John 9:24) and looking for inconsistency in his answers.

Instead of playing along, the beggar thoroughly embarrasses the religious elites. He responds with an answer which is honest, yet cuts the Pharisees and scribes deeply. In short, this uneducated man says, “I already told you this—are you asking because you want to believe in Jesus, too?” That, of course, is exactly the opposite of what these men want. They’ve threatened anyone who accepts Jesus with excommunication (John 9:22), and have already proven that they’re insincere in their rejection of Him (John 9:16). This means the beggar’s answer is almost certainly sarcastic.

This casual, confident response sends the religious leaders into a tantrum. Rather than acting as impartial judges, these men will resort to insults (John 9:28; 34). Unfortunately for them, this will only make the situation worse, as the beggar continues to counter their bile with common sense truth.

Verse 28. And they reviled him, saying, “You are his disciple, but we are disciples of Moses.

In an earlier argument, Jesus pointed out that His religious critics claimed to be followers of Moses, yet failed to act accordingly (John 5:39–47). When Jesus healed a man who had been born blind (John 9:1–7), these same scribes and Pharisees insisted that the miracle was a fraud. They rejected Jesus as a sinner (John 9:24), questioned the healed man (John 9:13), and his parents (John 9:18), before bringing the beggar back for a second round of interrogation. There, the man pointed out that he’d already answered their questions, and sarcastically asked if they’d changed their minds and decided to follow Jesus (John 9:27).

As they did in conversations with Jesus, the scribes and Pharisees respond to challenges with anger and insults (John 8:41, 48). This verse uses the Greek term loidorēo, which means to “rail at or heap abuses on.” In this context, it’s an act of verbal abuse. For pointing out their prejudice, the once-blind beggar has earned hatred and anger from these educated men.

Once again, the religious leaders stake their claim to religious knowledge. This is the same issue about which they debated Jesus after He healed a crippled man near the Pool of Bethesda (John 5:1–8; 5:37–38). They refuse to accept any claim contradicting their own traditions and knowledge. In their own minds, there is no possible way in which they could be wrong. Their arrogance will continue in the next verse.

Verse 29. We know that God has spoken to Moses, but as for this man, we do not know where he comes from.”

Here, the religious leaders of Jerusalem continue to claim that they have a greater connection to truth than Jesus does. Their second attempt at interrogating a miraculously healed man is backfiring: the man has sarcastically pointed out their prejudice (John 9:27). In return, these educated men resort to insults and verbal abuse (John 9:28, 34).

Their claim not to know where Jesus comes from is further proof of stubbornness and dishonesty. Jesus’ miracles are specifically meant to be “signs” of His divine power and approval (John 12:37–38). And yet, these men immediately reject the miracles because, to them, Jesus is a “sinner.” They know the Scriptures of the Old Testament, but refuse to follow them to their intended conclusion: that Jesus is the Promised One (John 5:39–40). The only reason these man cannot identify Jesus’ origin is pride: they do not know, or believe, because they do not want to know (John 7:17). Here, as in most cases, a person’s intent is far more powerful than any evidence or reason others might provide.

The formerly-blind beggar’s sarcastic answer has not only exposed their fragile egos, it has exposed their lack of reason. Things are about to get even worse for the scribes and Pharisees, however. The man they are insulting is about to strike back with an even more powerful point of logic.

Verse 30. The man answered, “Why, this is an amazing thing! You do not know where he comes from, and yet he opened my eyes.

The religious leaders of Jerusalem have made it clear they will not accept Jesus, no matter what. Even though His miracles are “signs” of His divinity (John 12:37–38), they instead find excuses to doubt or dismiss them (John 9:16). These men know the Scriptures, but ignore what those texts say about the Messiah (John 5:39–40). Their problem is not a lack of intelligence or even ignorance. Their problem is pride and hard hearts. They do not want to understand (John 7:17). Worse, they respond in angry insults when someone challenges them for their prejudice (John 9:28, 34).

