Bible Groups - Gospel and Letters of John - navigation>
Gospel of John - Chapter 9
- The controversy of chapter 8 might well lead straight to the Crucifixion, but John takes ten more chapters
because his aim is to generate and sustain a community of discipleship, and to lead humanity to heal its
divisions and do the will of one who sends. Chap 9 reveals the hope for humanity’s healing and the
response required of those in the community of the healed. Jesus is the light of the world while he is in
the world, his disciples are to be that light after he has gone physically from the world, after "night
comes" (v 4b).
- One of the masterpieces of John's storytelling. Three interpenetrating stories:-
- (a) Disciples' experience of accepting of Jesus while being rejected by the world;
- (b) Betrayal by relatives because of fear of the world authorities;
- (c) Blindness of those in worldly power to God’s work.
- We are still in the Tabernacles feast, with its light and the pool of Siloam, but Jesus is now outside the
Temple - symbolic. Outside the Temple a blind man comes to faith while the Jewish leaders move
towards blindness. Jesus the light of the world (8:12, Isa 42:6-7, 29:18, 49:6) which can bring light to
those born blind - through Baptism. ie immersion in Jesus, the One who was sent (Siloam has same
consonants as the Hebrew salah which means to send; siloam literally means a discharge of waters, so
the writer sees a similarity), but also can bring blindness to those who turn away from the light and
follow their own sight, thus judging themselves. The blind man knows little (vv 12, 25, 36) and learns
much; the Pharisees know everything (vv 16, 24, 29) and can be taught nothing. While the Samaritan
woman exemplifies the obstacles on the road to faith, the man born blind exemplifies one who is
enlightened at first encounter but comes to see who Jesus really is only later, after trials and being cast
out: encourages Johannine Christians that their trials provide opportunities to come to a more profound
faith.
- The most dramatic episode in John’s Gospel, easily read in parts, with 6 scenes starting at vv 1, 8, 13, 18,
24, 35, with a further scene in chap 10. Links in to chap 10: connected by 10:21 and 10:26-28.
- Probably used for instruction: the catechumens would have followed the same progress through
knowledge of Jesus (v 11), seeing him as Prophet (v 17), as a man from God (v 33), as the heavenly Son
of Man (v 35), to worship (v 38). Jesus proclaims that he is the light of the world, and the man's journey
from born blind to faith in the Son of Man shows how this is true. Jesus announced that he was the
lifegiving water (7:37-8), and cure by the pool of Siloam - the 'Sent One' shows how this is true. This
celebration of Tabernacles have been full of controversy over Jesus' claim to be the Nessiah, and Jesus'
description of himself as the Good Shepherd (10:14-18) tells how he exercises his messianic role.
- Much irony - things are opposite of what they seem: those who are sure they can see are really blind. The
blind man takes a risk, accepts Jesus’ invitation (v 6), and ends up seeing. But the neighbours remain in
ignorance, the parents refuse to take a risk (v 23), the Pharisees cannot make up their minds, and the
authorities refuse to believe what their eyes see. Jesus deals with each individual in a way that suits them:
in this case he does not approach the man to deal with his spiritual need until after the man had debated
with the Jews and been thrown out of the synagogue.
- In OT giving sight to blind associated with God (Exod 4:11; Ps 146:8), and also a messianic activity (Isa
29:18; 35:5; 42:7). It may have this significance in NT as a divine function of God's own Messiah.
- 1 Emphasis on blind from birth - as we are by original sin. The sight he will be given is a new creation.
Absence of “a” or “the” before “man” might indicate that it means “humanity” - but it might not.
- 2 Belief that illness was a punishment implying guilt from sin (Lk 13:2), since God could not bring about
evil that happens to people (Exod 20:5; Num 14:18; Deut 5:9; Tob 3:3-4). Did the parents sin, or did the
man sin before he was born? It is disciples who ask - perhaps misguided, somewhat negative: they are not
very good models of following Jesus, and do not appear again until chap 11. But chap 8 suggests a
permanent condition resulting from birth from the wrong “father”, so how can we know who has and has
not inherited this condition? Are we all in the same boat? So the disciples’ question may be: “Have we
inherited our condition, or made it ourselves?” We still struggle with this dilemma. Structural evil or
personal responsibility?
