BIBLES NET. COM
Matthew Henry’s Complete Commentary
on the Whole Bible
Back to Biblesnet.com Home Page
|
[Previous] [Next] |
Matthew Henry |
J O H N.
CHAP. IX.
After Christ’s departure out of the temple, in the close of the
foregoing chapter, and before this happened which is recorded in this
chapter, he had been for some time abroad in the country, it is
supposed about two or three months; in which interval of time Dr.
Lightfoot and other harmonists place all the passages that occur from
What is recorded in
was at the feast of tabernacles, in September; what is recorded in this
and the following chapter was at the feast of dedication in December,
Mr. Clark and others place this immediately after the foregoing
chapter. In this chapter we have,
I. The miraculous cure of a man that was born blind,
II. The discourses which were occasioned by it.
1. A discourse of the neighbours among themselves, and with the man,
2. Between the Pharisees and the man,
3. Between Christ and the poor man,
4. Between Christ and the Pharisees,
| Sight Given to One Born Blind. |
|
|
1 And as Jesus passed by, he saw a man which 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 I must work the works of him that sent me, while it is day:
the night cometh, when no man can work.
5 As long as I am in the world, I am the light of the world.
6 When he had thus spoken, he spat on the ground, and made clay
of the spittle, and he anointed the eyes of the blind man with
the clay,
7 And said unto him, Go, wash in the pool of Siloam, (which is
by interpretation, Sent.) He went his way therefore, and washed,
and came seeing.
We have here sight given to a poor beggar that had been blind from his
birth. Observe,
I. The notice which our Lord Jesus took of the piteous case of this
poor blind man
(v. 1):
As Jesus passed by he saw a man which was blind from his birth.
The first words seem to refer to the last of the foregoing chapter, and
countenance the opinion of those who in the harmony place this story
immediately after that. There it was said, paregen—he
passed by, and here, without so much as repeating him name (though
our translators supply it) kai parago—and as he
passed by.
1. Though the Jews had so basely abused him, both by
word and deed gave him the highest provocation imaginable, yet he did
not miss any opportunity of doing good among them, nor take up a
resolution, as justly he might have done, never to have favoured them
with any good offices. The cure of this blind man was a kindness to
the public, enabling him to work for his living who before was a
charge and burden to the neighbourhood. It is noble, and generous, and
Christ-like, to be willing to serve the public, even when we are
slighted and disobliged by them, or think ourselves so. Though he was
in his flight from a threatening danger, and escaping for his life, yet
he willingly halted and staid awhile to show mercy to this poor man. We
make more haste than good speed when we out-run opportunities of doing
good.
3. When the Pharisees drove Christ from them, he went to this poor
blind beggar. Some of the ancients make this a figure of the bringing
of the gospel to the Gentiles, who sat in darkness, when the
Jews had rejected it, and driven it from them.
4. Christ took this poor blind man in his way, and cured him in
transitu–as he passed by. Thus should we take occasions of doing
good, even as we pass by, wherever we are.
Now,
(1.) The condition of this poor man was very sad. He was blind,
and had been so from his birth. If the light is sweet, how
melancholy must it needs be for a man, all his days, to eat in
darkness! He that is blind has no enjoyment of the
light, but he that is born blind has no idea of it.
Methinks such a one would give a great deal to have his curiosity
satisfied with but one day’s sight of light and colours, shapes and
figures, though he were never to see them more. Why is the
light of life given to one that is in this misery, that
is deprived of the light of the sun, whose way is thus hid,
and whom God hath thus hedged in?
Job iii. 20-23.
Let us bless God that it was not our case. The eye is one of the most
curious parts of the body, its structure exceedingly nice and fine. In
the formation of animals, it is said to be the first part that appears
distinctly discernible. What a mercy is it that there was no
miscarriage in the making of ours! Christ cured many that were blind by
disease or accident, but here he cured one that was born blind.
[1.] That he might give an instance of his power to help in the most
desperate cases, and to relieve when none else can.
[2.] That he might give a specimen of the work of his grace upon
the souls of sinners, which gives sight to those that were by nature
blind.
(2.) The compassions of our Lord Jesus towards him were very tender. He
saw him; that is, he took cognizance of his case, and looked
upon him with concern. When God is about to work deliverance, he is
said to see the affliction; so Christ saw this poor man. Others
saw him, but not as he did. This poor man could not see Christ, but
Christ saw him, and anticipated both his prayers and expectations with
a surprising cure. Christ is often found of those that seek him not,
nor see him,
And, if we know or apprehend any thing of Christ, it is because we were
first known of him
and apprehended by him,
II. The discourse between Christ and his disciples concerning this man.
When he departed out of the temple they went along with him: for
these were they that continued with him in his temptations, and
followed him whithersoever he went; and they lost nothing by their
adherence to him, but gained experience abundantly. Observe,
1. The question which the disciples put to their Master upon this blind
man’s case,
v. 2.
When Christ looked upon him, they had an eye to him too; Christ’s
compassion should kindle ours. It is probable that Christ told them
this poor man was born blind, or they knew it by common fame; but they
did not move Christ to heal him. Instead of this, they started a very
odd question concerning him: Rabbi, who sinned, this man or his
parents, that he was born blind? Now this question of theirs
was,
(1.) Uncharitably censorious. They take it for granted that this
extraordinary calamity was the punishment of some uncommon wickedness,
and that this man was a sinner above all men that dwelt at Jerusalem,
For the barbarous people to infer, Surely this man is a
murderer, was not so strange; but it was inexcusable in
them, who knew the scriptures, who had read that all things come
alike to all, and knew that it was adjudged in Job’s case that the
greatest sufferers are not therefore to be looked upon as the
greatest sinners. The grace of repentance calls our own afflictions
punishments, but the grace of charity calls the afflictions of
others trials, unless the contrary is very evident.
(2.) It was unnecessarily curious. Concluding this calamity to
be inflicted for some very heinous crime, they ask, Who were the
criminals, this man or his parents? And what was this to them? Or
what good would it do them to know it? We are apt to be more
inquisitive concerning other people’s sins than concerning our own;
whereas, it is more our concern to know wherefore God contends with us
than wherefore he contends with others; for to judge ourselves is our
sin. They enquire,
[1.] Whether this man was punished thus for some sin of his own, either
committed or foreseen before his birth. Some think that the disciples
were tainted with the Pythagorean notion of the pre-existence of
souls, and their transmigration from one body to another. Was
this man’s soul condemned to the dungeon of this blind body to punish
it for some great sin committed in another body which it had before
animated? The Pharisees seem to have had the same opinion of his case
when they said, Thou wast altogether born in sin
(v. 34),
as if all those, and those only, were born in sin whom nature had
stigmatized. Or,
[2.] Whether he was punished for the wickedness of his parents, which
God sometimes visits upon the children. It is a good reason why
parents should take heed of sin, lest their children smart for it when
they are gone. Let not us thus be cruel to our own, as the ostrich
in the wilderness. Perhaps the disciples asked this, not as
believing that this was the punishment of some actual sin of his own or
his parents, but Christ having intimated to another patient that his
sin was the cause of this impotency
(ch. v. 14),
“Master,” say they, “whose sin is the cause of this impotency?” Being
at a loss what construction to put upon this providence, they desire to
be informed. The equity of God’s dispensations is always certain, for
his righteousness is as the great mountains, but not always to
be accounted for, for his judgments are a great deep.
2. Christ’s answer to this question. He was always apt to teach,
and to rectify his disciples’ mistakes.
(1.) He gives the reason of this poor man’s blindness: “Neither has
this man sinned nor his parents, but he was born blind, and has
continued so to this day, that now at last the works of God should
be made manifest in him,”
v. 3.
Here Christ, who perfectly knew the secret springs of the divine
counsels, told them two things concerning such uncommon calamities:–
[1.] That they are not always inflicted as punishments of sin. The
sinfulness of the whole race of mankind does indeed justify God in all
the miseries of human life; so that those who have the least share of
them must say that God is kind, and those who have the largest
share must not say that he is unjust; but many are made much
more miserable than others in this life who are not at all more
sinful. Not but that this man was a sinner, and his parents
sinners, but is was not any uncommon guilt that God had an eye to in
inflicting this upon him. Note, We must take heed of judging any to be
great sinners merely because they are great sufferers, lest we be
found, not only persecuting those whom God has smitten
(Ps. lxix. 26),
but accusing those whom he has justified, and condemning those
for whom Christ died, which is daring and dangerous,
[2.] That they are sometimes intended purely for the glory of
God, and the manifesting of his works. God has a sovereignty
over all his creatures and an exclusive right in them, and may make
them serviceable to his glory in such a way as he thinks fit, in doing
or suffering; and if God be glorified, either by us or in us, we were
not made in vain. This man was born blind, and it was
worth while for him to be so, and to continue thus long dark, that
the works of God might be manifest in him. That is, First,
That the attributes of God might be made manifest in him: his
justice in making sinful man liable to such grievous calamities; his
ordinary power and goodness in supporting a poor man under such a
grievous and tedious affliction, especially that his extraordinary
power and goodness might be manifested in curing him. Note, The
difficulties of providence, otherwise unaccountable, may be resolved
into this–God intends in them to show himself, to declare his
glory, to make himself to be taken notice of. Those who regard him not
in the ordinary course of things are sometimes alarmed by things
extraordinary. How contentedly then may a good man be a loser in his
comforts, while he is sure that thereby God will be one way or
other a gainer in his glory! Secondly, That the counsels of God
concerning the Redeemer might be manifested in him. He was born
blind that our Lord Jesus might have the honour of curing
him, and might therein prove himself sent of God to be the true
light to the world. Thus the fall of man was permitted, and the
blindness that followed it, that the works of God might be
manifest in opening the eyes of the blind. It was now a great
while since this man was born blind, and yet it never appeared till now
why he was so. Note, The intentions of Providence commonly do
not appear till a great while after the event, perhaps many
years after. The sentences in the book of providence are sometimes
long, and you must read a great way before you can apprehend the
sense of them.
