June 1, 2023
A Witness To Chaos
“Therefore some of the Pharisees were saying, ‘This man is not from God, because He does not keep the Sabbath.’ But others were saying, ‘How can a man who is a sinner perform such signs?’ And there was a division among them. So they said to the blind man again, ‘What do you say about Him, since He opened your eyes?’ And he said, ‘He is a prophet.’”
John 9:16-17 (NASB)
Can adults be so stubborn to argue in public? Yes. A year ago an HOA Board got out of hand. I stood and asked to be recognized by parliamentary procedure. I was tired of hearing the arguing. It stemmed from one board member who started arguing with another about the last board’s failures. I finally was allowed to stand and speak. I told the board I thought it was pretty juvenile, they needed to stop, or move to adjourn. It was a shame the meeting fell apart. I was a witness that night, but not a welcomed one because it wasn’t what they wanted to hear.
“Therefore some of the Pharisees were saying, ‘This man is not from God, because He does not keep the Sabbath.’ But others were saying, ‘How can a man who is a sinner perform such signs?’” The Jews added all kinds of additional laws to Mosaic Law. These additions were added for the purpose of gaining what they viewed to be a more pure sect of Judaism. These laws as Borchert will discuss seem a little strange, but are an active part of Jewish life at this time: Borchert says: “The rules of the rabbis, did not forbid all acts of mercy on the Sabbath because it was argued that if someone were in imminent danger of death, a Jew could come to the person’s aid. But the blind man did not fall under such a rule, and therefore they would have judged the healer here as guilty...”[1] “Not only did the rabbis regard the healing as a violation of the law, but Jesus’ act of mixing spittle and mud fell into another of the thirty-nine areas of forbidden work, namely, the act of kneading. Moreover, at least in the later Talmuds the anointing of the eye and the putting of spittle on the eye were regarded as violations of Sabbath.”[2] Two violations were found in Jesus actions. One was the healing on the Sabbath. The other of anointing the eye. Yet, the Pharisees weren’t interested in the rules. Their concentration was fixed on the healing of the blind man. He told them it was a divine act of God. As a result of this, “there was a division among them.” This may be rendered ‘they had different thoughts,’ ‘they opposed one another,’ or ‘their decisions did not agree.’”[3] So the two sides were divided in their investigation. This obviously led to more arguing and viewpoints from each side of the Pharisees, but this was common. How did the man view Jesus? “He is a prophet.” The answer was clear, but it was more than what all wanted to hear. This was because Jesus would have to be authenticated as One sent from God, and they weren’t about to let it go that easily.
Imagine being the healed man; so thankful for his miracle, only to be questioned by those who had another agenda. When they asked him to speak, they still didn’t like his answer. He could only testify of what really happened. Can each of us today testify even when others won’t like the result? Can we be as brave as this man, or do we collapse to the crowd’s influence?
[1] Gerald L. Borchert, John 1–11, vol. 25A, The New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 1996), 318.
[2] Ibid.
[3] Barclay Moon Newman and Eugene Albert Nida, A Handbook on the Gospel of John, UBS Handbook Series (New York: United Bible Societies, 1993), 307.