- 3 Jesus strongly rejects both interpretations: blindness only implies sin if it is blindness of the will. The
infirmity is providential. Stop moralising and get on with healing. God's work is about to be revealed in
this man's story. Moreover Jesus includes his disciples in the work of revealing God's work. Not the child
was made to suffer being blind in order to show God at work, but God overruled his physical blindness
so that as an adult he might see the glory of God in Jesus' face.
- 4 Note it is “we” who have to do the works - disciples too. Not an option, but a requirement: “we must” -
rare. Doing the works of God, not developing moral theology, is essential to discipleship. “Night is
coming” looks forward to the end of Jesus “day”, later than the “sixth hour” in Samaria. There is urgency
about doing God's works - the opportunity will not always be present. The night will bring to an end the
day - Jesus will then be absent physically from the human story. Then noone will be able to make God
known, unless the disciples continue his work of revealing God after his death. This is why the disciples
must be involved too - after the night of Jesus death, the disciples must continue his work of revealing
God's work - to work the works of the one who sent him - and so being light to the world. The works
originate with God - they are heaven-sent.
- 5 The presence of Jesus in the world brings light into the world, but his time in the world is short: he
must work quickly and the disciples are to continue his work after night has come. Jesus’ ministry is the
period of light; darkness will have its hour when he is put to death. (Jn 13:30, Lk 22:53)
- 6 Kneading the clay and healing with unclean spittle both violate the rabbinic sabbath rules. In Mark
(Mk 8:23, 7:33-34) Jesus uses spittle on a blind man and - with “Ephpheta” on a deaf man: the latter is
included in our Baptism; perhaps the anointing in Baptism comes from smearing the eyes with clay.
Perhaps 'mud' is an echo of man being made from the dust of the earth (Gen 2:7).
- 7 Washing in the pool, with a name interpreted as “sent”, effects the healing. [Hezekiah cut a tunnel
through the rock to bring waters from Gihon into the city. It flowed into the upper pool, Birket Silwan,
and probably then into a lower pool. 'Pool' is quite big - enough to swim in. Originally the name arose
from the water being 'sent' into the pool by a channel: the channel would be the 'sender' (Neh 3:15; Isa
8:6)]. So blindness is removed with the aid of the 'sent'. But it is preceded by a test of faith: “Go, wash”,
and the man accepts, doing what Nicodemus could not do: be born again. (Cf 2 Kgs 5:10). Yet why
should he do as Jesus asks? Could the use of spittle encourage him to hope for healing? Blind obedience
to God’s command produces its own fruits. In catacombs art, the healing of the blind man is a symbol of
baptism. Immediate unquestioning response: he went, he washed, he came back seeing. It is contact with
the ‘Sent One’ that effects a cure, not the pool waters. Sight is given to a man who has never seen the
light.
- 8 Jesus’ actions lead not to praise but to division. The man, now on his own in the world, is interrogated
by his neighbours - presumably who would know he was blind from birth from seeing him at home - and
by those who used to see him as a blind beggar - its first mention - and who would not necessarily know
he was blind from birth. They are incredulous, expecting the answer that he in not the same man. There
is excited continuous discussion. At first they only address his identity someone who was the blind
beggar - they would not have paid him enough attention to be sure of identifying him. At this stage he
knows only the man called Jesus.
- 9 They talk about him, but don’t do the courtesy of asking him - as we sometimes do in the presence of
disabled. He courageously acknowledges that he is the man - as Christians are expected to profess their
identity openly. Perhaps his use of the “I am he” formula indicates new found authority to speak, from
his re-birth. But also indicates that ego eimi does not always convey divine overtones.
- 10 If you are the one, how were your eyes opened? The first question ‘How?’ of many. Our neighbours
often ask us how we came to believe.