(2.) He gives the reason of his own forwardness and readiness to help
and heal him,
It was not for ostentation, but in pursuance of his undertaking: I
must work the works of him that sent me (of which this is one),
while it is day, and working time; the night cometh, the
period of that day, when no man can work. This is not only a
reason shy Christ was constant in doing good to the souls and bodies of
men, but why particularly he did this, though it was the sabbath day,
on which works of necessity might be done, and he proves this to be a
work of necessity.
[1.] It was his Father’s will: I must work the works of him that
sent me. Note, First, The Father, when he sent his Son into
the world, gave him work to do; he did not come into the world
to take state, but to do business; whom God sends he employs, for he
sends none to be idle. Secondly, The works Christ had to do were
the works of him that sent him, not only appointed by
him, but done for him; he was a worker together with God.
Thirdly, He was pleased to lay himself under the strongest
obligations to do the business he was sent about: I must work.
He engaged his heart, in the covenant of redemption, to draw
near, and approach to God as Mediator,
Shall we be willing to be loose, when Christ was willing to be
bound? Fourthly, Christ, having laid himself under obligations
to do his work, laid out himself with the utmost vigour and industry in
his work. He worked the works he had to do; did
ergazesthai ta erga—made a business of that which was
his business. It is not enough to look at our work, and talk over
it, but we must work it.
[2.] Now was his opportunity: I must work while it is day, while
the time lasts which is appointed to work in, and while the light lasts
which is given to work by. Christ himself had his day. First,
All the business of the mediatorial kingdom was to be done
within the limits of time, and in this world; for at the end of the
world, when time shall be no more, the kingdom shall be delivered up
to God, even the Father, and the mystery of God finished.
Secondly, all the work he had to do in his own person here
on earth was to be done before his death; the time of his living
in this world is the day here spoken of. Note, The time of our
life is our day, in which it concerns us to do the work of the
day. Day-time is the proper season for work
during the day of life we must be busy, not waste day-time, nor
play by day-light; it will be time enough to rest when our day
is done, for it is but a day.
[3.] The period of his opportunity was at hand, and therefore he would
be busy; The night comes when no man can work. Note, The
consideration of our death approaching should quicken us to improve all
the opportunities of life, both for doing and getting good. The
night comes, it will come certainly, may come suddenly, is coming
nearer and nearer. We cannot compute how nigh our sun is, it may go
down at noon; nor can we promise ourselves a twilight between the day
of life and the night of death. When the night comes we cannot
work, because the light afforded us to work by is
extinguished; the grave is a land of darkness, and our work
cannot be done in the dark. And, besides, our time allotted us
for our work will then have expired; when our Master tied us to
duty he tied us to time too; when night comes, call the
labourers; we must then show our work, and receive according
to the things done. In the world of retribution we are no longer
probationers; it is too late to bid when the inch of candle is
dropped. Christ uses this as an argument with himself to be
diligent, though he had no opposition from within to struggle with;
much more need have we to work upon our hearts these and the like
considerations to quicken us.
[4.] His business in the world was to enlighten it
(v. 5):
As long as I am in the world, and that will not be long, I am
the light of the world. He had said this before,
He is the Sun of righteousness, that has not only light in his
wings for those that can see, but healing in his wings, or beams, for
those that are blind and cannot see, therein far exceeding in virtue
that great light which rules by day. Christ would cure this
blind man, the representative of a blind world, because he came to be
the light of the world, not only to give light, but to
give sight. Now this gives us, First, A great
encouragement to come to him, as a guiding, quickening,
refreshing light. To whom should we look but to him? Which way should
we turn our eyes, but to the light? We partake of the sun’s light, and
so we may of Christ’s grace, without money and without price.
Secondly, A good example of usefulness in the world. What
Christ saith of himself, he saith of his disciples: You are lights
in the world, and, if so, Let your light shine. What were
candles made for but to burn?
III. The manner of the cure of the blind man,
The circumstances of the miracle are singular, and no doubt
significant. When he had thus spoken for the instruction of his
disciples, and the opening of their understandings, he addressed
himself to the opening of the blind man’s eyes. He did not defer it
till he could do it either more privately, for his greater safety, or
more publicly, for his greater honour, or till the sabbath was past,
when it would give less offence. What good we have opportunity of doing
we should do quickly; he that will never do a good work till there is
nothing to be objected against it will leave many a good work for ever
undone,
In the cure observe,
1. The preparation of the eye-salve. Christ spat on the ground, and
made clay of the spittle. He could have cured him with a word, as
he did others, but he chose to do it in this way to show that he is not
tied to any method. He made clay of his own spittle, because
there was no water near; and he would teach us not to be nice or
curious, but, when we have at any time occasion, to be willing to take
up with that which is next hand, if it will but serve the turn.
Why should we go about for that which may as well be had and
done a nearer way? Christ’s making use of his own spittle
intimates that there is healing virtue in every thing that belongs to
Christ; clay made of Christ’s spittle was much more precious than the
balm of Gilead.
2. The application of it to the place: He anointed the eyes of the
blind man with the clay. Or, as the margin reads it, He
spread (epechrise), he daubed the clay upon the
eyes of the blind man, like a tender physician; he did it himself
with his own hand, though the patient was a beggar. Now Christ did
this,
(1.) To magnify his power in making a blind man to see by that method
which one would think more likely to make a seeing man blind. Daubing
clay on the eyes would close them up, but never open
them. Note, The power of God often works by contraries; and he
makes men feel their own blindness before he gives them sight.
(2.) To give an intimation that it was his mighty hand, the very same
that at first made man out of the clay; for by him God made
the worlds, both the great world, and man the little world. Man was
formed out of the clay, and moulded like the clay, and here
Christ used the same materials to give sight to the body that at first
he used to give being to it.
(3.) To represent and typify the healing and opening of the eyes of the
mind by the grace of Jesus Christ. The design of the gospel is to
open men’s eyes,
Acts xxvi. 18.
Now the eye-salve that does the work is of Christ’s preparing; it is
made up, not as this, of his spittle, but of his blood, the blood and
water that came out of his pierced side; we must come to Christ for
the eye-salve,
Rev. iii. 18.
He only is able, and he only is appointed, to make it up,
The means used in this work are very weak and unlikely, and are made
effectual only by the power of Christ; when a dark world was to be
enlightened, and nations of blind souls were to have their eyes opened,
God chose the foolish things, and weak, and despised, for the
doing of it. And the method Christ takes is first to make men feel
themselves blind, as this poor man did whose eyes were daubed with
clay, and then to give them sight. Paul in his conversion was struck
blind for three days, and then the scales fell from his
eyes. The way prescribed for getting spiritual wisdom is, Let a
man become a fool, that he may be wise,
1 Cor. iii. 18.
We must be made uneasy with our blindness, as this man here, and then
healed.
3. The directions given to the patient,
v. 7.
His physician said to him, Go, wash in the pool of Siloam. Not
that this washing was needful to effect the cure; but,
(1.) Christ would hereby try his obedience, and whether he would with
an implicit faith obey the orders of one he was so much a stranger to.
(2.) He would likewise try how he stood affected to the tradition of
the elders, which taught, and perhaps had taught him (for many that are
blind are very knowing), that it was not lawful to wash the
eyes, no not with spittle medicinally, on the sabbath day, much less to
go to a pool of water to wash them.
(3.) He would hereby represent the method of spiritual healing, in
which, though the effect is owing purely to his power and grace, there
is duty to be done by us. Go, search the scriptures, attend upon the
ministry, converse with the wise; this is like washing in the pool of
Siloam. Promised graces must be expected in the way of instituted
ordinances. The waters of baptism were to those who had been trained up
in darkness like the pool of Siloam, in which they might not only wash
and be clean, but wash, and have their eyes opened. Hence they
that were baptized are said to be
photisthentes—enlightened; and the ancients
called baptism photismos—illumination. Concerning
the pool of Siloam observe,
[1.] That it was supplied with water from mount Zion, so that these
were the waters of the sanctuary
(Ps. xlvi. 4),
living waters, which were healing,
Ezek. xlvii. 9.
[2.] That the waters of Siloam had of old signified the throne and
kingdom of the house of David, pointing at the Messiah
(Isa. viii. 6),
and the Jews who refused the waters of Shiloa, Christ’s doctrine
and law, and rejoiced in the tradition of the elders. Christ would try
this man, whether he would cleave to the waters of Siloam or no.
[3.] The evangelist takes notice of the signification of the name, its
being interpreted sent. Christ is often called the sent of
God, the Messenger of the covenant
(Mal. iii. 1);
so that when Christ sent him to the pool of Siloam he did in effect
send him to himself; for Christ is all in all to the healing of
souls. Christ as a prophet directs us to himself as a priest. Go,
wash in the fountain opened, a fountain of life, not a
pool.
4. The patient’s obedience to these directions: He went his way
therefore, probably led by some friend or other; or perhaps he was
so well acquainted with Jerusalem that he could find the way himself.
Nature often supplies the want of sight with an uncommon sagacity; and
he washed his eyes; probably the disciples, or some stander by,
informed him that he who bade him do it was that Jesus whom he had
heard so much of, else he would not have gone, at his bidding, on that
which looked so much like a fool’s errand; in confidence of Christ’s
power, as well as in obedience to his command, he went, and washed.
5. The cure effected: He came seeing. There is more glory in
this concise narrative, He went and washed, and came
seeing, than in Cæsar’s Veni, vidi, vici–I came, I saw, I
conquered. When the clay was washed off from his eyes, all
the other impediments were removed with it; so when the pangs and
struggles of the new birth are over, and the pains and terrors of
conviction past, the bands of sin fly off with them, and a glorious
light and liberty succeed. See here an instance,
(1.) Of the power of Christ. What cannot he do who could not
only do this, but do it thus? With a lump of clay laid on
either eye, and washed off again, he couched those cataracts
immediately which the most skilful oculist, with the finest instrument
and the most curious hand, could not remove. No doubt this is he
that should come, for by him the blind receive their sight.
(2.) It is an instance of the virtue of faith and obedience. This man
let Christ do what he pleased, and did what he appointed him to
do, and so was cured. Those that would be healed by Christ must be
ruled by him. He came back from the pool to his neighbours and
acquaintance, wondering and wondered at; he came seeing. This
represents the benefit gracious souls find in attending on instituted
ordinances, according to Christ’s appointment; they have gone to the
pool of Siloam weak, and have come away strengthened; have gone
doubting, and come away satisfied; have gone mourning, and come away
rejoicing; have gone trembling, and come away triumphing; have gone
blind, and come away seeing, come away singing,
| Sight Given to One Born Blind. |
|
|
8 The neighbours therefore, and they which before had seen him
that he was 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,
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.
