Now as Jesus was passing by, he saw a man who had been blind from birth. His disciples asked him, “Rabbi, who committed the sin that caused him to be born blind, this man or his parents?” [1] Jesus answered, “Neither this man nor his parents sinned,[2] but he was born blind[3] so that the acts of God may be revealed through what happens to him.
As I understand that last comment, Jesus is smacking down the idea that sickness must be a result of someone’s sin, and instead elevating the value of the sick person by viewing them as one in whom God’s glory rather than their sinfulness will be revealed.
We must perform the deeds of the one who sent me as long as it is daytime. Night is coming when no one can work. As long as I am in the world, I am the light of the world.” Having said this, he spat on the ground and made some mud with the saliva.[4] He smeared the mud on the blind man’s eyes and said to him, “Go wash in the pool of Siloam” (which is translated “sent”). So the blind man went away and washed, and came back seeing.
I wouldn't overthink why Jesus did it this way. It meant something to the man and did not seem to surprise the people. Apparently, using saliva was a common medical approach to eye issues. What confounded the people was not how Jesus did it, but what it accomplished.
First side note: Jesus healed people in all kinds of ways: up close, at a distance; upon request or on no request; instantly or in stages. There is no need to try to discover a miraculous potion made of clay and spittle.
Second side note: Jesus didn’t need to apply a known medicinal practice to this man’s eyes. He could have just healed him. This isn’t the first time Jesus has outwardly used a natural remedy while bringing about a supernatural result. As I see it, it’s okay to go to a doctor and pray for healing. These don't have to be contradictory things. Even if you think it’s just ‘going through the motions’, using medical help for illness does not reveal a lack of faith.
Then the neighbors and the people who had seen him previously as a beggar began saying, “Is this not the man who used to sit and beg?” Some people said, “This is the man!” while others said, “No, but he looks like him.”
The man himself kept insisting, “I am the one!” So they asked him, “How then were you made to see?” He replied, “The man called Jesus made mud, smeared it on my eyes and told me, ‘Go to Siloam and wash.’ So I went and washed, and was able to see.”
They said to him, “Where is that man?” He replied, “I don’t know.” They brought the man who used to be blind to the Pharisees. (Now the day on which Jesus made the mud and caused him to see was a Sabbath.) So the Pharisees asked him again how he had gained his sight. He replied, “He put mud on my eyes and I washed, and now I am able to see.”
Then some of the Pharisees[5] began to say, “This man is not from God, because he does not observe the Sabbath.” But others said, “How can a man who is a sinner perform such miraculous signs?” Thus there was a division among them. So again they asked the man who used to be blind, “What do you say about him, since he caused you to see?”
“He is a prophet,” the man replied. Now the Jewish religious leaders refused to believe that he had really been blind and had gained his sight until at last they summoned the parents of the man who had become able to see. They asked the parents, “Is this your son, whom you say was born blind? Then how does he now see?”
So his parents replied, “We know that this is our son and that he was born blind. But we do not know how he is now able to see, nor do we know who caused him to see. Ask him, he is a mature adult. He will speak for himself.”
(His parents said these things because they were afraid of the Jewish religious leaders. For the Jewish leaders had already agreed that anyone who confessed Jesus to be the Christ would be put out of the synagogue. For this reason his parents said, “He is a mature adult, ask him.”)
Then they summoned the man who used to be blind a second time and said to him, “Promise before God to tell the truth. We know that this man is a sinner.” He replied, “I do not know whether he is a sinner. I do know one thing—that although I was blind, now I can see.”[6]
Then they said to him, “What did he do to you? How did he cause you to see?” He answered, “I told you already and you didn’t listen. Why do you want to hear it again? You people don’t want to become his disciples too, do you?” They heaped insults on him, saying, “You are his disciple! We are disciples of Moses! We know that God has spoken to Moses! We do not know where this man comes from!”[7]
The man replied, “This is a remarkable thing, that you don’t know where he comes from, and yet he caused me to see! We know that God doesn’t listen to sinners, but if anyone is devout and does his will, God listens to him. Never before has anyone heard of someone causing a man born blind to see. If this man were not from God, he could do nothing.”