- 11 We can only answer with simple truth: I accepted the invitation and came to see. The man remembers
who healed him, unlike the paralytic. And he is very specific: “the person” who healed me - he must have
listened to someone - in contrast to his own generality - Jesus is the one healer for all mankind.
Presumably he listened to others say the person’s name was Jesus, since Jesus did not tell him: we hear
about Jesus from others - in contrast to the Judeans who “do not listen” (8:47). The man also sees
himself as being - in the Hebrew - 'anointed' by Jesus, the clay not just “put”, as the narrator says. Also
he says “Siloam”, omitting the pool reference to emphasise “sent”. At this stage Jesus is simply 'a man'
he and others know as Jesus.
- 12 Why do they want to know? Hardly surprising that, in his joy at seeing, the man should lose sight of
Jesus: do we also? At least his answer is ‘I do not know’ - the step on the road to new knowledge.
- 13 The emphasis shifts: he is the “once blind man” rather than the “former beggar”: the question is now
the healing, not identity. Why did they bring the man to the Pharisees? To inform them? Or because
they think something is wrong? Or because they cannot agree and seek guidance? Or perhaps just to
report this wonderful happening? Appears to be a subsequent day, and just an unofficial enquiry by the
authorities.
- 14 We are told what everyone else knows, that it is the sabbath. Cf 5:9. Ominous overtones - is this why
they brought him to the Pharisees? Narrator’s summary of what Jesus did is accurate, but omits “Go,
wash” - emphasis on fact of vision rather than discipleship.
- 15 Persistent, continuos questioning by the Pharisees. Again the simple truth, put very succinctly, but
“He”, not “Jesus”, and “put” not “anointed” - more circumspect. “Making clay” omitted, as is Siloam.
Perhaps the man sees implications of sabbath violation? No violations in what he says here. The
Pharisees start from a position in darkness: Jesus' activity as the Light of the world inevitably brings
judgement to all - and condemnation to those who oppose the Light.
- 16 Perhaps sensing violation anyway, some rush to judgement, doubting Jesus’ authority - perhaps those
who brought him to the Pharisees told the Pharisees more. Suggests the Pharisees trust those who
reported him more than the man who experienced the healing. Does this reflect the experience of the
Johannine community of having their witness doubted. A consoling precedent for witnesses today whose
word is doubted by the authorities. Simple judgement: if he does not keep the Sabbath he cannot be from
God. Others cautiously examine the argument, starting from the miracle - and other 'signs', which
indicate Jesus might be from God. A second split (Cf 7:43). The Pharisees’ interest in the possible law
breaking and preserving their legal tradition, rather than the person of this miracle worker. But even here
there is division and debate about his origins. At least some are open to the possibility that Jesus might
be from God, but this group appears small, and is not heard from again. But the fact of the miracle is not
questioned by anyone.
- 17 Perhaps surprisingly - or perplexed, and split - they ask the man’s opinion - perhaps they are not so
sure of themselves. Strangely he is described as “the blind one” - do the Pharisees believe he is still
“blind” to his healer’s sinfulness? The man advances to the next stage, acknowledging Jesus to be
“Prophet” or “a Prophet” (it is unclear which), ie one whose power comes from God. For the man, with
his knowledge at this point, this is the highest he can say about Jesus.
- 18 As the man moves towards belief, the Jews move in the opposite direction. The Jews argue that Jesus
did not come from God, therefore he could not have done a miracle, therefore this miracle did not
happen. They do not examine the evidence with open minds, but start from their prejudices - as we
sometimes do?. Are they new characters who do not believe? They check whether he really was blind.
Different group from Pharisees? Or may be just alternated to vary the narrative. Is this a later
interrogation? Why call for his parents - unusual term in the gospels? Reference to sin of mankind’s
first parents? But the ‘Jews’ seem unable to believe in anything. Belief is beyond them - they must have
facts. (What is a fact?)
- 19 They ask two questions of the parents, the first implying a previous answer, but the second gives the
game away, conceding that the man had really been blind and can now see.
- 20 The first question is answered yes.