Such a wonderful event as the giving of sight to a man born blind could
not but be the talk of the town, and many heeded it no more than they
do other town-talk, that is but nine days’ wonder; but here we are told
what the neighbours said of it, for the confirmation of the matter of
fact. That which at first was not believed without scrutiny may
afterwards be admitted without scruple. Two things are debated
in this conference about it:–
I. Whether this was the same man that had before been blind,
v. 8.
1. The neighbours that lived near the place where he was born and bred,
and knew that he had been blind, could not but be amazed when they saw
that he had his eye-sight, had it on a sudden, and perfectly; and they
said, Is not this he that sat and begged? It seems, this blind
man was a common beggar, being disabled to work for his living; and so
discharged from the obligation of the law, that if any would not
work, neither should he eat. When he could not go about, he
sat; if we cannot work for God, we must sit still
quietly for him. When he could not labour, his parents not being able
to maintain him, he begged. Note, Those who cannot otherwise
subsist must not, like the unjust steward, be ashamed to beg;
let no man be ashamed of anything but sin. There are some common
beggars that are objects of charity, that should be distinguished; and
we must not let the bees starve for the sake of the drones or wasps
that are among them. As to this man,
(1.) It was well ordered by Providence that he on whom this miracle was
wrought should be a common beggar, and so generally known and
remarkable, by which means the truth of the miracle was better
attested, and there were more to witness against those infidel Jews who
would not believe that he had been blind than if he had been
maintained in his father’s house.
(2.) It was the greater instance of Christ’s condescension that he
seemed (as I may say) to take more pains about the cure of a common
beggar than of others. When it was for the advantage of his miracles
that they should be wrought on those that were remarkable, he pitched
upon those that were made so by their poverty and misery; not by their
dignity.
2. In answer to this inquiry,
(1.) Some said, This is he, the very same man; and these are
witnesses to the truth of the miracle, for they had long known him
stone-blind.
(2.) Others, who could not think it possible that a man born blind
should thus on a sudden receive his sight, for that reason, and no
other, said, He is not he, but is like him, and so, by their
confession, if it be he, it is a great miracle that is wrought upon
him. Hence we may take occasion to think,
[1.] Of the wisdom and power of Providence in ordering such a universal
variety of the faces of men and women, so that no two are so alike but
that they may be distinguished, which is necessary to society, and
commerce, and the administration of justice. And,
[2.] Of the wonderful change which the converting grace of God makes
upon some who before were very wicked and vile, but are thereby so
universally and visibly altered that one would not take them to be the
same persons.
3. This controversy was soon decided by the man himself: He said, I
am he, the very man that so lately sat and begged; “I am he that
was blind, and was an object of the charity of men, but now see, and am
a monument of the mercy and grace of God.” We do not find that the
neighbours appealed to him in this matter, but he, hearing the debate,
interposed, and put an end to it. It is a piece of justice we owe to
our neighbours to rectify their mistakes, and to set things before
them, as far as we are able, in a true light. Applying it spiritually,
it teaches us that those who are savingly enlightened by the grace of
God should be ready to own what they were before that blessed change
was wrought,
II. How he came to have his eyes opened,
They will now turn aside, and see this great sight, and enquire
further concerning it. He did not sound a trumpet when he did
these alms, nor perform his cures upon a stage; and yet, like a
city upon a hill, they could not be hid. Two things these neighbours
enquire after:–
1. The manner of the cure: How were thine eyes opened? The works
of the Lord being great, they ought to be sought out,
Ps. cxi. 2.
It is good to observe the way and method of God’s works, and they will
appear the more wonderful. We may apply it spiritually; it is strange
that blind eyes should be opened, but more strange when we consider how
they are opened; how weak the means are that are used, and how strong
the opposition that is conquered. In answer to this enquiry the poor
man gives them a plain and full account of the matter: A man that is
called Jesus made clay,–and I received sight.
v. 11.
Note, Those who have experienced special instances of God’s power and
goodness, in temporal or spiritual things, should be ready upon all
occasions to communicate their experiences, for the glory of God and
the instruction and encouragement of others. See David’s collection of
his experiences, his own and others’,
It is a debt we owe to our benefactor, and to our brethren. God’s
favours are lost upon us, when they are lost with us, and
go no further.
2. The author of it
(v. 12):
Where is he? Some perhaps asked this question out of curiosity.
“Where is he, that we may see him?” A man that did such cures as these
might well be a show, which one would go a good way for the sight of.
Others, perhaps, asked out of ill-will. “Where is he, that we may
seize him?” There was a proclamation out for the discovering and
apprehending of him
(ch. xi. 57);
and the unthinking crowd, in spite of all reason and equity, will have
ill thoughts of those that are put into an ill name. Some, we hope,
asked this question out of good-will. “Where is he, that we may
be acquainted with him? Where is he, that we may come to him, and share
in the favours he is so free of?” In answer to this, he could say
nothing: I know not. As soon as Christ had sent him to the pool
of Siloam, it should seem, he withdrew immediately (as he did,
and did not stay till the man returned, as if he either doubted of the
effect or waited for the man’s thanks. Humble souls take more pleasure
in doing good than in hearing of it again; it will be time
enough to hear of it in the resurrection of the just. The man
had never seen Jesus, for by the time that he had gained his sight he
had lost his Physician; and he asked, it is probable, Where is
he? None of all the new and surprising objects that presented
themselves could be so grateful to him as one sight of Christ, but as
yet he knew no more of him than that he was called, and rightly called,
Jesus–a Saviour. Thus in the work of grace wrought upon the
soul we see the change, but see not the hand that makes it; for the way
of the Spirit is like that of the wind, which thou hearest the sound
of, but canst not tell whence it comes nor whither it goes.
| The Cavilling of the Pharisees; The Cavilling of the Pharisees Refuted. |
|
|
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.
15 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
a man that is a sinner do such miracles? And there was a division
among them.
17 They say unto the blind man again, What sayest thou of him,
that he hath opened thine eyes? He said, He is a prophet.
18 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 should be put out of the
synagogue.
23 Therefore said his parents, He is of age; ask him.
24 Then again called they the man that was blind, and said unto
him, Give God the praise: we know that this man is a sinner.
25 He answered and said, Whether he be a sinner or no, I know
not: one thing I know, that, whereas I was blind, now I see.
26 Then said they to him 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? will ye also be his
disciples?
28 Then they reviled him, and said, Thou art his disciple; but
we are Moses’ disciples.
29 We know that God spake unto Moses: as for this fellow,
we know not from whence he is.
30 The man answered and said unto them, Why herein is a
marvellous thing, that ye know not from whence he is, and yet
he hath opened mine eyes.
31 Now we know that God heareth not sinners: but if any man be
a worshipper of God, and doeth his will, him he heareth.
32 Since the world began 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.
One would have expected that such a miracle as Christ wrought upon the
blind man would have settled his reputation, and silenced and shamed
all opposition, but it had the contrary effect; instead of being
embraced as a prophet for it, he is prosecuted as a criminal.
I. Here is the information that was given in to the Pharisees
concerning this matter: They brought to the Pharisees him that
aforetime was blind,
v. 13.
They brought him to the great sanhedrim, which consisted chiefly of
Pharisees, at least the Pharisees in the sanhedrim were most active
against Christ.
1. Some think that those who brought this man to the Pharisees did it
with a good design, to show them that this Jesus, whom they
persecuted, was not what they represented him, but really a great man,
and one that gave considerable proofs of a divine mission. What hath
convinced us of the truth and excellency of religion, and hath removed
our prejudices against it, we should be forward, as we have
opportunity, to offer to others for their conviction.
2. It should seem, rather, that they did it with an ill design,
to exasperate the Pharisees the more against Christ, and there was no
need of this, for they were bitter enough of themselves. They brought
him with such a suggestion as that in
If we let him thus alone, all men will believe on him. Note,
Those rulers that are of a persecuting spirit shall never want ill
instruments about them, that will blow the coals, and make them
worse.
II. The ground which was pretended for this information, and the colour
given to it. That which is good was never maligned but under the
imputation of something evil. And the crime objected here
(v. 14)
was that it was the sabbath day when Jesus made the clay, and opened
his eyes. The profanation of the sabbath day is certainly wicked,
and gives a man a very ill character; but the traditions of the Jews
had made that to be a violation of the law of the sabbath which was far
from being so. Many a time this matter was contested between Christ and
the Jews, that it might be settled for the benefit of the church in all
ages. But it may be asked, “Why would Christ not only work miracles on
the sabbath day, but work them in such a manner as he knew would give
offence to the Jews? When he had healed the impotent man, why should he
bid him carry his bed? Could he not have cured this blind man without
making clay?” I answer,
1. He would not seem to yield to the usurped power of the scribes and
Pharisees. Their government was illegal, their impositions were
arbitrary, and their zeal for the rituals consumed the substantials of
religion; and therefore Christ would not give place to them,
by subjection, no not for an hour. Christ was made under the law
of God, but not under their law.
2. He did it that he might, both by word and action, expound the law of
the fourth commandment, and vindicate it from their corrupt glosses,
and so teach us that a weekly sabbath is to be perpetually
observed in the church, one day in seven (for what need was there to
explain that law, if it must be presently abrogated?) and that it is
not to be so ceremonially observed by us as it was by the Jews?
Works of necessity and mercy are allowed, and the sabbath-rest to be
kept, not so much for its own sake as in order to the sabbath-work.
3. Christ chose to work his cures on the sabbath day to dignify and
sanctify the day, and to intimate that spiritual cures should be
wrought mostly on the Christian sabbath day. How many blind eyes have
been opened by the preaching of the gospel, that blessed eye-salve, on
the Lord’s day! How many impotent souls cured on that day!