The same man who sarcastically challenged the scribes and Pharisees earlier now responds to their insults. Once again, his tone is sardonic, biting, and confrontational. All the same, his point is much the same as the one he previously gave (John 9:25). Despite what people might claim they don’t know about Jesus, what we do know about Jesus is more than enough to make the right conclusion! The religious leaders are trying to dismiss Jesus for being an outsider—the healed man is pointing out that this is a poor excuse.

The once-blind man isn’t done, either. In the face of abuse and interrogation by the religious leaders of his home, this man will proceed to teach the self-styled teachers of Israel what they ought to understand.

Verse 31. We know that God does not listen to sinners, but if anyone is a worshiper of God and does his will, God listens to him.

A general theme of the Old Testament is that God’s attention is tuned to the prayers of those who follow Him, and generally against the prayers of those who oppose Him. While not an absolute rule, this principle takes on a greater meaning when applied to miracles. Elijah used prayer, and God’s miraculous response, as proof that his preaching was the truth (1 Kings 18:20–40). Jesus’ supernatural works are meant to be “signs” that He is operating with divine power, and godly approval (John 12:37–38; Isaiah 29:18; 35:5; 42:7). For the scribes and Pharisees to dismiss Jesus’ obvious power by calling Him a “sinner” (John 9:16) is proof that they’re grasping at straws.

This specific point is being made by a man who was born blind, but healed by Jesus (John 9:1–7). Jesus’ religious critics have responded to this man’s testimony with insults and anger (John 9:28, 34), demonstrating that they have no reasonable arguments to use. As part of this rejection, the scribes and Pharisees claimed to be followers of Moses, but that they did not know who Jesus was or where He was from (John 9:29). The beggar is pointing out that even if they don’t know everything about Jesus, the fact that He’s performing healing miracles is evidence enough.

In the next verses, this man will continue to apply this theme by pointing out that Jesus’ miracle is not only a potent sign—it’s a unique sign which no other prophet had accomplished before.

Verse 32. Never since the world began has it been heard that anyone opened the eyes of a man born blind.

The man speaking these words, so far as we know, is the first person in all of human history to be cured of lifelong blindness. Jesus’ miracle not only showed His godly power (John 12:37–38), it also fulfilled prophecies about the Messiah (Isaiah 29:18; 35:5; 42:7). In Scripture, concepts such as light and darkness, or sight versus blindness, were used to represent spiritual matters. In prior verses, the recently-healed man has pointed out that the miraculous healing Jesus performed on him ought to be evidence that Jesus is from God (John 9:30–31).

Further, Jesus’ miracle is unique. Not only has Jesus done something supernatural, He has done something no other prophet or priest in Israel’s history had ever done. Earlier, the scribes and Pharisees interrogating this man rejected Jesus on the grounds that they didn’t know where He’d come from. This response, from the one who’d been healed, points out that such excuses are just that: excuses to be prejudiced, not valid answers.

The “bottom line” of the formerly-blind man’s argument comes in the next verse, in simple and common-sense terms.

Verse 33. If this man were not from God, he could do nothing.”

When Jesus healed a man born blind, His religious critics responded in a predictable way. Jesus had already challenged them for willful ignorance (John 7:17), and for “refusing” to follow their own Scriptures in order to believe in Him (John 5:39–40). Here, these men have twice interrogated the healed man (John 9:13, 24), looking for any reason to dismiss Jesus’ work. The formerly-blind beggar, for his part, responded with bravery and remarkably clear thinking. His overall point, delivered with heavy sarcasm, has been that Jesus’ miracles themselves ought to be evidence enough that He’s been sent by God.

Here, the healed man makes this statement in clear and direct terms. This is almost identical to the conclusion Nicodemus brought to Jesus earlier in the gospel of John (John 3:1–2). This verse is the summary of the man’s response to the insults of the scribes and Pharisees, who tried to reject Jesus as a “sinner” instead of accepting His miracles.

