John 9 (First Essay): And WHAT a Healing!

The passage for the morning is too long to reproduce here, but the entirety of John 9 constitutes one of the great healing narratives of the NT. In Prof. J. Ramsey Michaels' mind (John, 145ff.), the man portrayed here is among the most fascinating characters in the Gospels. For one thing, his understanding of Jesus seems to grow as he speaks about him (9:13-34). Then, he doesn't mind sparring with the Pharisees about their understanding of what happened. He uses humor, direct and practical observation, irony and gentle accusation to show that the Pharisees' understanding of Jesus is driven more by their own fear than by a careful examination of the facts. By the end of the story this nameless blind man becomes a sort of hero of faith. He is willing to be cast out of the synagogue for confessing Jesus as his Lord. By studying this passage today we learn a lot about the power of direct and honest speech regarding what we know to be true. We also learn a sort of darker truth about life--that those who cling to what they know to be true may often be vilified and ultimately cast out from a society to which they had hitherto belonged.

This and the next essay tell the powerful story of the healing of the man born blind. In this essay I will give some background information to help understand the passage; the latter part of this and all of the next essay will then exposit the three parts of the story: (1) 9:1-12, the healing; (2) 9:13-34, the debate with the Pharisees; (3) 9:35-41, the confession of faith in Jesus.

II. Themes in John 9

Four literary and theological themes explored in this passage are: (1) the controversy between Judaism and earliest Christianity, centering on expulsion from the synagogue; (2) the contrast between blindess and sight, darkness and light; (3) the structure of the argument, with disagreements or uncertainties resolved, but each one of them taking more and more effort to resolve it; and (4) the names of Jesus that come into sharper focus as the narrative develops.

(1) Expulsion from the Synagogue

Each of the Gospels must be read on at least at two historical levels--the level of Jesus and that of the author a generation later. In no Gospel is that dual reading merged in a more challenging manner than in John. On one level (the "Jesus" level) the story is simply about the healing of a man born blind; on another level (the author level), it is about the plight of those confessing Jesus in relation to the synagogue. But the story as we read it in the Gospel betrays little indication of these two levels. It simply tells the story of a healed man who is thrown out (v. 34) for confessing Jesus as a man "from God" (v. 33). The undercurrent of fear and confrontation that runs throughout the narrative, however, especially in vv. 18-23 and vv. 24-34, indicates that what is in view here is the living reality of the early Christians at the end of the first century or when the Gospel is penned. People are in fear of the religious authorities, who are trying to "pin down" followers of Jesus. The contrast between those who follow Jesus and Moses (v. 28) is stark. If one persisted in faith in Jesus one would be thrown out of the synagogue (v. 22, 34). For Jews who had been raised on the essential importance of the synagogue to religious life, expulsion from that synagogue is tantamount to removal from the community which nurtured you from youth. We betray our 21st century bias if we think that a person thrown out of the synagogue could just easily decide to take his "membership" to another synagogue down the street. The separation of people is beginning to harden into the division between two religions. Indeed, the notion of "division" is in the air througout this passage (the word schisma appears in v. 16); we see it played out in the personal and synagogue level when we are aware of the two levels at which we read the story.

(2) Blindness and Sight, Light and Darkness

In the preceding chapter Jesus boldly proclaimed, "I am the light of the world. Whoever follows me will never walk in darkness but will have the light of life" (8:12). The theme of light and darkenss is not picked up elsewhere in ch. 8, but it becomes the focus of our passage. The man born blind will receive his sight. The emphasis on the man's congenital blindness, as Dr. Michaels reminds us, is one that none of other Gospel writers points to when narrating Jesus' healing of blind people. Thus, the man doesn't technically "recover" his sight; he never had it in the first place. Whereas there may have been stories in the Gospels and other Jewish miracle traditions about people "recovering" their sight, "never since the world began has it been heard that anyone opened the eyes of a person born blind" (9:32). But the contrast between light and darkness, sight and blindness goes deeper. The Pharisees are the ones who were supposed to "see" or understand the nature of faith. But they, like their leader Nicodemus (ch. 3), don't see. The blind man sees. He truly will understand who Jesus is. The problem is not with being blind. That, as we see from the narrative, can be healed. The problem is with people who say, "We see," but really do not understand. In this case, their sin remains (9:41).

(3) The Nature of Disagreements

Jesus' presence and actions cause disagreements, confusions and schisms, but each one of these is resolved as the passage unfolds. In fact, there are three, or perhaps four, disagreements which really move the passage along. First, there is the question of what caused the man's blindness. Was it because of his sin or that of his parents (v. 2). A potential confusion or disagreement exists. But Jesus deflects this question quickly by pointing to something else: "Neither this man nor his parents sinned; he was born blind so that God's works might be revealed in him" (v. 3). A second disagreement comes a few verses later. People see the man healed. Some say that it was the man who had begged by the pool of Siloam; others said that it wasn't him but was "someone like him" (v. 9). So, they asked him and he said, "I am the man" (v. 10). So, a second disagreement is cleared up. Third, the Pharisees got into the act in vv. 13ff. and tried to undersatnd the nature of his healing. Some said that "this man" (i.e., Jesus) is not from God because he didn't observe the sabbath (v. 16). Others, however, raised the question, "How can a man who is a sinner perform such signs" (v. 16)? So, there was a schisma among them. Finally, in the long disputation passage between the Pharisees and the man, when they called him in for a second interview, they said quite frankly that there was a division between those who are disciples of Moses and those who follow Jesus (v. 28).

The purpose of all the talk about divisions can only be understood in the context of the larger issue of the separation of Christianity from Judaism, but the continued reference to disagreements caused by Jesus' presence and activity also suggests that unity may be a sort of elusive goal even when those who follow Jesus are completely separated from the Jews.

(4) The Names/Titles of Jesus

Throughout the passage there is also the issue of who Jesus is. The man is put on the spot by various groups of interviewers; on one occasion he says that Jesus is a prophet (v. 17); when pressed further he says that he is "from God" (v. 33). Finally, after some instruction from Jesus he admits that Jesus is the "Son of Man" (v. 35). With each successive name comes a deeper understanding of who Jesus is. Not only does the man seem to be growing in his understanding. We, the reader, are having our eyes "opened" as we read along the narrative.

Now that these points have been established, let's turn to some exegetical insights from John 9.

3328