Unbelief and the Miraculous, Part 2 (John 9:18–34)

Series: “John: Life in Christ’s Name”Text: John 9:18–34

By: Shaun Marksbury Date: October 15, 2023

Venue: Living Water Baptist ChurchOccasion: AM Service

Introduction

People love to be viewed as intellectual, curious, and open minded. However, when we place the claims of Jesus Christ in front of them, they often reject the truth of God. They might ask questions that seem to probe the possibilities, but sadly, they seem to want to find error rather than truth. They want to avoid coming to Christ.

That’s what we’ve been considering in this chapter. You’ll remember last time that there was much confusion over how a man born blind could receive his sight. So drastic was this man’s transformation that his neighbors couldn’t agree on whether he was the same man (vv. 8–9). Because he testified that it was Jesus who healed him, they decided to take him to the Pharisees (vv. 11–13).

Unfortunately, the Pharisees, the supposed religious leaders, refused to acknowledge that Jesus could work such a miracle. They focused on the fact that Jesus made a clay or a mud pack for this man’s eyes on the Sabbath, which they viewed as a violation of the Law. However, even on that point, there was confusion, as v. 16 notes, as it seems incredible that God would allow a sinner to perform such a work.

We also noted underlying this text is great irony. The man who was born blind (which John repeats throughout this chapter) can see more clearly that everyone else! He doesn’t know everything about Jesus yet, but he went from calling Jesus a “man” in v. 11 to calling Him a prophet in v. 17. As we complete this chapter, this man will turn to full faith in Christ. It’s interesting how the unbelief of others will sometimes have a sharpening effect on your own faith!

Those who don’t believe here face an undeniable miracle, but they do everything they can to deny it. That’s what we see: Those refusing to believe explain away the truth. So, note first that those who don’t believe look for any excuse to continue unbelief (vv. 18–26). Second, those who don’t believe revile those who continue in belief (vv. 27–34).

Those who don’t believe look for any excuse to continue unbelief (vv. 18–26).

The Jews then did not believe it of him, that he had been blind and had received sight, until they called the parents of the very one who had received his sight, and questioned them, saying, “Is this your son, who you say was born blind? Then how does he now see?”

His parents answered them and said, “We know that this is our son, and that he was born blind; but how he now sees, we do not know; or who opened his eyes, we do not know. Ask him; he is of age, he will speak for himself.” His parents said this because they were afraid of the Jews; for the Jews had already agreed that if anyone confessed Him to be Christ, he was to be put out of the synagogue. For this reason his parents said, “He is of age; ask him.”

So a 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.” He then answered, “Whether He is a sinner, I do not know; one thing I do know, that though I was blind, now I see.” So they said to him, “What did He do to you? How did He open your eyes?”

The Pharisees refuse to believe that Jesus healed this man. They certainly are not going to accept the man’s viewpoint that Jesus is a prophet. They’ve already declared Jesus isn’t from God and a sinner (v. 16), which they repeat in v. 24. So, they begin looking for any excuse to continue in their unbelief.

The first option they set in on seems to be that the man may be pulling a fast one, perhaps colluding with Jesus. So, they call the man’s parents. They may have thought that this was reasonable from their perspective, withholding judgment until they had more information, but the truth is that they already decided what they want to believe about this man’s account.

So, they ask the parents in v. 19, “Is this your son, who you say was born blind?” They say this with an emphatic pronoun in the original language: “Who you, you say was born blind?” They do this perhaps to suggest deception as they ask how he now sees.

The parents, however, do not want to say too much, carefully answering their line of questioning. “We know that this is our son,” they begin, continuing, “and that he was born blind.” As one commentator puts it, they “are uncomfortable with the Jews’ line of attack.”

Yet, they state in the next verse that they don’t know how he sees or who opened his eyes. They say they don’t know twice, even say it the second time with emphasis — “we, we do not know.” They place it back on their son, saying that he’s an adult and can speak for himself. They may have heard what their son had said, but they were probably not present (the text doesn’t say they were), so they point the Pharisees back to their son’s testimony; that’s all they have, as well.

Of course, because they knew their son, they likely believed him. That would explain why we read what we do next in the text: “His parents said this because they were afraid of the Jews” (v. 22). These parents cared for their son and must have been overjoyed to hear that Jesus had healed him, only to now fear the wrath of their own leaders. Already, back in John 7:13, the people were afraid of the Jewish leadership, and now we see that intensified.

The Apostle John explains here that the leaders had already agreed or “decided” (NIV) to put people out of the synagogue who confessed Christ. Now, we want to be clear as to what the problem is. We would call this excommunication today, where someone is placed under discipline and disinvited from the fellowship. This is something that Jesus commanded in Matthew 18, and His apostles discuss it in other places like 1 Corinthians 5.

So, the concept of excommunication isn’t the problem. Interestingly, the most extreme Jewish synagogue excommunication resulted in the person being “cut off from all its blessings, hopes, and promises, like a pagan or Gentile,” and Jesus said that the person refusing to submit to church discipline is to “be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector” (Matt. 18:17), evidencing the link between the concepts. Many Christians think that it’s wrong to put people out of the church; while it can be done in an incorrect and abusive manner, it’s just as dangerous to the health of the body never to practice any discipline (which is what Paul says in 1 Corinthians 5).