- 21 But they avoid interpreting the facts, but the reference to “who opened his eyes” suggest they know
what the Jews are getting at. And why add “Ask him”, putting their son back on the spot? They are
emphatically distancing themselves from a potentially dangerous situation. They may not have been
present when their son was healed, but they show almost indecent concern not to be involved. Johannine
Christians disdain such reluctance (Lk 12:11) when questioned by the synagogue authorities. The facts of
the miracle have now been told 3 times. The Jews are still concentrating on the ‘how’. But faith in Jesus
does not depend on facts, but on the identity of Jesus, the light of the world, the Sent One of God.
- 22 The author says this is why they shifted the focus back to their son. In this context 'confess' seems
more likely to mean giving support to Jesus, rather than believing that Jesus is the Christ. Historical bi-level: Excommunication from synagogue old (Ezra 10:8), but was not known to have been a feature in
Jesus’ lifetime, nor of Paul’s (Acts 21:26). But it is believed that at the Synod of Jamnia in 85AD
synagogue prayer came to include a curse on heretics such as Christians, and Jewish Christians could not
share such a prayer and were therefore effectively excluded. So some debate about which 'putting out'
method is referred to here. All Jews would fear being deprived of synagogue privileges. But in Acts
Christians are seen as being freely accepted into Synagogues, so what sort of expulsion is being referred
to here is not clear. Perhaps some Jews were beginning to take action against Jesus' followers. The cured
man was thrown out (v 34), as were the Christians. This chapter strengthens those who have been
thrown out by encouraging them to fall at Our Lord’s feet to worship him (v 38). Not only the man’s
parents but in all generations there are those who are tested and found unwilling to proclaim their faith
publicly - and many have died over the years for such public proclamation.
- 23 Unusually detailed motivation for the parents' 'passing the buck' is emphasised by repeating the added
remark. This underlines the essence of the Johannine community’s problems: either you avoided public
commitment to Jesus, or you believed and lost everything in your worldly community - there was no
other option, no “live and let live”, such as we mostly experience. The parents’ passing the buck to their
son is their “sin”. They cannot make public commitment, as Nicodemus could not.
- 24 Perceiving they can get no further with the parents, they switch their attack back to the man. John's
irony: those who thought themselves enlightened try to badger the man into denying what he knows to be
true - that he was blind and can now see - and in the process the man develops a deeper appreciation of
Jesus. Which “they” - Jews or Pharisees - is the distinction significant? If the Pharisees, suggests they
called him the first time, rather than the neighbours bringing him voluntarily - or perhaps they brought
him at the request of the Pharisees? Perhaps the court is re-convened, with the aim of destroying Jesus’
credibility? “Give glory to God” - "Remember God sees you and give him due honour by speaking the
truth" - an oath formula (Josh 7:19; 1 Chron 30:6-9; Jer 13:16), putting the man under oath to tell the
truth: the man’s truth does indeed give God glory: the Pharisees’ words do the opposite. The Pharisees
seek to have him swear on a God of the Pharisees’ own making, not the God of Jesus Christ, because
they ‘know’ that Jesus is a sinner. The man’s identity and the fact of healing are no longer in dispute.
- 25 The man refuses to condemn Jesus, he is not prepared to accept their ‘knowledge’ that Jesus is a
sinner, he does not know. Rather he reaffirms the truth by stating what he is certain of from his own
experience: "One thing I do know". He was blind and now can see.
- 26 The flustered pharisees repeat earlier questions, perhaps trying to undermine his story - unless they
truly want to know. They are still focussing on the ‘how’ instead of ‘who’. Perhaps we also make a
mistake in seeking to explain how Jesus becomes present at the Consecration, instead of focussing the
who - Jesus himself and the love he has which he expresses in the Sacrament?
