Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

a ver. 34.

b ch. xi. 4.

c ch. iv. 34:

v. 19, 36:

xvii. 4.

a

was blind from his birth. 2 And his disciples asked him,
saying, Master, who did sin, this man, or his parents,
that he was born blind? 3 Jesus answered, Neither
hath this man sinned, nor his parents: but that the
works of God should be made manifest in him.
4 c I must

xi. 9:xii. 85: work the works of him that sent me, while it is day: the night cometh, when no man can work. 5 g As long as

d ch. i. 5, 9: iii. 19: viii. 12: xii. 35,

46.

I am in the world, d I am the light of the world. 6 When

e

he had thus spoken, he spat on the ground, and made Mark vii. 33: clay of the spittle, and he anointed the eyes of the blind

viii. 23.

e render, should be.

vi. 1, and vii. 1.

[blocks in formation]

The blind man was sitting begging (ver. 8), possibly proclaiming the fact of his having been so born; for otherwise the disciples could hardly have asked the following question. The incident may have been in the neighbourhood of the temple (Acts iii. 2): but doubtless there were other places where beggars sat, besides the temple entrances.

2.] According to Jewish ideas, every infirmity was the punishment of sin (see ver. 34). From Exod. xx. 5, and the prevailing views on the subject, the disciples may have believed that the man was visited for the sins of his parents: but how could he himself have sinned before his birth? Beza and Grotius refer the question to the doctrine of the transmigration of souls, that he may have sinned in a former state of existence; this however is disproved by the consideration adduced by Lightfoot, that the Pharisees believed that the good souls only passed into other bodies, which would exclude this case. Lightfoot, Lücke, and Meyer refer it to the possibility of sin in the womb; Tholuck to predestinated sin, punished by anticipation De Wette to the general doctrine of the præ-existence of souls, which prevailed both among the Rabbis and Alexandrians: see Wisd. viii. 19, 20.

The question may have been asked vaguely, without any strict application of it to the circumstances, merely taking for granted that some sin must have led to the blindness, and hardly thinking of the nonapplicability of one of the suppositions to this case. Or perhaps, as Stier inclines to suppose, the question may mean, this man, or, for that is out of the question, his parents?' 3.] Our Lord does not of course assert the absolute sinlessness of the man, or of his parents, but answers the question with reference to the reason

why it was asked. Supply therefore after his parents, "that he should be born blind.” Also after but supply “he was born blind.” In the economy of God's Providence, his suffering had its place and aim, and this was to bring out the works of God in his being healed by the Redeemer. De Wette denies this interpretation, and refers the saying merely to the view of our Lord to bring out his own practical design, to make use of this man to prove His divine power. But see ch. xi. 4, which is strictly parallel.

4.] Connected by the words,

work the works, to the former verse. There certainly seems to be some reference to its being the sabbath; see the similar expressions in ch. v. 17. From ver. 5, it seems evident that the day is the appointed course of the working of Jesus on earth, and the night the close of it (see the parallel, ch. xi. 9, 10). It is true, that, according to St. John's universal diction, the death of Jesus is His glorification; but the similitude here regards the effect on the world, see ver. 5; and the language of Rom. xiii. 12 is in accordance with it, as also Luke xxii. 53: John xiv. 30. 5.] This partly explains the day and night of the former verse, partly alludes to the nature of the healing about to take place. As before the raising of Lazarus (ch. xi. 25), He states that He is the Resurrection and the Life; so now, He sets forth Himself as the source of the archetypal spiritual light, of which the natural, now about to be conferred, is only a derivation and symbol. 6.] See Mark vii. 33; viii. 23. The virtue especially of the fasting saliva, in cases of disorders of the eyes, was well known to antiquity. In the accounts of the restoring of a blind man to sight attributed to Vespasian, the use of this remedy occurs. The use of clay also for healing the eyes was not unknown.

man with the clay, 7 and said unto him, Go wash in Neh. fil. 15. the pool of Siloam, (which is by interpretation, Sent.) He went his way therefore, and washed, and came seeing. 8 The neighbours therefore, and they which before had seen him that he was i blind, said, Is not this he that sat and begged? 9 Some said, This is he: others said, He is like him: [but] he said, I am he. 10 Therefore said they unto him, How were thine eyes opened? 11 He answered and said, " A man that is called Jesus made clay, g ver. 6, 7. and anointed mine eyes, and said unto me, Go to the pool of Siloam, and wash: and I went and washed, and I received sight. 12 Then said they unto him, Where is he? He said, I know not. 13 They brought to the Pharisees him that aforetime was blind. 14 And it was the sabbath day when Jesus made the clay, and opened his eyes.