Some might accept the concept of excommunication, but they say that the issue here is that the leaders are deciding this. However, that is nowhere forbidden in the New Testament. Moreover, as one Bible dictionary notes here, “The office of elder in the New Testament church cannot be fully understood without the background of the Old Testament local elder,” going on to note, “The first Christians were Jewish and the office was familiar to them.” In other words, the elders of the church in the New Testament are modeled after the Jewish synagogue authorities, which is why both the apostles and the elders they established make decisions for the church in places like Acts 15. So, the issue here isn’t that the leaders of the synagogue are rolling up their sleeves and debating whether someone confessing Jesus to be the Christ is in keeping with sound doctrine and the general fellowship — they have the right and the duty to do so.

So, what is the issue? The problem is that Jesus is the Christ, the Messiah, and they decide against Him. This is evidence that they had already considered Jesus’s messianic claims and rejected them. They decide to lead the people astray simply because they don’t want Jesus to be the Christ. So, they determined that excommunication was the proper course of action for all confessors of Jesus. As one commentator notes of being put out of the synagogue:

The Jews had three types of excommunication: one lasting 30 days, during which the person could not come within six feet of anybody else; one for an indefinite time, during which the person was excluded from all fellowship and worship; and one that meant absolute expulsion forever. These judgments were very serious because no one could conduct business with a person who was excommunicated.

This is something that true followers of Jesus had to consider. Jesus later warns His disciples that they would be ejected from the synagogues (John 16:2). Even today, if someone comes to Christ in a Jewish, Mormon, Jehovah’s Witness, or a Muslim community, it may mean that this person will face the hatred and scorn of their parents, their neighbors, and may suffer reduced employment and living opportunities as a result. That’s why Jesus calls any potential disciple to first count the cost — life may be harder for some, but He also pronounced those blessed who are ostracized for His sake (Luke 6:22).

Now, the Pharisees are not quite there yet with this situation, because so far, no one has confessed Jesus to be the Messiah. They are still trying to poke holes in this healing testimony, though. So, in v. 24, they call “the man who had been blind” a second time. Note the irony there — they’ve confirmed that this man was born blind, and that he obviously sees now, and therefore, the miracle. However, they will not accept that explanation.

So, they say, “Give glory to God; we know that this man is a sinner.” The expression, “give glory to God,” isn’t a command so much for praise but of oath-making. In Joshua 7:19, when Achan had sinned, Joshua says, “My son, I implore you, give glory to the Lord, the God of Israel, and give praise to Him; and tell me now what you have done. Do not hide it from me.” Here, this is a case where they were suggesting that the man was being dishonest with them and needed to glorify God by telling them the truth.

Ironically, he has been glorifying God by announcing it was Jesus who healed him. However, they again refer to Jesus with contempt, calling Him a sinner. They base this assessment on Jesus’s refusal to submit to their Sabbath traditions (v. 16). Of course, they didn’t really know; Jesus had said to their faces in John 8:46, “Which one of you convicts Me of sin?” As one commentary notes, they are pressuring this man with their statement.

However, this man answers with pure, refreshing honesty in the next verse. He says, “Whether He is a sinner, I do not know; one thing I do know, that though I was blind, now I see.” We could note here that Scripture clearly identifies Jesus as sinless, but there’s no way for this man to know at this point. He does know that he spent his own life in darkness, however, and that Jesus was the one who turned on the lights! For this man, this fact speaks volumes about Jesus.

This approach is nothing less than reasonable. However, the Pharisees still won’t have it. They continue to press the man with questions in v. 26 — “What did He do to you? How did He open your eyes?” This evidences not curiosity on their parts but a continued probe for the sake of accusation.

Even this man with his brand-new eyes can see it. So, his response will have more of a serrated edge. Yet, nothing he says will compare to the response they give, as we see next.

Those who don’t believe revile those who continue in belief (vv. 27–34).

He answered them, “I told you already and you did not listen; why do you want to hear it again? You do not want to become His disciples too, do you?” They reviled him and said, “You are His disciple, but we are disciples of Moses. “We know that God has spoken to Moses, but as for this man, we do not know where He is from.”

The man answered and said to them, “Well, here is an amazing thing, that you do not know where He is from, and yet He opened my eyes. We know that God does not hear sinners; but if anyone is God-fearing and does His will, He hears him. Since the beginning of time it has never been heard that anyone opened the eyes of a person born blind. If this man were not from God, He could do nothing.”

They answered him, “You were born entirely in sins, and are you teaching us?” So they put him out.

He isn’t interested in going around in circles with them. It’s obvious to him at this point that they are just looking for problems with his story out of their hatred for Jesus. That’s why he asks, “You do not want to become His disciples too, do you?” His question expects a negative response, but he asks it anyway to put an end to all pretenses. In fact, his words here imply that he’s ready to be Jesus’s disciple, which he purposefully states in the midst of this hostile audience.