They replied, “You were born completely in sinfulness, and yet you presume to teach us?” So they threw him out. [8]Jesus heard that they had thrown him out, so he found the man and said to him, “Do you believe in the Son of Man?”
The man replied, “And who is he, sir, that I may believe in him?” Jesus told him, “You have seen him; he is the one speaking with you.” He said, “Lord, I believe,” and he worshiped him.
Jesus said, “For judgment (a verdict) I have come into this world, so that those who do not see may gain their sight, and the ones who see may become blind.” Some of the Pharisees who were with him heard this and asked him, “We are not blind too, are we?”[9] Jesus replied, “If you were blind, you would not be guilty of sin, but now because you claim that you can see, your guilt remains.”[10]
* * * * *
Let’s talk about this verdict of judgment, and blindness, and light.
When light comes into the world, it renders a verdict in the sense that it shows truth. I tore apart an old sofa last week. Before the light revealed what all had fallen between the cracks, I had no idea how much junk had accumulated in the frame. But then light rendered a verdict: a lot. That’s how light works. It shows us what is true, and then we have to decide what to do with that. It is inevitable: when light is introduced, it separates light from darkness. This is a principle as old as Genesis 1.
And God said, “Let there be light,” and there was light. God saw that the light was good, and he separated the light from the darkness. (Genesis 1:3-4)
So how do we reconcile Jesus saying, “For judgment I have come into the world” with John writing, “God did not send his son into the world to condemn it, but to save it”? (John 3:17). By the same principle, the light is not a judgment in the sense of a punishment; it’s just that when light is introduced, it renders a verdict on reality.
Ephesians 5:13 “But when anything is exposed by the light, it becomes visible…”
John 3:19-21 “And this is the judgment: the light has come into the world, and people loved the darkness rather than the light because their works were evil. For everyone who does wicked things hates the light and does not come to the light, lest his works should be exposed. But whoever does what is true comes to the light, so that it may be clearly seen that his works have been carried out in God.”[11]
The arrival of Jesus brought a light of truth the revealed the condition of humanity and the nature of God. The light that starts by revealing truth goes on to reveal what people will do with it (that’s the verdict): people either love truth or they don’t. It’s one reason non-violent Jesus can say in Matthew 11:25 and Matthew 10:34; "I came not to bring peace, but a sword." Those sound like fighting words, but they’re not: the sword is the Word of God whose truth pierces us to our souls (Hebrews 4:12).
A new kind of light is introduced, and it clarifies the chasm between spiritual light and spiritual darkness. Those who love the darkness of deception will be held responsible for why they rejected the truth. Here’s a good explanation for the judgment question from Ellicott’s Commentary:[12]
“The special form of the word rendered “judgment” in this place is used nowhere else by St. John, and indicates that…His coming was a bringing light into the darkness of…hearts, a testing of the false and the true…That light judged no one, and yet by it everyone was judged.” (Ellicott’s Commentary For English Readers)[13]
“As those are most blind who will not see, so their blindness is most dangerous who fancy they do see. No patients are managed with so much difficulty as those who… say they are well, and that nothing ails them. The sin of those that are self-confident remains… and therefore the power of their sin remains unbroken.” (Benson Commentary)
I was thinking of when I have had knee and shoulder surgeries done, or when I got my stent. I was broken and sick and needed healing. The doctors did not do Xrays and MRIs to bring condemnation but to bring clarity as to the nature of the problem. They were there to save me. Did what their ‘light’ revealed render a verdict? You bet. ‘That’ is torn; ‘that’ is not. ‘That’ is blocked; ‘that’ is not. That new knowledge didn’t make me more sick; it clarified just how sick I was – and what kind of treatment could make me well.
That’s how Jesus can say he came to save the world not condemn it, even while bringing truth that renders a verdict on the true nature of the world, humanity, and of Jesus himself. Light brings (an often uncomfortable) truth that is for our good and that is meant to save us; we have to decide what to do with the truth we have been given.
That’s the first point.
Second point: People are responsible for the light given to them. When the Bible tells us that not one person is righteous on their own[14], it’s referring to everyone everywhere, even those who have not had the light of the Gospel specifically presented to them. How is that fair? Well, the author of Romans shed some light on this.