[blocks in formation]

The reason of his being sent to Siloam is uncertain. It may have been as part of the cure, or merely to wash off the clay. The former is most probable.

which is

A beggar blind from his birth would know the localities sufficiently to be able to find his way; so that there is no necessity to suppose a partial restoration of sight before his going. The situation of the fountain and pool of Siloam is very doubtful. On the subject of a recent suggestion respecting the identity of Siloam and Bethesda, see note on ch. v. 1. interpreted] The reason of this derivation being stated has been much doubted. Some consider the words to have been inserted as an early gloss of some allegorical interpreter. But there is no external authority for this supposition. Euthymius says, “I suppose, on account of the blind man being then sent thither :" and Meyer takes this view. But it would be a violent transfer, -of the name of the fountain, to the man who was sent thither. I should rather regard the healing virtue imparted to the VOL. I.

read, a beggar. 1 omit.

water to be denoted, as symbolical of Him
who was sent, and whose mission it was to
give the healing water of life. came,
i. e. came back;-apparently to his own
house, by the next verse. 8.] had
beheld, rather than "had seen.' The
choice of the word implies attention and
habit. 11.] The word rendered received
sight is literally, recovered sight. Sight
being natural to men, the deprivation of it
is regarded as a loss, and the reception of
it, though never enjoyed before, as a re-
covery. 13.] The neighbours appear
to have brought him to the Pharisees,
out of hostility to Jesus (see ver. 12):
and ver. 14 alleges the reason of this:-
or perhaps from fear of the sentence
alluded to in ver. 22. The "Pharisees"
here may have been the court presiding
over the synagogue, or one of the lesser
local courts of Sanhedrim. Lücke inclines
to think they were an assembly of the
great Sanhedrim, whom St. John some-
times names the Pharisees:-see ch. vii. 47;
xi. 46: Meyer regards them as some formal
section of the Pharisees, as a body: but
were there such sections? 14.] Lightfoot
cites from a Rabbinical treatise on the Sab-
bath, that it was forbidden even to put saliva
on the eyelids. But the making the clay,
as a servile work, seems to be here pro-
minently mentioned. Meyer notices,-
and it is interesting, as a minute mark of
accuracy, that the man, in verses 11 and
15, only relates what he himself, as being
blind, had felt he says nothing of the
O o

:

ver. 33.

ch. iii. 2.

15 m Then again the Pharisees also asked him how he had received his sight. He said unto them, He put clay upon mine eyes, and I washed, and do see. 16 Therefore said some of the Pharisees, This man is not of God, because he keepeth not the sabbath day.. Others said, ↳ How can And there was

í ch. vii. 12, 43: a man that is a sinner do such miracles?

x. 19.

k ch. iv. 19: vi. 14.

1 ch. vii. 13:

xii. 42: xix.

38. Acts v. 13.

m ver. 34.

ch. xvi. 2.

spittle.

h

a division among them. 17 They say unto the blind man again, What sayest thou of him, P that he hath opened thine eyes? He said, He is a prophet. 18 q But the Jews did not believe concerning him, that he had been blind, and received his sight, until they called the parents of him that had received his sight. 19 And they asked them, saying, Is this your son, who ye say was born blind? how then doth he now see? 20 His parents answered them and said, We know that this is our son, and that he was born blind: 21 but by what means he now seeth, we know not; or who [ hath] opened his eyes, we know not: he is of age; ask him: he shall speak for himself. 22 These words spake his parents, because they feared the Jews for the Jews had agreed already, that if any man did confess that he was Christ, he m should be put out of the synagogue. 23 Therefore said his parents, He is of

m render, Therefore.
read, They say therefore.
a render, Therefore.

