As he passed by (παραγων paragōn). Present active participle of παραγω paragō old verb to go along, by, or past (Matthew 20:30). Only example in this Gospel, but in 1 John 2:8, 1 John 2:17. The day was after the stirring scenes in chapter 8, but not at the feast of dedication as Westcott argues. That comes three months later (John 10:22).From his birth (εκ γενετης ek genetēs). Ablative case with εκ ek of old word from γενω γινομαι genō class="normal greek">τυπλος εκ γενετης ginomai Here alone in N.T., but the phrase tuphlos ek genetēs is common in Greek writers. Probably a well-known character with his stand as a beggar (John 9:5).
Who did sin? (τις ημαρτεν tis hēmarten). Second aorist active indicative of αμαρτανω hamartanō See Acts 3:2; Acts 14:8 for two examples of lameness from birth. Blindness is common in the Orient and Jesus healed many cases (cf. Mark 8:23; Mark 10:46) and mentions this fact as one of the marks of the Messiah in the message to the Baptist (Matthew 11:5). This is the only example of congenital blindness healed. It is not clear that the disciples expected Jesus to heal this case. They are puzzled by the Jewish notion that sickness was a penalty for sin. The Book of Job had shown that this was not always the case and Jesus shows it also (Luke 13:1-5). If this man was guilty, it was due to prenatal sin on his part, a curious notion surely. The other alternative charged it upon his parents. That is sometimes true (Exodus 20:5, etc.), but by no means always. The rabbinical casuists loved to split hairs on this problem. Ezekiel (Ezekiel 18:20) says: “The soul that sinneth it shall die” (individual responsibility for sin committed). There is something in heredity, but not everything.That he should be born blind (ινα τυπλος γεννητηι hina tuphlos gennēthēi). Probably consecutive (or sub-final) use of ινα hina with first aorist passive subjunctive of γενναω gennaō f0).
But that the works of God should be made manifest in him (αλλ ινα πανερωτηι τα εργα του τεου εν αυτωι all' hina phanerōthēi ta erga tou theou en autōi). Jesus denies both alternatives, and puts God‘s purpose (αλλ ινα all' hina with first aorist subjunctive of πανεροω phaneroō) as the true solution. It is sometimes true that disease is the result of personal sin as in the man in John 5:14 and parents can hand on the effects of sin to the third and fourth generations, but there are cases free from blame like this. There is comfort for many sufferers in the words of Jesus here.
We must work the works of him that sent me (ημας δει εργαζεσται τα εργα του πεμπσαντος με hēmas dei ergazesthai ta erga tou pempsantos me). This is undoubtedly the correct text (supported by the Neutral and Western classes) and not εμε eme (I) and με me (me) of the Syrian class nor ημας hēmas (we) and ημας hēmas (us) of the Alexandrian class. Jesus associates us with him in the task committed to him by the Father. Bernard argues vigorously, but vainly, for εμε eme me. We are not able to fathom the depth of the necessity (δει dei) here involved in each life as in this poor blind man and in each of us.While it is day (εως ημερα εστιν heōs hēmera estin). This clause gives the note of urgency upon us all. The night cometh (ερχεται νυχ erchetai nux). “Night is coming on,” and rapidly. Night was coming for Jesus (John 7:33) and for each of us. Cf. John 11:9; John 12:35. Even electric lights do not turn night into day. εως Heōs with the present indicative (John 21:22.) means “while,” not until as in John 13:38.
When I am in the world (οταν εν τωι κοσμωι ω hotan en tōi kosmōi ō). Indefinite relative clause with οταν hotan and present active subjunctive ω ō “whenever I am in the world.” The Latin Vulgate renders here οταν hotan by quamdiu so long as or while as if it were εως heōs But clearly Jesus here refers to the historic Incarnation (John 17:11) and to any previous visitations in the time of the patriarchs, prophets, etc. Jesus as God‘s Son is always the Light of the World (John 1:4, John 1:10; John 8:12), but here the reference is limited to his manifestation “in the world.”I am the light of the world (πως ειμι του κοσμου phōs eimi tou kosmou). The absence of the definite article (το πως to phōs in John 8:12) is to be noted (Westcott). Literally, “I am light to the world, whenever I am in the world.” “The display of the character varies with the occasion” (Westcott).