For when Gentiles who do not have the Law do instinctively the things of the Law, these, not having the Law, are a law to themselves, in that they show the work of the Law written in their hearts, their conscience bearing witness and their thoughts alternately accusing or else defending them, on the day when, according to my gospel, God will judge the secrets of men through Christ Jesus (Romans 2:12-16).
Let’s walk through this one phrase at time just so we have clarity.
· For when the Gentiles (those who don’t have the Law)
· by nature (they have imago dei. There are moral and ethical requirements widely recognized and honored in people generally. It was a commonplace of rabbinic teaching that Abraham kept the laws of Sinai long before they were given.[15])
· do the things contained in the law (they do right things)[16]
· these, not having the written law, are a law unto themselves, (“Gentiles, though not given the Mosaic law, also have some knowledge of God’s law”[17] by the light and grace of God. It’s a moral code, fallen and incomplete though it may be.)[18]
· who show the law written in their hearts, (by the same divine hand which wrote the commandments on the tables of stone)
· their conscience and their thoughts bearing witness, accusing or defending them ([19]“The way conscience operates is described as a process of accusation or defense by the thoughts of a person, the inner life being pictured as a kind of debating forum, so that at times one finds oneself exonerated at the bar of conscience, at other times convicted of wrong.”[20]
Here is an example of how this works. A fourth century Roman emperor named Julian the Apostate (he was raised Christian and reverted to paganism) wrote “Against the Galilaeans,” which criticized Christianity and its Jewish foundation. At one point, he disparages the uniqueness of the Ten Commandments:
“What nation is there, I swear before the gods, which does not think that it ought to keep the commandments, excluding ‘Thou shalt not worship other gods’ and ‘Remember the Sabbath day’? Thus also penalties have been assigned to transgressors...” (Against the Galilaeans, 152D).[21]
Unwittingly, I think, Julian made Paul’s point in Romans: God has provided all with the ability to respond to a moral order that can be known at least to some degree. God, through general revelation of nature and conscience, has ensured that people know that there is good and evil, and that they are responsible to do good and not evil.
The apostle hath explained what the light of nature is, and demonstrated that there is such a light existing. It is a revelation from God written originally on the heart or mind of man; consequently is a revelation common to all nations; and, so far as it goes, it agrees with the things written in the external revelation which God hath made to some nations. (Benson’s Commentary)
Even Gentiles, who had not the written law, had that within, which directed them what to do by the light of nature. Conscience is a witness, and first or last will bear witness…Conscience is a witness, and first or last will bear witness. As they kept or broke these natural laws and dictates, their consciences either acquitted or condemned them. (Matthew Henry’s Concise Commentary)
The point is not that those without divine revelations will escape the Day of Reckoning. They will have to give an answer like everyone else for what they have done with what they were given. And, like all of us, they will not keep the dictates of the Law.
“Paul emphasized that all individuals will be judged on the basis of their response to the revelation they have received. Gentiles will not be condemned for failing to adhere to the stipulations of the law, which were unknown to them. God will not judge Gentiles on the basis of the Jewish law, and the Jew will not be excused by the Gentiles’ failure to uphold the law… Furthermore, human conscience serves as grounds for condemnation because it establishes a framework of right and wrong and reflects the law written in their hearts”. (NKJV Evangelical Study Bible)[22]
People will not have to give an answer based on the light they did not receive; we will all give an answer for what we have done with the light we have been given. Those who have never seen a Bible can still know God’s revelation of himself in nature and in their consciences. They, too, have a light for which they will give an answer. All will be judged for their actions and motives, which are controlled by their consciences.[23]
· How are you responding internally to the light you have been given? If you are sitting in this church, the Bible is yours to read. How are you responding to the light Jesus has revealed to you? How are you responding to the person of Jesus as revealed in Scripture? What has it shown in your heart, soul, and mind, and how are you responding. “Search me, O God, and know my heart: try me, and know my thoughts: And see if there be any wicked way in me, and lead me in the way everlasting.” (Psalm 139:23-24) How’s that going? Are you able to be honest, humble, surrendered, committed to dealing with what the light reveals?
· What are you doing externally with the light of revelation you have been given? Is it changing the rhythms of life? Is it ordering your steps? Are you living like a different kind of person than you were before you had the truth? Has the truth set you free from the bondage of sin? Are you stepping into or hiding from the light?
