Owl's Head Light

Owl's Head Light
Owl's Head Maine

Wednesday, May 1, 2013

The Gospel of John Lesson 32 (4-28-2013) John 9:11-34


The Gospel of John Lesson 32 (4-28-2013)

Lesson 32 – John 9:11-34

V. 11 Even though the man had received a healing from the Lord it appears that he had yet to not only figure out who Jesus was, but also apparently had not yet believed in Jesus putting his faith in Him as his personal Savior. At this point we find him simply amazed with Jesus and what He had done to and for him, but he was unclear as to actually who Jesus was.
Over the next few verses we see this man’s faith progress in steps or stages appearing to fully mature at the end of this chapter. Everyone should be completely happy with what had happened to this man in receiving his healing, right? The man who was blind from birth receives his sight and in the end gives credit to the right and appropriate source in the end committing his life to Christ. This should be a happy ending. It doesn’t get much better than this.
But not so fast. Not everyone was happy about what had happened and how it went down. The people that had encountered the now seeing formally blind man were not only amazed at what had happened, but they were also perplexed having no way to explain what had happened. In looking for answers they turn to one of the very few sources that they have for answers taking the now seeing blind man to the temple hoping to get input that might be helpful. But, instead in the end they end up in a conflict that I am sure that they did not actually anticipate.
The people clear and simple had no doubt that this was a full fledged miracle. However, when discussing the matter with the Pharisees they found out that these religious leaders were concerned with other details.
To begin with as these religious leaders begin to question them the first thing that they find out is that this miracle had been performed on the Sabbath. Talking about starting on the wrong foot. Right here no matter what had happened the religious leaders had already come to a conclusion in their mind that what had happened could not be of God because this miracle had happened on the Sabbath. They had viewed performing a miracle as work and to them doing work on the Sabbath was a violation of the Law. Obviously to them in doing so whoever did such was a sinner having done such a sinful act violating their version of God’s Law and could not truly be of God.
However, the people disagreed. They looked at it from another perspective. They had viewed it from the perspective that a miracle had happened that had God’s name on it and they could not deny that it was of God no matter what day that it had occurred on. They apparently disagreed so strongly that in the end of v. 16 it tells us that it ends up causing a division among the people. It is not completely clear as to what two groups formed as a result to this encounter. It would be safe to assume, however, that there was at least a division formed between the religious leaders and the people, but some translations make it clear that even the religious leaders were not all on the same page indicating that even among the Sanhedrin there was sharp division.
In v. 15 the Pharisees at least ask further questions asking the man born blind to review the details of the miracle with them. One might question however their motive in doing so. It seems from all indications here as was their usual custom that they in reality had already made up their mind having already formed their opinion and appraisal of what had happened as seen in v. 16. In v. 17 the Pharisees in looking for a way to discredit Jesus’ work and what had happened turn again to the man that had been born blind and foolishly and in all probability reluctantly ask the man his opinion of what had happened and what he thought of Jesus. It was a foolish and risky move on their part.
The man instead of backing down from the peer pressure of these religious leaders and lessening his opinion of what he thought of Jesus as seen earlier in this chapter seems to raise the bar appearing to be developing a more sure opinion of who he thought Jesus was. In doing so, we find him elevating his opinion from Jesus as a man to Jesus a prophet of God, v. 17. To the Pharisees this answer was not good. This was not what they were looking for or what they were expecting the man to say. Instead of the blind man’s testimony helping them to discredit Jesus it did the opposite. Now they were desperate.
In v. 18 we see the Pharisees not willing to accept the former blind man’s opinion of Jesus now look for ways to not only discredit Jesus, but now also the man. In doing so, they declare publicly that they even doubt that this man had ever been born blind in the first place. In attempting to get to the bottom of this they call for his parents and begin to question them now also.
In v. 19 they ask his parents 2 questions. The first question they ask them is if this man was indeed their son. To this his parents answer in the affirmative, v. 20. The second question to them was how did this happen? By what method did their son regain his sight? They had already asked this same question of the man that had been born blind in v. 15. The second part of their questioning to his parents, however, did not come without its share of intimidation and potential consequences. This was a loaded inquiry or question. Answering this question in the wrong way could make life difficult for the man and his parents.