III. The trial and examination of this matter by the Pharisees,
So much passion, prejudice, and ill-humour, and so little reason,
appear here, that the discourse is nothing but crossing questions. One
would think, when a man in these circumstances was brought before them,
they would have been so taken up in admiring the miracle, and
congratulating the happiness of the poor man, that they could not have
been peevish with him. But their enmity to Christ had divested them of
all manner of humanity, and divinity too. Let us see how they teased
this man.
1. They interrogated him concerning the cure itself.
(1.) They doubted whether he had indeed been born blind, and
demanded proof of that which even the prosecutors had acknowledged
(v. 18):
They did not believe, that is, they would not, that he was
born blind. Men that seek occasion to quarrel with the clearest
truths may find it if they please; and they that resolve to hold
fast deceit will never want a handle to hold it by. This was not a
prudent caution, but a prejudiced infidelity. However, it was a good
way that they took for the clearing of this: They called the parents
of the man who had received his sight. This they did in hopes to
disprove the miracle. These parents were poor and timorous, and if they
had said that they could not be sure that this was their son, or that
it was only some weakness or dimness in his sight that he had been born
with, which if they had been able to get help for him might have been
cured long since, or had otherwise prevaricated, for fear of the court,
the Pharisees had gained their point, had robbed Christ of the honour
of this miracle, which would have lessened the reputation of all the
rest. But God so ordered and overruled this counsel of theirs that it
turned to the more effectual proof of the miracle, and left them under
a necessity of being either convinced or confounded. Now in this part
of the examination we have,
[1.] The questions that were put to them
(v. 19):
They asked them in an imperious threatening way, “Is this
your son? Dare you swear to it? Do you say he was born
blind? Are you sure of it? Or did he but pretend to be so, to have
an excuse for his begging? How then doth he now see? That is
impossible, and therefore you had better unsay it.” Those who cannot
bear the light of truth do all they can to eclipse it, and
hinder the discovery of it. Thus the managers of evidence, or
mismanagers rather, lead witnesses out of the way, and teach them how
to conceal or disguise the truth, and so involve themselves in a double
guilt, like that of Jeroboam, who sinned, and made Israel to sin.
[2.] Their answers to these interrogatories, in which,
First, They fully attest that which they could safely say in
this matter; safely, that is, upon their own knowledge, and
safely, that is, without running themselves into a
premunire
(v. 20):
We know that this is our son (for they were daily conversant
with him, and had such a natural affection to him as the true mother
had,
which made them know it was their own); and we know that he was
born blind. They had reason to know it, inasmuch as it had cost
them many a sad thought, and many a careful troublesome hour, about
him. How often had they looked upon him with grief, and lamented their
child’s blindness more than all the burdens and inconveniences of their
poverty, and wished he had never been born, rather than be born to such
an uncomfortable life! Those who are ashamed of their children, or any
of their relations, because of their bodily infirmities, may take a
reproof from these parents, who freely owned, This is our
son, though he was born blind, and lived upon alms.
Secondly, They cautiously decline giving any evidence concerning
his cure; partly because they were not themselves eye-witnesses of it,
and could say nothing to it of their own knowledge; and partly
because they found it was a tender point, and would not bear to
be meddled with. And therefore, having owned that he was their
son and was born blind, further these deponents say not.
a. Observe how warily they express themselves
(v. 21):
“By what means he now seeth we know not, or who has opened
his eyes we know not, otherwise than by hearsay; we can give
no account either by what means or by whose hand it was done.” See how
the wisdom of this world teaches men to trim the matter in
critical junctures. Christ was accused as a sabbath-breaker, and as an
imposter. Now these parents of the blind man, though they were not
eye-witnesses of the cure, were yet fully assured of it, and were bound
in gratitude to have borne their testimony to the honour of the Lord
Jesus, who had done their son so great a kindness; but they had not
courage to do it, and then thought it might serve to atone for their
not appearing in favour of him that they said nothing to his prejudice;
whereas, in the day of trial, he that is not apparently for
Christ is justly looked upon as really against him,
That they might not be further urged in this matter, they refer
themselves and the court to him: He is of age, ask him, he shall
speak for himself. This implies that while children are not of age
(while they are infants, such as cannot speak) it is incumbent
upon their parents to speak for them, speak to God for them in
prayer, speak to the church for them in baptism; but, when they are of
age, it is fit that they should be asked whether they be willing to
stand to that which their parents did for them, and let them speak for
themselves. This man, though he was born blind, seems to have
been of quick understanding above many, which enabled him to speak for
himself better than his friends could speak for him. Thus God often by
a kind providence makes up in the mind what is wanting in the body,
His parents turning them over to him was only to save themselves from
trouble, and expose him; whereas they that had so great an interest in
his mercies had reason to embark with him in his hazards
for the honour of that Jesus who had done so much for them.
b. See the reason why they were so cautious
(v. 22, 23):
Because they feared the Jews. It was not because they would put
an honour upon their son, by making him his own advocate, or because
they would have the matter cleared by the best hand, but because
they would shift trouble off from themselves, as most people are in
care to do, no matter on whom they throw it. Near is my friend, and
near is my child, and perhaps near is my religion, but nearer is
myself–Proximus egomet mihi. But Christianity teaches another
lesson,
Here is,
(a.) The late law which the sanhedrim had made. It was
agreed and enacted by their authority that, if any man within their
jurisdiction did confess that Jesus was Christ, he should be
put out of the synagogue. Observe,
[a.] The crime designed to be punished, and so prevented, by
this statute, and that was embracing Jesus of Nazareth as the promised
Messiah, and manifesting this by any overt-act, which amounted to a
confessing of him. They themselves did expect a Messiah, but they could
by no means bear to think that this Jesus should be he, nor admit the
question whether he were or no, for two reasons:–First, Because
his precepts were all so contrary to their traditional laws. The
spiritual worship he prescribed overthrew their formalities; nor did
any thing more effectually destroy their singularity and
narrow-spiritedness than that universal charity which he taught;
humility and mortification, repentance and self-denial, were lessons
new to them, and sounded harsh and strange in their ears.
Secondly, Because him promises and appearances were so contrary
to their traditional hopes. They expected a Messiah in outward pomp and
splendour, that should not only free the nation from the Roman yoke,
but advance the grandeur of the sanhedrim, and make all the members of
it princes and peers: and now to hear of a Messiah whose outward
circumstances were all mean and poor, whose first appearance and
principal residence were in Galilee, a despised province, who never
made his court to them, nor sought their favour, whose followers were
neither sword-men nor gown-men, nor any men of honour, but contemptible
fishermen, who proposed and promised no redemption but from sin, no
consolation of Israel but what is spiritual and divine, and at the same
time bade his followers expect the cross, and count upon persecution;
this was such a reproach to all the ideas they had formed and filled
the minds of their people with, such a blow to their power and
interest, and such a disappointment to all their hopes, that they could
never be reconciled to it, nor so much as give it a fair or patient
hearing, but, right or wrong, it must be crushed.
[b.] The penalty to be inflicted for this crime. If any should
own himself a disciple of Jesus, he should be deemed and taken as an
apostate from the faith of the Jewish church, and a rebel and traitor
against the government of it, and should therefore be put out of the
synagogue, as one that had rendered himself unworthy of the
honours, and incapable of the privileges, of their church; he should be
excommunicated, and expelled the commonwealth of Israel. Nor was this
merely an ecclesiastical censure, which a man that made no conscience
of their authority might slight, but it was, in effect, an
outlawry, which excluded a man from civil commerce and deprived
him of his liberty and property. Note, First, Christ’s holy
religion, from its first rise, has been opposed by penal laws made
against the professors of it; as if men’s consciences would otherwise
naturally embrace it, this unnatural force has been put upon
them. Secondly, The church’s artillery, when the command of it
has fallen into ill hands, has often been turned against itself, and
ecclesiastical censures have been made to serve a carnal secular
interest. It is no new thing to see those cast out of the synagogue
that were the greatest ornaments and blessings of it, and to hear those
that expelled them say, The Lord be glorified,
Isa. lxvi. 5.
Now of this edict it is said,
1. That the Jews had agreed it, or conspired it. Their
consultation and communion herein were a perfect conspiracy against the
crown and dignity of the Redeemer, against the Lord and his Anointed.
2. That they had already agreed it. Though he had been but a few
months in any public character among them, and, one would think, in so
short a time could not have made them jealous of him, yet thus early
were they aware of his growing interest, and already agreed to do their
utmost to suppress it. He had lately made his escape out of the temple,
and, when they saw themselves baffled in their attempts to take him,
they presently took this course, to make it penal for any body to own
him. Thus unanimous and thus expeditious are the enemies of the church,
and their counsels; but he that sits in heaven laughs at them,
and has them in derision, and so may we.
(b.) The influence which this law had upon the parents of the
blind man. They declined saying any thing of Christ, and shuffled it
off to their son, because they feared the Jews. Christ had
incurred the frowns of the government to do their son a kindness, but
they would not incur them to do him any honour. Note, The fear of
man brings a snare
and often makes people deny and disown Christ, and his truths and ways,
and act against their consciences. Well, the parents have thus
disentangled themselves, and are discharged from any further
attendance; let us now go on with the examination of the man himself;
the doubt of the Pharisees, whether he was born blind, was put
out of doubt by them; and therefore,
(2.) They enquired of him concerning the manner of the
cure, and made their remarks upon it,
[1.] The same question which his neighbours had put to him now again
the Pharisees asked him, how he had received his sight. This they
enquired not with any sincere desire to find out the truth, by tracing
the report to the original, but with a desire to find an occasion
against Christ; for, if the man should relate the matter fully, they
would prove Christ a sabbath-breaker; if he should vary from his former
story, they would have some colour to suspect the whole to be a
collusion.
[2.] The same answer, in effect, which he had before given to his
neighbours, he here repeats to the Pharisees: He put clay upon mine
eyes, and I washed, and do see. He does not here speak of the
making of the clay, for indeed he had not seen it made. That
circumstance was not essential, and might give the Pharisees most
occasion against him, and therefore he waives it. In the former account
he said, I washed, and received sight; but lest they should
think it was only a glimpse for the present, which a heated imagination
might fancy itself to have, he now says, “I do see: it is a
complete and lasting cure.”
