13 "THEY bring to the Pharisees him that aforetime was blind. 14 Now it was the Sabbath on the day when Jesus made the 15 clay, and opened his eyes. Again therefore the Pharisees also asked him how he received his sight. And he said unto them, He put clay upon mine eyes, and I washed, and 16 do see. Some therefore of the Pharisees said, This man is not from God, because he keepeth not the Sabbath. But others said, How can a man that is a sinner do such signs? 17 And there was a division among them. They say therefore unto the blind man again, What sayest thou of him, in that 18 he opened thine eyes? And he said, He is a prophet. The Jews therefore did not believe concerning him, that he had been blind, and had received his sight, until they called the 19 parents of him that had received his sight, and asked them, saying, Is this your son, who ye say was born blind? how 20 then doth he now see? His parents answered and said, We 21 know that this is our son, and that he was born blind; but how he now seeth, we know not; or who opened his eyes, we know not; ask him; he is of age; he shall speak for him 22 self. These things said his parents, because they feared the Jews; for the Jews had agreed already, that if any man should confess him to be Christ, he should be put out of the 23 synagogue. Therefore said his parents, He is of age; ask 24 him. So they called a second time the man that was blind, and said unto him, Give glory to God. We know that this 25 man is a sinner. He therefore answered, Whether he be a sinner, I know not; one thing I know, that, whereas I was blind, now I see."
QUESTIONS.
What was done with the man who had received sight?
On what day was the miracle performed?
What inquiry did the Pharisees make?
How did the man reply to them?
What conclusion did some of the Pharisees draw?
How did others view the matter?
What was thus made manifest?
How did they continue their questioning of the man?
What did he declare his belief to be?
What conclusion did the Jews adopt concerning his story?
What question did they ask his parents?
What did his parents admit that they knew?
Of what did they deny any knowledge?
What did they recommend the Jews to do?
Why did the parents take this course?
What caused this feeling on their part?
What action was based upon this threat of the Jews?
Who was now called again?
What did the Jews declare their belief to be concerning the one who had wrought the miracle?
Of what did the man admit his ignorance?
What did he know?
NOTES.
1. It may have been no special ill feeling which led the neighbors to bring to the Pharisees the man who had been healed of his blindness, "but as work had been done on the Sabbath, they judge it best to refer the matter to these great authorities in matters of religion." The former inquiries are now repeated. "Again, therefore, he was asked and (now) by the Pharisees, how he had recovered his sight." The reply of the man caused a division among his judges, and it is worth while to observe carefully the conclusions arrived at, and the basis of their reasoning. The one party say, This man is not of God, because he keepeth not the Sabbath day. Their course of reasoning is virtually this: We have certain regulations in regard to the observance of the Sabbath, and this Man has gone contrary to them. The fact that a remarkable miracle of mercy has been performed by this Man, does not weigh in our minds against the other fact that he does not keep the Sabbath, in harmony with our well-established rules. This is really saying that God himself must act in harmony with their traditions13if he wishes them to acknowledge him as God. They are exalting themselves above God. But this is only the logical result of putting man's ideas in place of God's ideas, and demanding submission to a man-made creed. We see the same thing being done over again to-day. Then the chief question was whether the Sabbath should be kept as God intended that it should be kept, and so be a blessing to men, or whether it should be a burden grievous to be borne because weighted down with the added exactions of men. Now the question is whether the same day which God blessed, and thus made a blessing to men, shall be observed, or whether a rival day, upon which God has never placed a blessing, shall be foisted into its place under ecclesiastical authority alone. Christ himself was condemned by the religious teachers of his day as a Sabbath-breaker, and some of those who choose to follow him in the matter of Sabbath-keeping are being condemned in the same way to-day. But, according to his own testimony, he kept the commandments of God (John 15:10), and now through his word he bears similar testimony (Rev. 14:12) concerning those who refuse to accept the traditions of men about the Sabbath.
2. THE other party among the Pharisees yielded to the evidence, and agreed with Nicodemus (John 3:2) that he exhibited divine credentials. It does not follow that they became believers on Christ, but in view of the nature of the miracle, they were not prepared to accept the logic of their traditions, lest haply they should be "found to fight even against God." They broke away from ecclesiastical bondage far enough to say, "How can a man that is a sinner do such miracles?" This may be a step toward belief on him.
3. JESUS had been among this people, so marked with bigotry and prejudice, and he knew that in healing on the Sabbath day he would be regarded as a transgressor of the law. He was aware that the Pharisees would seize upon such acts with great indignation, and thereby seek to influence the people against him. He knew that they would use these works of mercy as strong arguments to affect the minds of the masses, who had all their lives been bound by the Jewish restrictions and exactions. Nevertheless, he was not prevented by this knowledge from breaking down the senseless wall of superstition that barricaded the Sabbath, and teaching men that charity and benevolence are lawful on all days.
4. "In all his lessons, Jesus presented to men the worthlessness of merely ceremonial obedience. He sought to impress them with the spirituality of the law, unveiling its vital principles, and making plain its eternal obligation. The righteousness of the law was presented to the world in the character of Christ, and the holy, benevolent, and paternal attributes of God were revealed in the Saviour's dealings with mankind."
5. THE prophecy stated that Christ would be "numbered with the transgressors" (Isa. 53:12), and so he was, during his ministry (John 9:24), and at his crucifixion (Mark 15:27, 28).
6. THE Jews were not seeking for evidence that Jesus was the Christ, for they had not only decided against him themselves already, but had threatened with excommunication any who might believe on him. And this being put out of the synagogue was a "punishment involving the direct consequences socially and religiously. It was, in fact, the lesser excommunication, which lasted thirty days, but might be lengthened for continued impenitence, or curtailed by contrition. It shut a person utterly from the synagogue; for even if he entered it, he was reckoned as not present. No mourning for the dead, and no right of circumcision, could take place in his house, and no one but his wife or child could come within four cubits of him."
Suggestions for Further Study.
Jesus made the clay and anointed his eyes; the man went and washed. What lesson is taught in these facts?
Every effort to hinder Christ's work only resulted in advancing it. 2 Cor. 13:8. The semi-official and critical examination into this miracle only established its reality beyond a doubt. How is the same principle illustrated in God's work to-day?
God treated Christ as a sinner. Why? Men treated Christ as a sinner. Why? What was the difference in their treatment of him?
Some now accept the view of the Pharisees that Jesus broke the Sabbath. Are they prepared to accept the conclusion that he was "not of God"?
Were not the Pharisees right in their logic? If a man wilfully breaks the Sabbath, can he be "of God"? What is the present application of this principle?
Are miracles ever wrought through the instrumentality of "a man that is a sinner"? Will the question be of any special interest to this generation?