At this point, the religious leaders of Jerusalem have been thoroughly embarrassed. They have failed to debunk Jesus’ miracle. They have responded in angry insults to one of their witnesses. And, they’ve been “taught” some common sense spiritual truth by a man they consider beneath them.

The following verse is exactly the kind of reaction one would expect from these kinds of spiritual hypocrites. Rather than countering the man’s argument, or challenging his facts, they resort once again to insults.

Verse 34. They answered him, “You were born in utter sin, and would you teach us?” And they cast him out.

These scribes and Pharisees have attempted to debunk Jesus’ latest miracle. They’ve interrogated the man who was born blind (John 9:13), and subsequently healed (John 9:6–7). They’ve questioned the man’s parents (John 9:18). And, they’ve taken a second look at the healed man’s testimony (John 9:24). That second exchange led to embarrassment for the religious leaders. The formerly-blind man’s sincere, but sarcastic responses showed these men were nothing more than religious hypocrites. They claimed not to know where Jesus was from; the healed man said Jesus’ miracles were evidence enough of who He was (John 9:25). The scribes and Pharisees claimed Jesus was a “sinner;” the healed man pointed out that a “sinner” wouldn’t have access to God’s power (John 9:30–31).

In response, these men once again resort to a typical reaction: personal attacks. In logic and debate, this is known as an ad hominem, which literally means “to the man.” This is where one side insults or disparages the person, rather than dealing with the issue itself. Here, the scribes and Pharisees dismiss the once-blind beggar with yet another insult.

It’s worth noting that these same men have used this tactic on Jesus, as well: insults instead of reason (John 8:48). In fact, their verbal abuse of this man is similar to what was said to Jesus by questioning His birth (John 8:41). This man is experiencing the same kind of hatred, from the world, which Christ Himself received (John 15:18–21).

In a very practical sense, this man’s experience is a compressed version of what it means to convert to Christianity. He is given a “sight” he never before possessed (John 9:1–2), by someone he had never before known (John 9:11–12). The only thing he knows for certain is the effects of this change on his own life (John 9:25). And, when he stands up for the truth of his own experience, the world insults and abuses him (John 9:28, 34), much the same way it did Jesus.

In the next passage, this blind man will finally see Jesus—who had sent him off to complete the healing miracle by washing his eyes. Jesus will fill in the last gaps in this man’s knowledge, resulting in his salvation.

Verse 35. Jesus heard that they had cast him out, and having found him he said, “Do you believe in the Son of Man?”

The man Jesus healed of lifelong blindness has been excommunicated by the scribes and Pharisees (John 9:22, 34). Beyond his support for Jesus (John 9:25), this man also embarrassed local religious leaders by exposing their hypocrisy. Though he knew little about the man who healed him, this formerly-blind beggar knew more than enough to recognize a messenger of God (John 9:30–31). His challenge to the religious leaders earned him their insults, and their hatred (John 9:28).

Prior to this moment, this man has not actually “seen” Jesus. His blindness was healed when he obeyed Jesus’ command to wash off his eyes (John 9:6–7), so Jesus was not there when the beggar gained eyesight. Now, Jesus finds the man after his run-in with the scribes and Pharisees.

As He often does, Jesus challenges the man by asking him to explain his own beliefs. This question is important for several reasons. The term “Son of Man” is one that Jewish people associated closely with the Messiah. To this point, the once-blind man has not said he thinks Jesus is the Messiah—only that he believes Jesus has been sent by God (John 9:11).

As the following verses show, this once-blind man is more than willing to follow what he has learned from his experiences; he only needs to be told how (Matthew 7:7).