[3.] The remarks made upon this story were very different, and
occasioned a debate in the court,
First, Some took this occasion to censure and condemn Christ for
what he had done. Some of the Pharisees said, This man is not of
God, as he pretends, because he keepeth not the sabbath day.
1. The doctrine upon which this censure is grounded is very true–that
those are not of God–those pretenders to prophecy not sent of
God, those pretenders to saintship not born of God–who do
not keep the sabbath day. Those that are of God will keep the
commandments of God; and this is his commandment, that we sanctify
the sabbath. Those that are of God keep up communion with God, and
delight to hear from him, and speak to him, and therefore will observe
the sabbath, which is a day appointed for intercourse with heaven. The
sabbath is called a sign, for the sanctifying of it is a sign of
a sanctified heart, and the profaning of it a sign of a profane heart.
But,
2. The application of it to our Saviour is very unjust, for he did
religiously observe the sabbath day, and never in any instance violated
it, never did otherwise than well on the sabbath day. He did not
keep the sabbath according to the tradition of the elders and the
superstitious observances of the Pharisees, but he kept it according to
the command of God, and therefore, no doubt, he was of God, and his
miracles proved him to be Lord also of the sabbath day. Note,
much unrighteous and uncharitable judging is occasioned by men’s making
the rules of religion more strict than God has made them, and adding
their own fancies to God’s appointments, as the Jews here, in the case
of sabbath-sanctification. We ourselves may forbear such and such
things, on the sabbath day, as we find a distraction to us, and we do
well, but we must not therefore tie up others to the same strictness.
Every thing that we take for a rule of practice must not presently be
made a rule of judgment.
Secondly, Others spoke in his favour, and very pertinently
urged, How can a man that is a sinner do such miracles? It seems
that even in this council of the ungodly there were some that
were capable of a free thought, and were witnesses for Christ,
even in the midst of his enemies. The matter of fact was plain, that
this was a true miracle, the more it was searched into the more it was
cleared; and this brought his former similar works to mind, and gave
occasion to speak magnificently of them, toiauta
semeia—such great signs, so many, so evident. And the
inference from it is very natural: Such things as these could never be
done by a man that is a sinner, that is, not by any mere man, in
his own name, and by his own power; or, rather, not by one that is a
cheat or an imposter, and in that sense a a sinner; such a one may
indeed show some signs and lying wonders, but not such signs and
true wonders as Christ wrought. How could a man produce such divine
credentials, if he had not a divine commission? Thus there was a
division among them, a schism, so the word is; they clashed in
their opinion, a warm debate arose, and the house divided upon
it. Thus God defeats the counsels of his enemies by dividing them; and
by such testimonies as these given against the malice of persecutors,
and the rubs they meet with, their designs against the church are
sometimes rendered ineffectual and always inexcusable.
2. After their enquiry concerning the cure, we must observe their
enquiry concerning the author of it. And here observe,
(1.) What the man said of him, in answer to their enquiry. They ask him
(v. 17),
“What sayest thou of him, seeing that he has opened thine eyes?
What dost thou think of his doing this? And what idea hast thou of him
that did it?” If he should speak slightly of Christ, in answer
to this, as he might be tempted to do, to please them, now that he was
in their hands, as his parents had done–if he should say, “I know not
what to make of him; he may be a conjuror for aught I know, or some
mountebank”–they would have triumphed in it. Nothing confirms
Christ’s enemies in their enmity to him so much as the slights put upon
him by those that have passed for his friends. But, if he should speak
honourably of Christ, they would prosecute him upon their new law,
which did not except, no, not his own patient; they would make him an
example, and so deter others from applying to Christ for cures, for
which, though they came cheap from Christ, yet they would make them pay
dearly. Or perhaps Christ’s friends proposed to have the man’s own
sentiments concerning his physician, and were willing to know, since he
appeared to be a sensible man, what he thought of him. Note, Those
whose eyes Christ has opened know best what to say of him, and have
great reason, upon all occasions, to say well of him. What think we of
Christ? To this question the poor man makes a short, plain, and direct
answer: “He is a prophet, he is one inspired and sent of God to
preach, and work miracles, and deliver to the world a divine message.”
There had been no prophets among the Jews for three hundred years; yet
they did not conclude that they should have no more, for they knew that
he was yet to come who should seal up vision and prophecy,
Dan. ix. 24.
It should seem, this man had not any thoughts that Christ was the
Messiah, the great prophet, but one of the same rank with the other
prophets. The woman of Samaria concluded he was a prophet before
she had any thought of his being the Messiah
(ch. iv. 19);
so this blind man thought well of Christ according to the light he had,
though he did not think well enough of him; but, being faithful in what
he had already attained to, God revealed even that unto him.
This poor blind beggar had a clearer judgment of the things pertaining
to the kingdom of God, and saw further into the proofs of a divine
mission, than the masters in Israel, that assumed an authority
to judge of prophets.
(2.) What they said of him, in reply to the man’s testimony. Having in
vain attempted to invalidate the evidence of the fact, and finding that
indeed a notable miracle was wrought, and they could not deny
it, they renew their attempt to banter it, and run it down, and do
all they can to shake the good opinion the man had of him that opened
his eyes, and to convince him that Christ was a bad man
(v. 24):
Give God the praise, we know that this man is a sinner. Two ways
this is understood:
[1.] By way of advice, to take heed of ascribing the praise of
his cure to a sinful man, but to give it all to God, to whom it was
due. Thus, under colour of zeal for the honour of God, they rob Christ
of his honour, as those do who will not worship Christ as God, under
pretence of zeal for this great truth, that there is but one God to be
worshipped; whereas this is his declared will, that all men should
honour the Son even as they honour the Father; and in confessing
that Christ is Lord we give glory to God the Father. When God
makes use of men that are sinners as instruments of good to us, we must
give God the glory, for every creature is that to us which he
makes it to be; and yet there is gratitude owing to the instruments. It
was a good word, Give God the praise, but here it was ill used;
and there seems to be this further in it, “This man is a sinner,
a bad man, and therefore give the praise so much the more to
God, who could work by such an instrument.”
[2.] By way of adjuration; so some take it. “We know (though
thou dost not, who hast but lately come, as it were, into a new world)
that this man is a sinner, a great impostor, and cheats the
country; this we are sure of, therefore give God praise” (as
Joshua said to Achan) “by making an ingenuous confession of the fraud
and collusion which we are confident there is in this matter; in God’s
name, man, tell the truth.” Thus is God’s name abused in papal
inquisitions, when by oaths, ex officio, they extort accusations
of themselves from the innocent, and of others
from the ignorant. See how basely they speak of the Lord Jesus:
We know that this man is a sinner, is a man of sin. In which we
may observe, First, Their insolence and pride. They would not
have it thought, when they asked the man what he thought of him, that
they needed information; nay, they know very well that he is a sinner,
and nobody can convince them of the contrary. He had challenged them to
their faces
to convince him of sin, and they had nothing to say; but now
behind his back they speak of him as a malefactor, convicted upon the
notorious evidence of the fact. Thus false accusers make up in
confidence what is wanting in proof. Secondly, The injury and
indignity hereby done to the Lord Jesus. When he became man, he took
upon him the form not only of a servant, but of a sinner
(Rom. viii. 3),
and passed for a sinner in common with the rest of mankind. Nay, he
was represented as a sinner of the first magnitude, a sinner above all
men; and, being made sin for us, he despised even this
shame.
3. The debate that arose between the Pharisees and this poor man
concerning Christ. They say, He is a sinner; he says, He is a
prophet. As it is an encouragement to those who are concerned for
the cause of Christ to hope that it shall never be lost for want of
witnesses, when they find a poor blind beggar picked up from the
way-side, and made a witness for Christ, to the faces of his most
impudent enemies; so it is an encouragement to those who are called out
to witness for Christ to find with what prudence and courage this man
managed his defence, according to the promise, It shall be given you
in that same hour what you shall speak. Though he had never seen
Jesus, he had felt his grace. Now in the parley between the Pharisees
and this poor man we may observe three steps:–
(1.) He sticks to the certain matter of fact the evidence of which they
endeavour to shake. That which is doubtful is best resolved into that
which is plain, and therefore,
[1.] He adheres to that which to himself at least, and to his own
satisfaction, was past dispute
(v. 25):
“Whether he be a sinner or no I know not, I will not now stand
to dispute, nor need I, the matter is plain, and though I should
altogether hold my peace would speak for itself;” or, as it might
better be rendered, “If he be a sinner, I know it not, I see no
reason to say so, but the contrary; for this one thing I know,
and can be more sure of than you can be of that of which you are so
confident, that whereas I was blind, now I see, and therefore
must not only say that he has been a good friend to me, but that he is
a prophet; I am both able and bound to speak well of him.” Now
here, First, He tacitly reproves their great assurance of the
ill character they gave of the blessed Jesus: “You say that you
know him to be a sinner; I, who know him as well as you
do, cannot give any such character.” Secondly, He boldly relies
upon his own experience of the power and goodness of the holy Jesus,
and resolves to abide by it. There is no disputing against experience,
nor arguing a man out of his senses; here is one that is properly an
eyewitness of the power and grace of Christ, though he had never seen
him. Note, As Christ’s mercies are most valued by those that have felt
the want of them, that have been blind and now see, so the most
powerful and durable affections to Christ are those that arise from an
experimental knowledge of him,
The poor man does not here give a nice account of the method of the
cure, nor pretend to describe it philosophically, but in short,
Whereas I was blind, now I see. Thus in the work of grace in the
soul, though we cannot tell when and how, by what instruments and by
what steps and advances, the blessed change was wrought, yet we may
take the comfort of it if we can say, through grace, “Whereas I was
blind, now I see. I did live a carnal, worldly, sensual life, but,
thanks be to God, it is now otherwise with me,”
[2.] They endeavour to baffle and stifle the evidence by a needless
repetition of their enquiries into it
(v. 26):
What did he to thee? How opened he thine eyes? They asked these
questions, First, Because they wanted something to say, and
would rather speak impertinently than seem to be silenced or run
a-ground. Thus eager disputants, that resolve they will have the last
word, by such vain repetitions, to avoid the shame of being silenced,
make themselves accountable for many idle words. Secondly,
Because they hoped, by putting the man upon repeating his evidence, to
catch him tripping in it, or wavering, and then they would think they
had gained a good point.