- 27 They have resisted listening so far - perhaps they really are prepared to listen? His courageous
sarcasm strikes in warm chord in us. A very different character from the timid paralytic of chap 5. He
has already told them - if they are not seeking information, perhaps they have some other reason for
repeating their questions. He even invites them to become disciples too, in a way that expects the answer
'No'! Does “too” imply he is already almost a disciple? Or perhaps he genuinely thinks their interest is
sincere. We must be careful not to indulge in sarcasm in case there is a sincere desire to listen. Listening
to the story of Jesus - perhaps many times - is part of the process of becoming a disciple of Jesus.
- 28 Not surprisingly the Pharisees angrily abuse him and fall back on Moses, to whom God spoke face to
face (Num 12:7-8) - to their certain ‘knowledge’. They now state the man is a disciple of Jesus. Implied
danger to the man born blind, as well as to Jesus - if he is a disciple, he could suffer too.
- 29 Cf their earlier query about Jesus’ origins, even though they had earlier asserted he was from Galilee
(7:41, 52). But they do not know where Jesus comes from. The Jews are locked into the gift of God that
came through Moses, to whom God 'has spoken' - perfect tense ie completed action, and they reject the
perfection of this gift through Jesus, because they will, not accept that he is from God. But also fulfilling
the messianic condition that “no one is to know where he is from” (7:27) - if they had remembered this
prophecy they might still be led to the truth.
- 30 In the longest speech in the chapter, the increasingly empowered man points out the illogicality of
their position: you are uncertain about his origin, in spite of what he has done to me. Your unbelief in the
face of the evidence is more of a miracle than my cure! Emphatic 'you' - the religious experts cannot
work out what is going on. There is a principle at stake: there must be a link between the fact of someone
opening the eyes of a man born blind and his origins - this must be common ground: God listens to
people who do his will, not to sinners. Instead of looking at the ‘how’ they should look at the ‘who’:
never before in human history has someone born blind been given sight. There must be a special
relationship between the person who does such things and God who makes this new creation possible
(giving sight to a man born blind is a new creation).
- 31 And continues to teach them, matching their 'we know' with a basic principle of his own. Now using
“we”: God hears the devout (Prov 15:29). Is the “we” an ironic “we, you and I” know the ways of God,
don’t we! The Psalms are full of petitions from sinners to God. Challenges their theology: God does not
hear sinners, but a man who does the will of God and worships Him, will be heard.
- 32 Healing the blind is unheard of. (Except for Tobit, but he was not born blind: Tb 7:7, 11:13)
- 33 If Jesus were a sinner, then according to the Pharisees’ argument he would not be able to heal.
Therefore he must be from God. A good chain of reasoning - especially for a man blind from birth
forced to beg for a living. Under their questioning the man has been forced to think through the
implications of what has happened in the light of the then prevailing theology, and has reached a new
understanding - precisely the experience of the Johannine community. The man is still hesitant, basing
his belief on the miracle. The man moves to the next stage, drawing the conclusion that Jesus is a “man
from God” - else he could not have done this.
- 34 Affronted at being taught by a man they judge as a sinner because of his illness, thus admitting that
there has been a cure, rather than their knowledge of God through Moses, so they throw him out, falling
back on old formulae. The experience of many “at the bottom” refused credence by those in power at the
top. The consequence of his public commitment - being born again - is expulsion. God’s glory working
through “sinners”. Humanity, born into blindness, is capable of learning to see, but there is a price to be
paid. Many are unwilling to pay it.
- 35 It would be known that the man had been thrown out, and Jesus could not remain indifferent to
someone persecuted for his sake. Now Jesus seeks him out - not just accidentally came across him - and
interrogates him, like Wisdom seeking the worthy (Wis 6:17), using a perhaps primitive baptismal
demand for a confession of faith. Earlier uses of ‘Son of Man’ indicates that Jesus uses this term to refer
to his role of making God known in the human story. His presence among as the Son of Man is critical,
revealing God and bringing judgement, but the consummation of this role is still to come. Jesus' 'you' is
emphatic - faith is essentially personal: do you believe?
- 36 This is the first time the man has seen Jesus - presumably he recognised his voice. He is grateful and
willing to believe, and he realises from Jesus' question that he is being asked to believe, and he wants to
do what is right, but is puzzled: he does not yet know enough to answer, so he asks a question. He
addresses Jesus as Sir (kyrie).