Context Summary
John 9:35–41 shows Jesus meeting with the man He has healed, formerly blind since birth. His healing, and subsequent conversation with the Pharisees, has resulted in the man being excommunicated from his synagogue. Jesus reveals His identity to the man, and explains how this episode summarized His earthly ministry. The Pharisees, once again, prove their spiritual stubbornness, giving Jesus an opportunity to connect greater knowledge with greater responsibility.

Verse 36. He answered, “And who is he, sir, that I may believe in him?”

Earlier, Jesus healed a man who had been born blind, but was not there when the man completed Jesus’ instructions (John 9:6–7). All the newly-healed man knows is that someone—sent from God—has given him the sight he’d never had (John 9:1–2, 11). After being insulted and abused by local religious leaders, the man is found again by Jesus.

In the prior verse, Jesus asked this formerly-blind man if he believed in the Son of Man. This is a phrase heavily tied to the Jewish concept of the Messiah. The now-seeing beggar has admitted that he knows very little about Jesus (John 9:25), but he certainly believes that Jesus is operating on divine power (John 9:30–31).

Here, the man responds to Jesus’ question with an admission of his own ignorance. This statement is similar to the cry of the father of a demon-possessed boy in Mark 9:24: “I believe; help my unbelief!” Here, the healed man wants to follow the truth, but simply does not know how. This is a strong contrast to the hard-headed scribes and Pharisees (John 5:39–40), who know more than enough about the Scriptures, but “refuse” to follow them by accepting Christ.

As promised (Matthew 7:7), Jesus will respond to sincere seeking, and give this man the wisdom he needs.

Verse 37. Jesus said to him, “You have seen him, and it is he who is speaking to you.”

Jesus is speaking to the man He’d healed of lifelong blindness earlier in this passage (John 9:1–7). At that time, Jesus had sent the still-blind man off to wash his eyes, resulting in sight. This conversation is the first time the man has actually “seen” the person who granted him vision. Jesus’ question, posed in verse 35, was a chance for the beggar to explain his own faith. Jesus asked the man if he believed in the “Son of Man,” a phrase heavily tied to the Jewish concept of the Messiah. In response, the man admitted his own ignorance, and his willingness, to believe. This is a strong contrast to the scribes and Pharisees who have more than enough information (John 5:39–40), but who simply did not want to understand (John 7:17).

Since the formerly-blind man does not know who the “Son of Man”—the Messiah—actually is, Jesus tells him. It’s Jesus Himself, the one standing right there speaking with the now-seeing man. Once again, the man’s response differs drastically from that of Jesus’ religious critics. Following his own advice (John 9:27), the man will immediately confess his faith in the Promised One.

Verse 38. He said, “Lord, I believe,” and he worshiped him.

This moment is similar to how Thomas will respond to his encounter with a resurrected Jesus later in this gospel (John 20:24–29). Prior to this moment, all the once-blind man knew is that he had been healed by “a prophet” from God (John 9:6–7, 11). When that healer—Jesus—found the man, he admitted that he did not know who the Son of Man was, but wanted to know so he could respond in faith. Hearing that this Messiah was Jesus, the man immediately responded with worship.

The religious leaders of Jerusalem respond to Jesus in exactly the opposite way. This man accepts the evidence he has, rather than looking for excuses about what he does not know (John 9:25). He seeks to follow God faithfully, but admits his own ignorance (John 9:36). The scribes and Pharisees don’t want to understand the truth (John 7:17), and they reject all the knowledge they already have (John 5:39–40).

This moment is also important when discussing Jesus’ claims to be God. In other portions of Scripture, worship of any being other than God is forbidden (Exodus 20:3–4). When someone mistakenly worships other beings, such as angels, those beings respond by refusing that worship (Revelation 19:9–10). As with Thomas, Jesus accepts the worship of this newly-seeing man. By implication, Jesus is agreeing that He can be worshipped, which from a Jewish perspective means He is claiming to be identical to God.

Verse 39. Jesus said, “For judgment I came into this world, that those who do not see may see, and those who see may become blind.”