(2.) He upbraids them with their obstinate infidelity and invincible
prejudices, and they revile him as a disciple of Jesus,
where the man is more bold with them and they are more sharp upon him
than before.
[1.] The man boldly upbraids them with their wilful and unreasonable
opposition to the evidence of this miracle,
He would not gratify them with a repetition of the story, but bravely
replied, I have told you already, and you did not hear, wherefore
would you hear it again, will you also be his disciples? Some think
that he spoke seriously, and really expecting that they would be
convinced. “He had many disciples, I will be one, will you also come
in among them?” Some zealous young Christians see so much reason for
religion that they are ready to think every one will presently be on
their mind. But it rather seems to be spoken ironically: “Will you
be his disciples? No, I know you abhor the thoughts of it; why then
should you desire to hear that which will either make you his disciples
or leave you inexcusable if you be not?” Those that wilfully shut their
eyes against the light, as these Pharisees here did, First, Make
themselves contemptible and base, as these here did, who were justly
exposed by this poor man for denying the conclusion, when they had
nothing to object against either of the premises. Secondly, They
forfeit all the benefit of further instructions and means of knowledge
and conviction: they that have been told once, and would not
hear, why should they be told it again?
See
Thirdly, They hereby receive the grace of God in vain.
This implied in that, “Will you be his disciples? No, you
resolve you will not; why then would you hear it again, only that you
may be his accusers and persecutors?” Those who will not see cause to
embrace Christ, and join with his followers, yet, one would think,
should see cause enough not to hate and persecute him and them.
[2.] For this they scorn and revile him,
When they could not resist the wisdom and spirit by which he spoke,
they broke out into a passion, and scolded him, began to call names,
and give him ill language. See what Christ’s faithful witnesses must
expect from the adversaries of his truth and cause; let them count upon
all manner of evil to be said of them,
The method commonly taken by unreasonable man is to make out with
railing what is wanting in truth and reason.
First, They taunted this man for his affection to Christ; they
said, Thou art his disciple, as if that were reproach enough,
and they could not say worse of him. “We scorn to be his disciples, and
will leave that preferment to thee, and such scoundrels as thou art.”
They do what they can to put Christ’s religion in an ill name, and to
represent the profession of it as a contemptible scandalous thing. They
reviled him. The Vulgate reads it, maledixerunt eum–they
cursed him; and what was their curse? It was this, Be thou his
disciple. “May such a curse” (saith St. Augustine here) “ever be on
us and on our children!” If we take our measures of credit and disgrace
from the sentiment or rather clamours of a blind deluded world, we
shall glory in our shame, and be ashamed of our glory.
They had no reason to call this man a disciple of Christ, he had
neither seen him nor heard him preach, only he had spoken favourably of
a kindness Christ had done him, and this they could not bear.
Secondly, They gloried in their relation to Moses as their
Master: “We are Moses’s disciples, and do not either need or
desire any other teacher.” Note,
1. Carnal professors of religion are very apt to trust to, and be proud
of, the dignities and privileges of their profession, while they are
strangers to the principles and powers of their religion. These
Pharisees had before boasted of their good parentage: We are
Abraham’s seed; here they boast of their good education, We are
Moses’s disciples; as if these would save them.
2. It is sad to see how much one part of religion is opposed, under
colour of zeal for another part. There was a perfect harmony between
Christ and Moses; Moses prepared for Christ, and Christ perfected
Moses, so that they might be disciples of Moses, and become the
disciples of Christ too; and yet they here put them in opposition, nor
could they have persecuted Christ but under the shelter of the abused
name of Moses. Thus those who gainsay the doctrine of free grace value
themselves as promoters of man’s duty, We are Moses’s disciples;
while, on the other hand, those that cancel the obligation of the law
value themselves as the assertors of free grace, and as if none were
the disciples of Jesus but they; whereas, if we rightly understand the
matter, we shall see God’s grace and man’s duty meet together and kiss
and befriend each other.
Thirdly, They gave some sort of reason for their adhering to
Moses against Christ
(v. 29):
We know that God spoke unto Moses; as for this fellow, we know not
whence he is. But did they not know that among other things which
God spoke unto Moses this was one, that they must expect another
prophet, and further revelation of the mind of God? yet, when our Lord
Jesus, pursuant to what God said to Moses, did appear, and gave
sufficient proofs of his being that prophet, under pretence of sticking
to the old religion, and the established church, they not only
forfeited, but forsook, their own mercies. In this argument of their
observe,
1. How impertinently they allege, in defence of their enmity to Christ,
that which none of his followers ever denied: We know that God spoke
unto Moses, and, thanks be to God, we know it too, more plainly to
Moses than to any other of the prophets; but what then? God spoke to
Moses, and does it therefore follow that Jesus is an impostor? Moses
was a prophet also? Moses spoke honourably of Jesus
(ch. v. 46),
and Jesus spoke honourably of Moses
(Luke xvi. 29);
they were both faithful in the same house of God, Moses as a servant,
Christ as a Son; therefore their pleading Moses’ divine warrant in
opposition to Christ’s was an artifice, to make unthinking people
believe it was as certain that Jesus was a false prophet as that Moses
was a true one; whereas they were both true.
2. How absurdly they urge their ignorance of Christ as a reason to
justify their contempt of him: As for this fellow. Thus
scornfully do they speak of the blessed Jesus, as if they did not think
it worth while to charge their memories with a name so inconsiderable;
they express themselves with as much disdain of the Shepherd of Israel
as if he had not been worthy to be set with the dogs of their flock:
As for this fellow, this sorry fellow, we know not whence he
is. They looked upon themselves to have the key of knowledge, that
none must preach without a license first had and obtained from them,
under the seal of their court. They expected that all who set up for
teachers should apply to them, and give them satisfaction, which this
Jesus had never done, never so far owned their power as to ask their
leave, and therefore they concluded him an intruder, and one that came
not in by the door: They knew not whence nor what he was,
and therefore concluded him a sinner; whereas those we know
little of we should judge charitably of; but proud and narrow souls
will think none good but themselves, and those that are in their
interest. It was not long ago that the Jews had made the contrary to
this an objection against Christ
(ch. vii. 27):
We know this man whence he is, but when Christ comes no man knows
whence he is. Thus they could with the greatest assurance either
affirm or deny the same thing, according as they saw it would serve
their turn. They knew not whence he was; and whose fault was
that?
(1.) It is certain that they ought to have enquired. The Messiah was to
appear about this time, and it concerned them to look about them, and
examine every indication; but these priests, like those,
said not, Where is the Lord?
(2.) It is certain that they might have known whence he was, might not
only have known, by searching the register, that he was born in
Bethlehem; but by enquiring into his doctrine, miracles, and
conversation, they might have known that he was sent of God, and had
better orders, a better commission, and far better instructions, than
any they could give him. See the absurdity of infidelity. Men will not
know the doctrine of Christ because they are resolved they will not
believe it, and then pretend they do not believe it because they do not
know it. Such ignorance and unbelief, which support one another,
aggravate one another.
(3.) He reasons with them concerning this matter, and they
excommunicate him.
[1.] The poor man, finding that he had reason on his side, which they
could not answer, grows more bold, and, in prosecution of his argument,
is very close upon them.
First, He wonders at their obstinate infidelity
(v. 30);
not at all daunted by their frowns, nor shaken by their confidence, he
bravely answered, “Why, herein is a marvelous thing, the
strangest instance of wilful ignorance that ever was heard of among men
that pretend to sense, that you know not whence he is, and yet
he has opened mine eyes.” Two things he wonders at:–
1. That they should be strangers to a man so famous. He that
could open the eyes of the blind must certainly be a considerable man,
and worth taking notice of. The Pharisees were inquisitive men, had a
large correspondence and acquaintance, thought themselves the eyes of
the church and its watchmen, and yet that they should talk as if they
thought it below them to take cognizance of such a man as this, and
have conversation with him, this is a strange thing indeed. There are
many who pass for learned and knowing men, who understand business, and
can talk sensibly in other things, who yet are ignorant, to a wonder,
of the doctrine of Christ, who have no concern, no, not so much as a
curiosity, to acquaint themselves with that which the angels desire
to look into.
2. That they should question the divine mission of one that had
undoubtedly wrought a divine miracle. When they said, We know not
whence he is, they meant, “We know not any proof that his doctrine
and ministry are from heaven.” “Now this is strange,” saith the poor
man, “that the miracle wrought upon me has not convinced you, and put
the matter out of doubt,–that you, whose education and studies give
you advantages above others of discerning the things of God, should
thus shut your eyes against the light.” It is a marvelous work and
wonder, when the wisdom of the wise thus perisheth
that they deny the truth of that of which they cannot gainsay the
evidence. Note,
(1.) The unbelief of those who enjoy the means of knowledge and
conviction is indeed a marvelous thing,
(2.) Those who have themselves experienced the power and grace of the
Lord Jesus do especially wonder at the wilfulness of those who reject
him, and, having such good thoughts of him themselves, are amazed that
others have not. Had Christ opened the eyes of the Pharisees, they
would not have doubted his being a prophet.
Secondly, He argues strongly against them,
They had determined concerning Jesus that he was not of God
(v. 16),
but was a sinner
(v. 24),
in answer to which the man here proves not only that he was not a
sinner
(v. 31),
but that he was of God,
v. 33.
a. He argues here,
(a.) With great knowledge. Though he could not read a letter of
the book, he was well acquainted with the scripture and the things of
God; he had wanted the sense of seeing, yet had well improved that of
hearing, by which faith cometh; yet this would not have served him if
he had not had an extraordinary presence of God with him, and special
aids of his Spirit, upon this occasion.
(b.) With great zeal for the honour of Christ, whom he could not
endure to hear run down, and evil spoken of.