- 37 Jesus identifies himself clearly, now that the man has endured expulsion. But not in the dramatic ego
eimi, but by appealing to the man’s senses - seeing and hearing come together. For the man newly able to
see, being told he have has seen him would be very moving. Central aspect of John’s christology: noone
can see God or come to know God directly, but Jesus reveals what he has seen and speaks what he has
seen with the Father. Those who believe in Jesus will see, those who refuse to see are condemned. The
supreme revelation of God takes place when the believer looks upon the Son of Man.. The man is
challenged to recognise that God is made known to him in the Son of Man. And when Jesus speaks he
makes God known. He is the incarnation of the logos of God. Jesus speaks of what he knows from the
Father, and speaks with unquestionable authority. His word gives life, peace and joy, but also condemns
those who refuse to listen.
- 38 The man moves to the final stage and completes his profession of faith in Jesus as Son of Man, (Dan
7:13ff) and worships him with a simplicity which contrasts with the Pharisees. He is the true son of
Abraham, acting as Abraham acted. Now his 'kyrie' means 'Lord'. His insight is the climax to his
developing understanding throughout the chapter. The man sees that Jesus is the unique object of a right
faith and puts his trust in him. The unusual use of face to face “worship” perhaps suggests Jesus replaces
Temple and Torah as eliciting respect and honour. The only place in this Gospel where anyone worships
Jesus. Having recognised that Jesus comes from God, the man gives to Jesus the reverence that is
appropriate to God. The man has moved from belief in Jesus as a man, to a prophet, to suggesting that he
must be from God, and finally to worshipping Jesus as one who makes God known. Jesus’ words in v.3
have come true: this man’s journey from blindness to sight was “that the works of God might be made
manifest in him”.
- 39 Jesus underlines the lesson by turning his attention from one who was ready to receive the light to
those who have closed their eyes to it: the Pharisees are not innocent blind, who would accept the
testimony of others. Seems likely that this is a later occasion - unlikely that the discussion between Jesus
and the previously blind man would be in the presence of hostile witnesses. The chapter began with light
and birth, but ends with judgement and separation. Again Jesus emphasises that he did not come into the
world to judge, but judgement takes place as a result of his presence in the world, separating those who
are willing to believe from those who are not willing. The result of Jesus' coming into the world is that
blind people see. The man born blind ‘did not know’ (vv 12, 25) and his willingness to search for the Son
of Man so that he might believe (v 36) contrasts with the Jews’ arrogant claim that they know (vv
24,29,31). Those who claim to have spiritual sight may be shown up for the blind people they really are
(Cf Isa 6:9-10). Content with their knowledge that God spoke to Moses, in their self-sufficiency they
have become blind and brought judgement on them selves.
- 40 Some Pharisees heard. They ask with a sneer if Jesus thinks they are blind, unable to imagine Jesus
could mean them. They have taken the point.
- 41 They probably anticipated that Jesus would say they were blind. But Jesus says they are worse than
blind, they will not to see. If they were really blind, if they had no understanding at all of spiritual things,
they would have some excuse. No blame if ignorant. But they claim to see and to know the law. They
have enough spiritual knowledge to be responsible. Because they claim all knowledge there is no room
for the revelation of the light they comes through Jesus. Therefore they fall under judgement. Physical
blindness is not caused by sin (v 3), but spiritual blindness is so caused. Had they acted on their best
knowledge they would have welcomed the Son of God. But they did not make use of their intellect and
knowledge. They claimed to be able to see but acted like trhe blind, so their sin is not taken away. “Your
sin remains” reminds us that for John sin is disbelief (8:24) - refusal to believe and trust in Jesus. If these
are secret believers, their sin is not to commit openly. The Gospel appeals to secret believers to allow
themselves to be thrown out, for Jesus will seek them out and bring them to complete faith. They cannot
continue to be both Pharisees or Jews and “with Him”. They remain in sin so long as their faith is not
public.