__________________________________________________________________________________________
[1] “Many in ancient times believed serious birth defects were the product of personal sin—thus the disciples’ question in verse 2.” (CBS Tony Evans Study Bible)
[2] (Acts 28:4) “The people of the island saw it hanging from his hand and said to each other, “A murderer, no doubt! Though he escaped the sea, justice will not permit him to live.”
[3] F. F. Bruce notes, "This does not mean that God deliberately caused the child to be born blind in order that, after many years, his glory should be displayed in the removal of the blindness; to think so would again be an aspersion on the character of God. It does mean that God overruled the disaster of the child's blindness so that, when the child grew to manhood, he might, by recovering his sight, see the glory of God in the face of Christ, and others, seeing this work of God, might turn to the true Light of the World.”
[4] “We know from the pages of Pliny, and Tacitus, and Suetonius, that the saliva jejuna was held to be a remedy in cases of blindness, and that the same remedy was used by the Jews is established by the writings of the Rabbis.” (Ellicott’s Commentary)
[5] The Pharisaic school of Hillel permitted prayer for the sick on the Sabbath; the dominant Shammaite schoo didn’t. (NIV Cultural Backgrounds Study Bible)
[6] “Many people do not bear witness to Christ because they fear they will be asked questions they cannot answer…“That I don't know, but what I do know is this,” is foundational to witnessing one's faith to others.” (Orthodox Study Bible)
[7] “Critics sometimes insulted their opponents by refusing to name them (and)denying their importance.” (NIV Cultural Backgrounds Study Bible)
[8] “The man who had been physically blind had become a believer, for his spiritual eyes had also been opened. On the other hand, the Pharisees could see physically but were spiritually blind.”(Africa Bible Commentary)
[9] “Many ancient writers spoke of spiritual or moral blindness (see Isaiah 6:9 – 10; 42:18 – 19); some also spoke of those who were physically blind yet had great spiritual insight.” (NIV Cultural Backgrounds Study Bible)
[10] Paul makes a similar argument in Rom. 1:18–3:20.
[11] There are plenty of other ‘light’ verses, such as this one in 2 Corinthians 4:6 “ God, who said, “Let light shine out of darkness,” made his light shine in our hearts to give us the light of the knowledge of God’s glory displayed in the face of Christ.”
[12] “Bringing a sword” is simply an observation that not all will accept the truth about Jesus, and disagreement over this issue will lead to conflict.
[13] “His coming would manifest the disposition and character of every man. The humble, teachable, and upright, though they were as much in the dark with respect to religion and the knowledge of divine things, as the blind man had been with respect to the light of the sun, should be greatly enlightened by his coming: whereas those, who in their own opinion were wise, and learned, and clear-sighted, should appear to be, what they really were, blind, that is…foolish.” (Benson Commentary)
[14] Romans 3:10
[15] Expositor’s Bible Commentary
[16] In 1 Corinthians 5, Paul deals with a disturbing situation in the Corinthian church: “It is reported commonly that there is fornication among you, and such fornication as is not so much as named among the Gentiles, that one should have his father’s wife.” Seneca the Younger (another contemporary of Paul) wrote a play called Phaedra in which Phaedra desires her step-son, Hippolytus. Phaedra’s nurse counsels her: “I beg you, then, extinguish the flames of your incestuous love, a sin which the barbarians have yet to commit. The nomadic Getae do not practice incest, nor the inhospitable Taurians, nor the scattered Scythians. Expel this perversion from your mind.” (Paul and the Pagans, faith.edu)
[17] Zondervan Illustrated Bible Backgrounds Commentary Of The New Testament
[18] “Without individual conscience, there could be no public moral code. But we believe the main reference here to be to the public code; to the general consciousness and opinion of heathens that right and wrong are eternally different, and that judgment is to be accordingly hereafter…and as all pointing to a great manifestation of the truth of the principle at the Last Day.” (Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges)
[19] Expositor’s Bible Commentary
[20] Benson’s Commentary
[21] “Paul and the Pagans,” faith.edu
[22] “Heathen sinners shall be justly condemned; for though without the law, they have a substitute for it.” Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
[23] Africa Bible Commentary