In v. 21 we see his parents use a bit of wisdom in answering them by essentially sidestepping the question deferring them to the source, i.e. the blind man, saying that he was of age to answer his own questions. It is likely that this inquiry was at least somewhat of a public discussion and dialog between the religious rulers, the man born blind and his parents. In all likelihood it was set up this way by the religious leaders to be used as a form of intimidation to encourage the man and his parents to respond in their favor making them look good attempting to discredit the miracle that Jesus had just performed. In v. 22 the Apostle John tells us that there is indeed a cover-up and that the Pharisee’s intention and desire was not to obtain the truth, but was to manipulate the facts using them for their own benefit.
In v. 24 out of frustration they begin to again further question the man born blind using leading questions telling the man exactly what to say. They tell him that he had better give God the praise for his healing and make a public statement supporting their opinion and verdict on Who Jesus was. However, the man wanting to give an accurate account boldly answers them back un-intimidated choosing not to give into their intimidation stating again the truth of what had happened. As yet he had not made a firm decision as to who he thought that Jesus was, but does state to them the fact that he does know for sure, that he was once blind and now he can see.
Still not believing that a miracle had indeed occurred, v. 26, the Pharisees ask the man again to explain the mechanics and details of what he claimed had happened. In asking the man this question again in all likelihood what they were actually looking for was not the truth of what had actually happened, but were in actuality looking for something that they could use to discredit what had occurred.
In v. 27 the man born blind begins to get annoyed with their continual interrogation and insinuation. This is the third time that we see in this chapter that they ask for an account of the details of what had happened. In replying to their request in v. 26 he replies with a bit of sarcasm asking them if the reason that they continue to ask him these questions is possibly because they also want to become His disciples.
We know that this is a poke at them by the man because a couple of verses earlier the religious leaders made it clearly known what they thought of Jesus declaring Jesus a sinner to the man born blind telling him to give the credit to God instead. In doing so, from their point of view, it was clear that Jesus was not connected to God in any way and that there was no way that they would even remotely want to be Jesus’ disciple. But, the man born blind couldn’t help himself. To him what they were saying was so ridiculous that he begins to mirror their cynicism back at them from the other side of the table so to speak by asking them if they too wanted to become Jesus’ disciples.
The Pharisees respond back furiously in v. 28 to the man’s comment about their possibly wanting to be Jesus’ disciples explaining their response the KJV uses the terminology ‘reviling him’ as they respond. The NIV translates their response as ‘they hurled insults’ at the man. The International Standard Version says that ‘they turned on him in fury’. The Net translation says that they ‘heaped insults’ on him. The Living Bible paraphrase says that they ‘cursed’ the man. And, the God’s Word translation says that they ‘yelled’ at him. They were hot! They were not getting the response that they were looking for and they were done messing around.
In v. 28 they draw a line in the sand now more distinctly than ever creating two distinct camps, those for Jesus or those who at least believe the details of the miracle that had happened and the other side aligning with the view and opinion of the Pharisees believing that Jesus is in actuality a deceiver of the people of God and therefore making Him out to be a sinner.  
However, now in this verse they not only try to discredit and in actuality defame Jesus, but now they create the standard of either ‘guilty’ or ‘good’ by association, placing those accepting Jesus’ miracle as valid on the so called ‘sinner side’ and those who reject Jesus along with the religious leaders on the God or good side. However, the religious leaders throw in one more detail. They weight the outcome putting their thumb on the scale so to speak claiming Moses as the basis for their conviction. It is interesting that in this verse they claim Moses as their justification, but the question to them should be turned around asking them ‘Would Moses claim them’. They had claimed to be connected with Moses, but would Moses have agreed. It is unlikely. Their actions here proved otherwise!
In v. 30 the man born blind annoyed with their logic and attitude replies to them putting his spin on what had happened. He reminds them of the caliber of the miracle that had occurred. They were supposed to know everything important and yet they were clueless as to where Jesus received His power. The man was speaking from firsthand experience. The miracle had happened to him!
He proceeds in v. 31-4 outlining the working of God in essence telling them that there is no mistaking what had happened. What had happened had the signature of God on it. His rational was that Jesus had to get His power from somewhere. Something like this doesn’t just happen and the only logical source for such power was God Almighty. He makes the point that God does not just give out this kind of power to just anyone, especially to one who was considered a sinner.
In v. 34 we see that the man’s comments did not go over too well. The religious leaders end this discussion by essentially calling the man one of the worst sinners that ever existed and that because of this that he, the man, could not possibly have anything that he could share with them that could be of benefit. They forget that they were the ones that began this dialog at least appearing to want some answers. In the end they end up casting the man out of the Temple and Temple life. Now being an outcast Jesus comes to claim him…

No comments:

Post a Comment