Jesus’ comment here can be confused with statement such as John 3:17 and John 12:47. In those verses, Jesus states that He did not come to “condemn.” Here, Jesus states that He did come for “judgment.” The reason for Jesus’ earthly ministry was to secure our salvation; this required judgment on and against sin. The result of this ministry, however, is the—eventual—condemnation of those who reject Him.

The reference to those who see versus those who are blind is meant to explain this entire incident with the blind beggar and the religious critics. Those who admit their need, and trust in God, are those who will be granted sight—just as the blind man was given both sight and knowledge by Jesus in response to his sincere faith. Those who are arrogant and presume they already know, will be hardened by the presence of Jesus, instead. Despite their knowledge (John 5:39–40), they’ll allow their own prejudice to blind them (2 Corinthians 4:4), making them incapable of understanding what they don’t want to understand, anyway (John 7:17).

Verse 40. Some of the Pharisees near him heard these things, and said to him, “Are we also blind?”

According to Jesus’ prior statement, those who are willfully ignorant of spiritual matters claim they have knowledge—”sight”—when in reality they’re spiritually blind. A major component of Jesus’ conflicts with religious leaders was their arrogance. Too often, these men started from the assumption that they knew best, and Jesus could not be true, simply because He didn’t agree with them. As Jesus pointed out, that wasn’t because God had failed to provide evidence (John 5:36). It was because these men refused to accept the truth (John 5:39–40).

As part of their debate against Jesus, the Pharisees now ask a pointed question. This is meant to be rhetorical—they ask with the assumption that the answer is an obvious “no.” By their own standards, the Pharisees were the most moral, well-educated, and spiritually capable of men. One can imagine a modern Pharisee asking, sarcastically, “you’re not saying I don’t understand spirituality!” and laughing.

Jesus’ response, in the next verse, shows that this is exactly the case. Worse, for the Pharisees, is their arrogance and presumption. Those who recognize their weakness and need for truth find forgiveness and grace (John 9:35–38; Mark 9:24). Those who claim they have knowledge will be judged according to their own standards (John 9:41).

Verse 41. Jesus said to them, “If you were blind, you would have no guilt; but now that you say, ‘We see,’ your guilt remains.

The Pharisees, of all people, ought to recognize the Messiah when they see Him. Nobody in Jesus’ era was more passionate about Scripture, or obedience to God. Unfortunately, most of the Pharisees—but not all (John 3:1–2; Luke 23:50–51)—were really more concerned with tradition and status than truth (John 5:39–40; 5:45–47). By worldly standards, these men had more spiritual “sight” than anyone else. So, when Jesus indicated that His ministry was meant to give spiritual sight to those who sought it, and reveal spiritual blindness to those who thought they were wise, the Pharisees responded with arrogance. Their response, in essence, was to say, “you obviously aren’t saying we’re spiritually blind.”

Here, Jesus clarifies: this is exactly what He’s saying.

Further, Jesus’ statement here underscores an important principle, which is that God holds people accountable only for what they know, but holds them absolutely accountable for it. Those who come to God in humility, admitting weakness and seeking truth, are met with grace and forgiveness (Mark 9:24; John 9:35–38; Matthew 7:7–8). Those who think they are wise, who claim to have spiritual sight, will be judged accordingly (James 3:1). This is especially true of those who, like the Pharisees, have knowledge and deliberately choose to ignore it.

End of Chapter 9.

Please Note:

The material use in this post, video is from BibleRef.com which is from Got Questions Ministries and is posted here to be read by Immersive reader in the Edge Browser. If you copy this material please follow these rules:

•Content from BibleRef.com may not be used for any commercial purposes, or as part of any commercial work, without explicit prior written consent from Got Questions ministries.

•Any use of our material should be properly credited; please make it clear the content is from BibleRef.com.

•BibleRef.com content may not be altered, modified, or otherwise changed unless such changes are specifically noted.