So, we read first that they reviled him. They don’t like his sass and give it back to him! As one commentator notes, “The idea of this illiterate beggar sarcastically suggesting they were interested in Jesus was more than their pride could take.” Because of pride, people turn away from Christ and seek to tear down those who follow Him. Those who face it for the sake of Christ must remember that their blessed, though, for Jesus said, “Blessed are you when people insult you and persecute you, and falsely say all kinds of evil against you because of Me” (Matt. 5:11).

Reviling is a trait of worldliness, by the way. We might expect this behavior from lost Pharisees, but no Christian should engage in gossip and revile others. We see this in 1 Corinthians 5:11, which says, “But actually, I wrote to you not to associate with any so-called brother if he is an immoral person,” like “a reviler … not even to eat with such a one.” So, if anyone engages in reviling someone else here, that person should pass on communion and take time to repent, or risk putting themselves under church discipline.

These men revile, and as one commentator notes, “At this point, the meeting degenerated into a shouting match of insults.” The first insult, at least in their minds, was to say, “You are His disciple.” They want to make a clear separation — saying, by implication, that this man is now a disciple of the wrong man.

They continue to incorrectly state that they are the disciples of Moses. This is what they claim, but Jesus said that Moses wrote of Him and accuses them (John 5:45), noting that Scripture condemns those in opposition to Him (vv. 45–47). Nonetheless, they double down in this claim to support their pride and self-righteousness.

Now, note that those who are wrong can say right things. They say in v. 29, “We know that God has spoken to Moses.” They affirm a proper understanding in this moment of revelation, that God gave Moses the Law, something the Apostle John affirmed in John 1:17. Just because a person, like a Pharisee, has something fundamentally wrong in his theology doesn’t mean we reject the true theology they believed.

What was fundamentally wrong in their theology? They rejected the Christ Moses predicted. They say they don’t know where Jesus is coming from, a denial of His divine revelation and authority. That’s no surprise; Jesus previously said He knows, but they don’t (John 8:14).

This man continues to press them, holding them accountable to what they just said. He calls it amazing or marvelous that they don’t know where Jesus gets His authority. They should know, and they do, though they’ve rejected it. This man, however, has proof positive of a miracle literally on his face! He showed a more honest assessment than the spiritual leaders did.

He then gives a fascinating argument, which we could spend much time examining. Yet, as one summary notes of these verses, “He uses a form of deductive reasoning used in logic. Major premise—God does not listen to sinners. Minor premise—this man healed a man of blindness. Conclusion—God must have listened to him and he must be from God.” In other words, God won’t give His attention to someone like the Pharisees describe, and yet, only God could allow someone to heal his congenital condition. Therefore, Jesus is from God.

This is where the debate lies. We saw this back in John 9:16 — “Therefore some of the Pharisees were saying, ‘This man is not from God, because He does not keep the Sabbath.’ But others were saying, ‘How can a man who is a sinner perform such signs?’ And there was a division among them.” It is possible, of course, for there to be lying signs and wonders. However, they assume Jesus broke the Sabbath because He didn’t keep their traditions, not because He dishonored the heart of the commandment. The man’s argument isn’t iron-clad, but it’s honest, and true spiritual leaders would reconsider their false assessment that Jesus is a sinner, especially considering the obvious miracle.

The Pharisees were not interested in debate, however. They had already decided against Jesus, and all they see before them is an uneducated beggar telling them what to think. They’re the spiritual elite; everyone else is just (as the rabbinic literature records) the am ha-eretz, the people of the land. He’s part of the unwashed masses.

Moreover, he was born blind. So, they say, “You were born entirely in sins, and are you teaching us?” To be clear, they aren’t referring to the doctrine of original sin, considering that they are creating a division between him and them. This may be a reference back to the belief that the disciples voiced in v. 2, that this man was born blind because he somehow sinned while in the womb.

This amounts to an ad hominen attack; and argument “against the man.” When someone runs out of substantial arguments, he often resorts to name calling and shaming. This is what the Pharisees do to try to shut this man down.

They do so with the full force of their authority. We read it in one, simple statement: “So they put him out.” They excommunicated him from the synagogue. Usually, a formal meeting of the Sanhedrin would be required for excommunication, but they make their decision right there, in the moment.

Conclusion

This seems like a dark moment to end on, but Jesus will find this man in the next verses. He doesn’t leave this man comfortless or as an orphan, as we discussed last week. He ensures that this man comes to a full understanding of who He is, making him a true disciple.

A lot of skeptics ask questions, like these Pharisees did. In some cases, those questions lead to honest reflection and a desire for the truth. In others, though, the questions are meant to push away the truth.

If you don’t believe in Jesus, I hope that you will come to honestly investigate His claims. Don’t just look for excuses to keep disbelieving, and don’t simply sit and mock those who believe in Jesus. Look at all the evidence as an impartial judge would, and I’m sure you will come to believe in the Lord. I hope that you’re not avoiding starting such an investigation because you fear that outcome!

For those who believe, take heart. People will revile and persecute. However, our Lord calls us blessed when this happens. Pray for unbelievers, blessing those who say mean and untrue things about you, and continue to follow the Lord who opened your eyes.