Unbelieving Jews were Blind
The subsequent evaluation of Jesus confirmed this distinction between seeing and not seeing in the comparison made between the believing man and the unbelieving Jews. Blindness is here to be interpreted on two levels (9:39). On the one hand, the Pharisees who had by physical standards been able to see were by spiritual standards revealed to be blind. On the other hand, the former blind man who had come to see physically in fact also became the model of spiritual perception. Jesus’ answer to the Pharisees’ question concerning their state (9:40) was thus for the evangelist self-evident. Accordingly, Jesus confirmed the continuation of their pitiful state of both blindness and guilt. The judgment on the blind state of the Pharisees here in John was not very different from Jesus’ judgment on the hypocritical Pharisees of Matt 23:16–19, who were condemned as pathetic, blind guides. That view is reinforced by Paul’s judgment on the self-righteous Jews as guides of the blind who themselves were in desperate need of direction (Rom 2:19). The Jews here had not found the light (John 8:12) of the new Tabernacles’ symbol (cf. 1:14) and therefore were walking blindly in the darkness of the world’s wilderness.
The coming of Jesus was thus to be viewed as a moment of truth (“judgment,” 9:39). While his intention in coming to the world was not condemnation (cf. 3:17), the rejection of him and his mission meant that condemnation was inevitable (cf. 3:18). Bultmann calls this crossing point the “paradox of revelation.”246 The love and grace of God removes the camouflage of evil and sin (cf. 3:19). The point is that both the blind man and the Pharisees here stood uncovered in the presence of Jesus. The blind man’s eyes were opened, but the lives of the Pharisees were clearly declared to be blind. Their guilt was confirmed (“remains,” menein).
The dialogical interplay presented in this chapter between the blind man and the investigating authorities is one of the Johannine literary jewels. The rationalistic guardians of tradition were set over against a witness to authentic divine transformation. The lines were drawn. In the interchange the honesty of the former blind man proved in the story to be a fully adequate match for the words of the religious power brokers of his time. But as the gulf widened between the two sides, power became the means for silencing honesty, and the man was removed from their community.
Yet the story does not end without the intrusion of the Son of Man, who judged both authenticity and falseness according to unmasked reality. In so doing, Jesus in this story has left a lasting message for all Christians who have to face persecution and exclusion from power forces in the world that demand conformity not to God but to human traditions. May all who read this exquisite story and who claim to be children of God eschew the tempting way of the self-righteous power brokers of religion and accept instead the way of a humble commitment to Jesus Christ, who transforms human blindness into spiritual sight and dynamic life.
Borchert, Gerald L. John 1–11. Vol. 25A. Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1996. Print. The New American Commentary.
Comments