(c.) With great boldness, and courage, and undauntedness, not
terrified by the proudest of his adversaries. Those that are ambitious
of the favours of God must not be afraid of the frowns of men. “See
here,” saith Dr. Whitby, “a blind man and unlearned judging more
rightly of divine things than the whole learned council of the
Pharisees, whence we learn that we are not always to be led by the
authority of councils, popes, or bishops; and that it is not absurd for
laymen sometimes to vary from their opinions, these overseers being
sometimes guilty of great oversights.”
b. His argument may be reduced into form, somewhat like that of
David,
The proposition in David’s argument is, If I regard iniquity in my
heart, God will not hear me; here it is to the same purport, God
heareth not sinners: the assumption there is, But verily God
hath heard me; here it is, Verily God hath heard Jesus, he hath
been honoured with the doing of that which was never done before: the
conclusion there is to the honour, Blessed be God; here to the
honour of the Lord Jesus, He is of God.
(a.) He lays it down for an undoubted truth that none but good
men are the favourites of heaven
(v. 31):
Now we know, you know it as well as I, that God heareth not
sinners; but if any man be a worshipper of God, and does his
will, him he heareth. Here,
[a.] The assertions, rightly understood, are true. First,
Be it spoken to the terror of the wicked, God heareth not
sinners, that is, such sinners as the Pharisees meant when they
said of Christ, He is a sinner, one that, under the shelter of
God’s name, advanced the devil’s interest. This bespeaks no
discouragement to repenting returning sinners, but to those that go on
still in their trespasses, that make their prayers not only consistent
with, but subservient to, their sins, as the hypocrites do; God will
not hear them, he will not own them, nor give an answer of peace
to their prayers. Secondly, Be it spoken to the comfort of the
righteous, If any man be a worshipper of God, and does his will, him
he heareth. Here is,
1. The complete character of a good man: he is one that worships
God, and does his will; he is constant in his devotions at
set times, and regular in his conversation at all times. He is one that
makes it his business to glorify his Creator by the solemn adoration of
his name and a sincere obedience to his will and law; both must go
together.
2. The unspeakable comfort of such a man: him God hears; hears
his complaints, and relieves him; hears his appeals, and rights him;
hears his praises, and accepts them; hears his prayers, and answers
them,
[b.] The application of these truths is very pertinent to prove
that he, at whose word such a divine power was put forth as cured one
born blind, was not a bad man, but, having manifestly such an interest
in the holy God as that he heard him always
was certainly a holy one.
(b.) He magnifies the miracles which Christ had wrought, to
strengthen the argument the more
(v. 32):
Since the world began was it not heard that any man opened the eyes
of one that was born blind. This is to show either,
[a.] That it was a true miracle, and above the power of nature;
it was never heard that any man, by the use of natural means, had cured
one that was born blind; no doubt, this man and his parents had
been very inquisitive into cases of this nature, whether any such had
been helped, and could hear of none, which enabled him to speak this
with the more assurance. Or,
[b.] That it was an extraordinary miracle, and beyond the
precedents of former miracles; neither Moses nor any of the prophets,
though they did great things, ever did such things as this, wherein
divine power and divine goodness seem to strive which should outshine.
Moses wrought miraculous plagues, but Christ wrought miraculous cures.
Note, First, The wondrous works of the Lord Jesus were such as
the like had never been done before. Secondly, It becomes those
who have received mercy from God to magnify the mercies they have
received, and to speak honourably of them; not that thereby glory may
redound to themselves, and they may seem to be extraordinary favourites
of Heaven, but that God may have so much the more glory.
(c.) He therefore concludes, If this man were not of God, he
could no nothing, that is, nothing extraordinary, no such thing as
this; and therefore, no doubt, he is of God,
notwithstanding his nonconformity to your traditions in the business of
the sabbath day. Note, What Christ did on earth sufficiently
demonstrated what he was in heaven; for, if he had not been sent of
God, he could not have wrought such miracles. It is true the man of sin
comes with lying wonders, but not with real miracles; it is
likewise supposed that a false prophet might, by divine permission,
give a sign or a wonder
yet the case is so put as that it would carry with it its own
confutation, for it is to enforce a temptation to serve other gods,
which was to set God against himself. It is true, likewise, that
many wicked people have in Christ’s name done many wonderful works,
which did not prove those that wrought them to be of God, but him in
whose name they were wrought. We may each of us know by this whether we
are of God or no: What do we? What do we for God, for our souls,
in working out our salvation? What do we more than others?
[2.] The Pharisees, finding themselves unable either to answer his
reasonings or to bear them, fell foul upon him, and with a great deal
of pride and passion broke off the discourse,
Here we are told,
First, What they said. Having nothing to reply to his
argument, they reflected upon his person: Thou wast altogether born
in sin, and dost thou teach us? They take that amiss which they had
reason to take kindly, and are cut to the heart with rage by that which
should have pricked them to the heart with penitence. Observe,
1. How they despised him, and what a severe censure they passed upon
him: “Thou wast not only born in sin, as every man is, but
altogether so, wholly corrupt, and bearing about with thee in thy body
as well as in thy soul the marks of that corruption; thou wast one whom
nature stigmatized.” Had he still continued blind, it had been
barbarous to upbraid him with it, and thence to gather that he was more
deeply tainted with sin than other people; but it was most unjust to
take notice of it now that the cure had not only rolled away the
reproach of his blindness, but had signalized him as a favourite
of Heaven. Some take it thus: “Thou hast been a common beggar, and such
are too often common sinners, and thou hast, no doubt, been as bad as
any of them;” whereas by his discourse he had proved the contrary, and
had evinced a deep tincture of piety. But when proud imperious
Pharisees resolve to run a man down, any thing shall serve for a
pretence.
2. How they disdain to learn of him, or to receive instruction
from him: Dost thou teach us? A mighty emphasis must be laid
here upon thou and us. “What! wilt thou, a silly
sorry fellow, ignorant and illiterate, that hast not seen the light of
the sun a day to an end, a beggar by the way-side, of the very dregs
and refuse of the town, wilt thou pretend to teach us, that are
the sages of the law and grandees of the church, that sit in Moses’s
chair and are masters in Israel?” Note, Proud men scorn to be taught,
especially by their inferiors, whereas we should never think ourselves
too old, nor too wise, nor too good, to learn. Those that have much
wealth would have more; and why not those that have much knowledge? And
those are to be valued by whom we may improve in learning. What a poor
excuse was this for the Pharisees’ infidelity, that it would be a
disparagement to them to be instructed, and informed, and convinced, by
such a silly fellow as this!
| Christ’s Address to the Man that Had Been Blind. |
|
|
35 Jesus heard that they had cast him out; and when he had
found him, he said unto him, Dost thou believe on 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 he worshipped him.
In these verses we may observe,
I. The tender care which our Lord Jesus took of this poor man
(v. 35):
When Jesus heard that they had cast him out (for it is likely
the town rang of it, and everybody cried out shame upon them for it),
then he found him, which implies his seeking him and looking
after him, that he might encourage and comfort him,
1. Because he had, to the best of his knowledge, spoken so very well,
so bravely, so boldly, in defence of the Lord Jesus. Note, Jesus Christ
will be sure to stand by his witnesses, and own those that own him and
his truth and ways. Earthly princes neither do, nor can, take
cognizance of all that vindicate them and their government and
administration; but our Lord Jesus knows and observes all the faithful
testimonies we bear to him at any time, and a book of remembrance is
written, and it shall redound not only to our credit hereafter, but our
comfort now.
2. Because the Pharisees had cast him out and abused him. Besides the
common regard which the righteous Judge of the world has to those who
suffer wrongfully
(Ps. ciii. 6),
there is a particular notice taken of those that suffer in the cause of
Christ and for the testimony of a good conscience. Here was one poor
man suffering for Christ, and he took care that as his afflictions
abounded his consolations should much more abound. Note,
(1.) Though persecutors may exclude good men from their communion, yet
they cannot exclude them from communion with Christ, nor put them out
of the way of his visits. Happy are they who have a friend from whom
men cannot debar them.
(2.) Jesus Christ will graciously find and receive those who for his
sake are unjustly rejected and cast out by men. He will be a hiding
place to his outcasts, and appear, to the joy of those whom their
brethren hated and cast out.
II. The comfortable converse Christ had with him, wherein he brings him
acquainted with the consolation of Israel. He had well improved the
knowledge he had, and now Christ gives him further instruction; for he
that is faithful in a little shall be entrusted with more,
1. Our Lord Jesus examines his faith: “Dost thou believe on the Son
of God? Dost thou give credit to the promises of the Messiah? Dost
thou expect his coming, and art thou ready to receive and embrace him
when he is manifested to thee?” This was that faith of the Son of God
by which the saints lived before his manifestation. Observe,
(1.) The Messiah is here called the Son of God, and so the Jews
had learned to call him from the prophecies,
See
Thou art the Son of God, that is, the true Messiah. Those that
expected the temporal kingdom of the Messiah delighted rather in
calling him the Son of David, which gave more countenance to
that expectation,
But Christ, that he might give us an idea of his kingdom, as purely
spiritual and divine, calls himself the Son of God, and rather
Son of man in general than of David in particular.
(2.) The desires and expectations of the Messiah, which the
Old-Testament saints had, guided by and grounded upon the promise, were
graciously interpreted and accepted as their believing on the Son of
God. This faith Christ here enquires after: Dost thou
believe? Note, The great thing which is now required of us
and which will shortly be enquired after concerning us, is our
believing on the Son of God, and by this we must stand or fall
for ever.
2. The poor man solicitously enquires concerning the Messiah he was to
believe in, professing his readiness to embrace him and close with him
(v. 36):
Who is he, Lord, that I may believe on him?
(1.) Some think he did know that Jesus, who cured him, was the Son of
God, but did not know which was Jesus, and therefore, supposing this
person that talked with him to be a follower of Jesus, desired him to
do him the favour to direct him to his master; not that he might
satisfy his curiosity with the sight of him, but that he might the more
firmly believe in him, and profess his faith, and know whom he had
believed. See
It is Christ only that can direct us to himself.
(2.) Others think he did know that this person who talked with him was
Jesus, the same that cured him, whom he believed a great and good man
and a prophet, but did not yet know that he was the Son of God and the
true Messiah. “Lord, I believe there is a Christ to come; thou who hast
given me bodily sight, tell me, O tell me, who and where this Son of
God is.” Christ’s question intimated that the Messiah was come, and was
now among them, which he presently takes the hint of, and asks,
Where is he, Lord? The question was rational and just: Who is
he, Lord, that I may believe on him? For how could he believe in
one of whom he had not heard; the work of ministers is to tell us
who the Son of God is, that we may believe on him,
3. Our Lord Jesus graciously reveals himself to him as that Son of God
on whom he must believe: Thou hast both seen him, and it is he that
talketh with thee,
v. 37.