8 render, For this cause.

15.] again refers back to ver. 10. The enquiry was official, as addressed to the chief witness in the matter. We cannot hence infer that no one else was present at the healing but Jesus and His disciples.

16. some....
... others]
Among the latter party would be such as
Nicodemus, Joseph, [Gamaliel ?]; who
probably (Joseph certainly, Luke xxiii. 51)
at last withdrew, and left the majority to
carry out their hate against Jesus.

17.] The question is but one, What sayest
thou of him, that he hath opened (i. e. for
having opened) thine eyes? The stress is
on thou. What hast thou to say to it,
seeing we are divided on the matter?'
Both parties are anxious to have the man's
own view to corroborate theirs.
a pro-
phet, and therefore, from God.
18.]
The hostile party (the Jews,-those in
authority among these variously-minded
Pharisees) disappointed at his direct tes-

П render, from.

P render, seeing that.
romit.

timony against them, betake themselves
to sifting more closely the evidence of the
fact. The parents are summoned as wit-
nesses. 19.] The question is three-
fold, and in strict legal formality: Is
this your son? Was he born blind? How
is it that he now sees ?'
21.] The
pronouns in the latter part of the verse
are emphatic who hath opened his eyes
we know not: ask him: he is of age: he
shall speak for himself. 22.] It

is not said when this resolution was come
to; and this also speaks for an interval
between ch. vii., viii., and this incident.
It could hardly have been before the coun-
cil at the conclusion of ch. vii.

put out of the synagogue] Probably the first of the three stages of Jewish excommunication,--the being shut out from the synagogue and household for thirty days, but without any anathema. The other two, the repetition of the above, accom

n

Josh. vii. 19.

1 Sam. vi. 5.

age; ask him. 24t Then again called they the man that was blind, and said unto him, Give a God the praise: 0 we know that this man is a sinner. 25 He answered and over. 16. said, Whether he be a sinner or no, I know not one thing I know, that, whereas I was blind, now I see. 26 z Then said they to him [a again], What did he to thee? how opened he thine eyes? 27 He answered them, I have told you already, and ye did not hear: wherefore would ye hear it again? b will ye also be his disciples? 28 [c Then] they reviled him, and said, Thou art his disciple; but we are Moses' disciples. 29 We know that God spake unto Moses : e as for this fellow, P we know not from whence he is. 30 The man. answered and said unto them, 9 Why herein is a marvellous thing, that ye know not from whence he is, and yet he [chath] opened mine eyes. 31 Now we know that God heareth not sinners: but if

г

[blocks in formation]

panied by a curse, and final exclusion,— would be too harsh, and perhaps were not in use so early. Trench regards the resolution not as a token that the Sanhedrim had pronounced Him a false Christ, but as shewing that they forbade a private man to anticipate their decision on this point by confessing Him. But perhaps this may be questioned.

24. Give glory to God] not, Give God the praise' (A. V.) i. e. 'the glory of thy healing:' for the Pharisees want to overawe the man by their authority, and make him deny the miracle altogether. The words are a form of adjuration (see Josh. vii. 19), to tell the truth, q. d. Remember that you are in God's presence, and speak as unto Him.'

25.] The man shrewdly evades the inference and states again the simple fact. We must render his words at the end of the verse, not "whereas I WAS blind, now I see," as A. V.: but being a blind man, or as in text, though a blind man, I now see. The shrewd and naïve disposition of the man furnishes the key to the ænigmatical expression. He puts it to them as the problem, the fact of which he knows for cer

p ch. viii. 14.

ach. iii. 10. xxxv. 12, 13. xvi. 18.

r Job xxvii. 9:

Ps. xviii. 41: xxxiv. 15:

Prov. i. 28:

XV. 29: xxviii. 9.

Jer. xi. 11.
xiv. 12.

Ezek. viii.
Zech.

18. Mic. iii.

vii. 13.

render, is a sinner.

d render, hath spoken.

tain but the reason of which it was for
them to solve, that he, whom they all knew
as a blind man, now saw. 26.] They
perhaps are trying to shake his evidence,-
or to make him state something which
should bring out some stronger violation of
the sabbath. 27.] did not hear must
be in its special meaning of 'did not heed
it.' The latter clause is of course ironical:
'you seem so anxious to hear particulars
about Him, that you must surely be in-
tending to become His disciples.'

29.] God hath spoken, not spake, is im-
portant: it betokens the abiding finality of
God's revelation to Moses, in their esti-
mation: as if they said, "We stand by God's
revelation to Moses." from whence,-
'whether from God or not.' But see ch.
vii. 27, 28, where a very different reason is
given for disbelieving Him to be the Christ.

30.] Why herein is, &c. This well
expresses the sense of the original. The
man takes what their words had conceded,
and proceeds to argue upon it.
ye is
emphatic: you, whose business it is to
know such things.
31.] He expresses
a general popular conviction, that one who

s ver. 16.

t ver. 2.

u Matt. xiv.

33: xvi. 16.
Mark i. 1.

ch. x. 36.

1 John v. 13.

Ich. iv. 26.

See ch. iii.

17: xii. 47.

z Matt. xiii. 13.

any man be a worshipper of God, and doeth his will, him he heareth. 32 Since the world began 8 was it not heard that any man opened the eyes of one that was born blind. 33 If this man were not of God, he could do nothing. 34 They answered and said unto him, Thou wast altogether born in sins, and dost thou teach us?. And they cast him out.

t

35 Jesus heard that they had cast him out; and i when he had found him, he said unto him, Dost thou believe on u the Son of God? 36 He answered and said, Who is he, Lord, that I might believe on him? 37 And] Jesus said unto him, Thou hast both seen him, and it is he that talketh with thee. 38 And he said, Lord, I believe. And

[ocr errors]

y ch. v. 22, 27. he worshipped him. 39 And Jesus said, y For judgment "I am come into this world, that they which see not might see; and that they which see might be made blind. 40 And some of the Pharisees which were with him heard

[blocks in formation]

could do these things, must be a pious man: and (ver. 32) very eminently so, since this miracle was unprecedented. 33.] nothing, i. e.-nothing of this kind, much less such a thing as this. 34.1 See on ver. 2. altogether, deeply and entirely, as thy infirmity proved. They forget that the two charges, - one that he had never been born blind, and so was an impostor, the other, that he bore the mark of God's anger in a blindness that reached back to his birth,- will not agree together.' Trench. they cast him out: i. e. they excommunicated him: see on ver. 22. It cannot merely mean, ‘they cast him out of the court,' as many, both ancient and modern, interpret it: see next verse, where it would hardly be stated that Jesus heard of it, unless it had been some public formal

act. 35.] Art thou he, whom our rulers have severely treated on account of thy belief in Jesus whom men call Christ? Dost thou, even after this treatment, believe on the Son of God?' Lampe. 36.] This Son of God surpasses his present comprehension: and therefore, true to his simple and guileless character, he asks for further information about Him.

37.] These words, Thou hast both seen him, &c. serve to remind the man of the

1 omit.

n render, those.

benefit he has received, and to awaken in him the liveliest gratitude: compare Luke ii. 30. They do not refer to a former seeing, when he was healed: this was the first time that he had seen his Benefactor. 39.] There seems to be an interval between the last verse and this, and the narrative appears to be taken up again at some subsequent time when this miracle became again the subject of discourse.

The blind man had recovered sight in two senses,-bodily and spiritual. And as our Lord always treats of the spiritual as paramount, including the bodily, so here He proceeds to speak of spiritual sight.

'We are all, according to the spirit of nature, no better than persons born blind; and to know and confess this our blindness, is our first and only true sight, out of which the grace of the Lord can afterwards bring about a complete receiving of sight. The "becoming blind," on the other hand, is partly an ironical expression for remaining blind, but partly also has a real meaning in the increasing darkening and hardening which takes place through unbelief.' Stier. they which see here answer to "they which are whole," and "the righteous" of Matt. ix. 12, 13; see note there. 40.] They ask the ques

« AnteriorContinuar »