Thou needest not go far to find out the Son of God, Behold the Word
is nigh thee. We do not find that Christ did thus expressly, and in
so many words, reveal himself to any other as to this man here and to
the woman of Samaria: I that speak unto thee am he. He left
others to find out by arguments who he was, but to these weak and
foolish things of the world he chose to manifest himself, so as not to
the wise and prudent. Christ here describes himself to this man
by two things, which express his great favour to him:–
(1.) Thou hast seen him; and he was much indebted to the Lord
Jesus for opening his eyes, that he might see him. Now he was made
sensible, more than ever, what an unspeakable mercy it was to be cured
of his blindness, that he might see the Son of God, a sight which
rejoiced his heart more than that of the light of this world.
Note, The Greatest comfort of bodily eyesight is its serviceableness to
our faith and the interests of our souls. How contentedly might this
man have returned to his former blindness, like old Simeon, now that
his eyes had seen God’s salvation! If we apply this to the
opening of the eyes of the mind, it intimates that spiritual sight is
given principally for this end, that we may see Christ,
Can we say that by faith we have seen Christ, seen him in his beauty
and glory, in his ability and willingness to save, so seen him as to be
satisfied concerning him, to be satisfied in him? Let us give him the
praise, who opened our eyes.
(2.) It is he that talketh with thee; and he was indebted to
Christ for condescending to do this. He was not only favoured with a
sight of Christ, but was admitted into fellowship and communion with
him. Great princes are willing to be seen by those whom yet they
will not vouchsafe to talk with. But Christ, by his word and
Spirit, talks with those whose desires are towards him, and in talking
with them manifests himself to them, as he did to the two disciples,
when he talked their hearts warm,
Observe, This poor man was solicitously enquiring after the Saviour,
when at the same time he saw him, and was talking with him. Note,
Jesus Christ is often nearer the souls that seek him than they
themselves are aware of. Doubting Christians are sometimes saying,
Where is the Lord? and fearing that they are cast out from his
sight when at the same time it is he that talks with them, and
puts strength into them.
4. The poor man readily entertains this surprising revelation, and, in
a transport of joy and wonder, he said, Lord, I believe, and he
worshipped him.
(1.) He professed his faith in Christ: Lord, I believe thee to be
the Son of God. He would not dispute any thing that he said
who had shown such mercy to him, and wrought such a miracle for him,
nor doubt of the truth of a doctrine which was confirmed by such signs.
Believing with the heart, he thus confesses with the mouth; and now the
bruised reed was become a cedar.
(2.) He paid his homage to him: He worshipped him, not only gave
him the civil respect due to a great man, and the acknowledgments owing
to a kind benefactor, but herein gave him divine honour, and worshipped
him as the Son of God manifested in the flesh. None but God is
to be worshipped; so that in worshipping Jesus he owned him to be God.
Note, True faith will show itself in a humble adoration of the Lord
Jesus. Those who believe in him will see all the reason in the world
to worship him. We never read any more of this man; but, it is very
likely, from henceforth he became a constant follower of Christ.
| Christ’s Address to the Pharisees. |
|
|
39 And Jesus said, 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 these
words, and said unto him, Are we blind also?
41 Jesus said unto them, If ye were blind, ye should have no
sin: but now ye say, We see; therefore your sin remaineth.
Christ, having spoken comfort to the poor man that was persecuted, here
speaks conviction to his persecutors, a specimen of the distributions
of trouble and rest at the great day,
Probably this was not immediately after his discourse with the man, but
he took the next opportunity that offered itself to address the
Pharisees. Here is,
I. The account Christ gives of his design in coming into the world
(v. 39):
“For judgment I am come to order and administer the great
affairs of the kingdom of God among men, and am invested with a
judicial power in order thereunto, to be executed in conformity to the
wise counsels of God, and in pursuance of them.” What Christ spoke, he
spoke not as a preacher in the pulpit, but as a king upon the throne,
and a judge upon the bench.
1. His business into the world was great; he came to keep the
assizes and general goal-delivery. He came for judgment, that
is,
(1.) To preach a doctrine and a law which would try men, and
effectually discover and distinguish them, and would be completely
fitted, in all respects, to be the rule of government now and of
judgment shortly.
(2.) To put a difference between men, by revealing the thoughts of many
hearts, and laying open men’s true characters, by this one test,
whether they were well or ill affected to him.
(3.) To change the face of government in his church, to abolish the
Jewish economy, to take down that fabric, which, though erected for the
time by the hand of God himself, yet by lapse of time was antiquated,
and by the incurable corruptions of the managers of it was become
rotten and dangerous, and to erect a new building by another model, to
institute new ordinances and offices, to abrogate Judaism and enact
Christianity; for this judgment he came into the world,
and it was a great revolution.
2. This great truth he explains by a metaphor borrowed from the miracle
which he had lately wrought. That those who see not might see, and
that those who see might be made blind. Such a difference of
Christ’s coming is often spoken of; to some his gospel is a savour
of life unto life, to others of death unto death.
(1.) This is applicable to nations and people, that the Gentiles, who
had long been destitute of the light of divine revelation, might see
it; and the Jews, who had long enjoyed it, might have the things of
their peace hid from their eyes,
The Gentiles see a great light, while blindness is happened unto
Israel, and their eyes are darkened.
(2.) To particular sons. Christ came into the world,
[1.] Intentionally and designedly to give sight to those that were
spiritually blind; by his word to reveal the object, and by his Spirit
to heal the organ, that many precious souls might be turned from
darkness to light. He came for judgment, that is, to set
those at liberty from their dark prison that were willing to be
released,
[2.] Eventually, and in the issue, that those who see might be made
blind; that those who have a high conceit of their own wisdom, and
set up that in contradiction to divine revelation, might be sealed up
in ignorance and infidelity. The preaching of the cross was
foolishness, and an infatuating think, to those who by wisdom knew
not God. Christ came into the world for this
judgment, to administer the affairs of a spiritual kingdom,
seated in men’s minds. Whereas, in the Jewish church, the blessings and
judgments of God’s government were mostly temporal, now the method of
administration should be changed; and as the good subjects of his
kingdom should be blessed with spiritual blessings in heavenly things,
such as arise from a due illumination of the mind, so the rebels should
be punished with spiritual plagues, not war, famine, and pestilence, as
formerly, but such as arise from a judicial infatuation,
hardness of heart, terror of conscience, strong delusions, vile
affections. In this way Christ will judge between cattle and
cattle,
Ezek. xxxiv. 17, 22.
II. The Pharisees’ cavil at this. They were with him, not
desirous to learn any good from him, but to form evil against him; and
they said, Are we blind also? When Christ said that those who
saw should by his coming be made blind, they apprehended that he
meant them, who were the seers of the people, and valued
themselves on their insight and foresight. “Now,” say
they, “we know that the common people are blind; but are we blind
also? What we? The rabbin, the doctors, the learned in the laws,
the graduates in the schools, are we blind too?” This is
scandalum magnatum–a libel on the great. Note, Frequently those
that need reproof most, and deserve it best, though they have wit
enough to discern a tacit one, have not grace enough to bear a
just one. These Pharisees took this reproof for a reproach, as
those lawyers
(Luke xi. 45):
“Are we blind also? Darest thou say that we are blind, whose
judgment every one has such a veneration for, values, and yields to?”
Note, Nothing fortifies men’s corrupt hearts more against the
convictions of the word, nor more effectually repels them, than the
good opinion, especially if it be a high opinion, which others have of
them; as if all that had gained applause with men must needs obtain
acceptance with God, than which nothing is more false and deceitful,
for God sees not as man sees.
III. Christ’s answer to this cavil, which, if it did not convince them,
yet silenced them: If you were blind you should have no sin; but now
you say, We see, therefore your sin remaineth. They gloried that
they were not blind, as the common people, were not so credulous and
manageable as they, but would see with their own eyes, having
abilities, as they thought, sufficient for their own guidance, so that
they needed not any body to lead them. This very thing which they
gloried in, Christ here tells them, was their shame and ruin. For,
1. If you were blind, you would have no sin.
(1.) “If you had been really ignorant, your sin had not been so deeply
aggravated, nor would you have had so much sin to answer for as now you
have. If you were blind, as the poor Gentiles are, and many of your own
poor subjects, from whom you have taken the key of knowledge, you would
have had comparatively no sin.” The times of ignorance God
winked at; invincible ignorance, though it does not justify sin,
excuses it, and lessens the guilt. It will be more tolerable with those
that perish for lack of vision than with those that rebel against
the light.
(2.) “If you had been sensible of your own blindness, if when you would
see nothing else you could have seen the need of one to lead you, you
would soon have accepted Christ as your guide, and then you would
have had no sin, you would have submitted to an evangelical
righteousness, and have been put into a justified state.” Note, Those
that are convinced of their disease are in a fair way to be cured, for
there is not a greater hindrance to the salvation of souls than
self-sufficiency.
2. “But now you say, We see; now that you have knowledge, and
are instructed out of the law, your sin is highly aggravated; and now
that you have a conceit of that knowledge, and think you see your way
better than any body can show it you, therefore your sin
remains, your case is desperate, and your disease incurable.” And
as those are most blind who will not see, so their blindness is
most dangerous who fancy they do see. No patients are so hardly managed
as those in a frenzy who say that they are well, and nothing
ails them. The sin of those who are self-conceited and self-confident
remains, for they reject the gospel of grace, and therefore the
guilt of their sin remains unpardoned; and they forfeit the Spirit of
grace, and therefore the power of their sin remains unbroken. Seest
thou a wise man in his own conceit? Hearest thou the Pharisees say,
We see? There is more hope of a fool, of a publican and a
harlot, than of such.
|
[Previous] [Next] |
Matthew Henry |
|
Back to Bibles Net . Com – Online Christian Library Matthew Henry’s Complete Commentary – Free Download |
Copyright 2008. Bibles Net. Com. All Rights Reserved.