He spat on the ground (επτυσεν χαμαι eptusen chamai). First aorist active indicative of the old verb πτυω ptuō for which see Mark 7:33. Χαμαι Chamai is an old adverb either in the dative or locative (sense suits locative), in N.T. only here and John 18:6. Jesus was not asked to cure this man. The curative effects of saliva are held in many places. The Jews held saliva efficacious for eye-trouble, but it was forbidden on the Sabbath. “That Jesus supposed some virtue lay in the application of the clay is contradicted by the fact that in other cases of blindness He did not use it” (Dods). Cf. Mark 8:23. Why he here accommodated himself to current belief we do not know unless it was to encourage the man to believe.He made clay (εποιησεν πηλον epoiēsen pēlon). Only use of πηλος pēlos old word for clay, in N.T. in this chapter and Romans 9:21. The kneading of the clay and spittle added another offense against the Sabbath rules of the rabbis. Anointed his eyes with the clay (επεχρισεν αυτου τον πηλον επι τους οπταλμους epechrisen autou ton pēlon epi tous ophthalmous). First aorist active indicative of επιχριω epichriō old verb, to spread on, anoint, here only and John 9:11 in N.T. “He spread the clay upon his eyes.” B C read επετηκεν epethēken (first aorist active indicative of επιτιτημι epitithēmi to put on).
Wash (νιπσαι nipsai). First aorist middle imperative second person singular of νιπτω niptō later form of νιζω nizō to wash, especially parts of the body. Certainly bathing the eyes is good for eye trouble, and yet we are not to infer that the cure was due to the use of the clay or to the washing.In the pool of Siloam (εις την κολυμβητραν του Σιλωαμ eis tēn kolumbēthran tou Silōam). The word κολυμβητρα kolumbēthra (from κολυμβαω kolumbaō to swim) is a common word for swimming-pool, in N.T. only here and John 5:2, John 5:7. The name απεσταλμενος Siloam is Hebrew (Isaiah 8:6) and means “sent” (αποστελλω apestalmenos perfect passive participle of ενιπσατο apostellō). It was situated south of the temple area and was apparently connected by a subterranean tunnel with the Virgin‘s Well (John 5:2) according to Bernard. The water was conducted artificially to the pool of Siloam. Washed (νιπσαι enipsato). First aorist direct middle (cf. ηλτεν βλεπων nipsai), apparently bathing and not merely washing his eyes. Came seeing (ēlthen blepōn). Jesus had healed him. He was tested by the demand to bathe his eyes.
Neighbours (γειτονες geitones). From γη gē (land), of the same land, old word. See Luke 14:2.Saw him (τεωρουντες theōrountes). Present active participle of τεωρεω theōreō who used to observe him. Aforetime (το προτερον to proteron). Adverbial accusative, “the former time,” formerly. That he was a beggar (οτι προσαιτης ην hoti prosaitēs ēn). See John 4:19; John 12:19 for declarative οτι hoti after τεωρεω theōreō But it is entirely possible that οτι hoti here is “because” (Westcott). Προσαιτης Prosaitēs is a late word for beggar, in N.T. only here and Mark 10:46. It is from προσαιτεω prosaiteō to ask in addition (see προσαιτων prosaitōn below), a thing that beggars know how to do. Is not this he that sat and begged? (Ουχ ουτος εστιν ο κατημενος και προσαιτων Ouch houtos estin ho kathēmenos kai prosaitōn). He had his regular place and was a familiar figure. But now his eyes are wide open.
Nay but he is like him (Ουχι αλλα ομοιος αυτωι εστιν Ouchi class="normal greek">ουχι alla homoios autōi estin). Vigorous denial (αυτοι ouchi) and mere similarity suggested. Associative instrumental case ομοιος autoi after εκεινος ελεγεν homoios The crowd is divided.He said (ekeinos elegen). Emphatic demonstrative (as in John 9:11, John 9:12, John 9:25, John 9:36), “That one spake up.” He knew.
How then were thine eyes opened? (Πως ουν ηνεωιχτησαν σου οι οπταλμοι Pōs oun ēneōichthēsan sou hoi ophthalmoi). Natural and logical (ουν oun) question. First aorist passive indicative (triple augment) of ανοιγω anoigō These neighbours admit the fact and want the manner (“how”) of the cure made clear.
The man that is called Jesus (ο αντρωπος ο λεγομενος Ιησους ho anthrōpos ho legomenos Iēsous). He does not yet know Jesus as the Messiah the Son of God (John 9:36).I received sight (ανεβλεπσα aneblepsa). First aorist active indicative of αναβλεπω anablepō old verb to see again, to recover sight, not strictly true of this man who had never seen. He got back sight that he had never had. Originally the verb means to look up (Matthew 14:19).
Where is he? (Που εστιν εκεινοσ Pou estin ekeinos). The very question of John 7:11.
They bring him (αγουσιν αυτον agousin auton). Vivid dramatic present active of αγω agō These neighbours bring him.To the Pharisees (προς τους Παρισαιους pros tous Pharisaious). The accepted professional teachers who posed as knowing everything. The scribes were usually Pharisees. Him that aforetime was blind (τον ποτε τυπλον ton pote tuphlon). Simply, “the once blind man.”
Now it was the sabbath (ην δε σαββατον ēn de sabbaton). Literally, “Now it was a sabbath” (no article). To the Pharisees this fact was a far more important matter than whether or how the thing was done. See notes in Volume 1 and notes in Volume 2 for discussions of the minute Sabbath regulations of the rabbis.
Again (παλιν palin). Besides the questioning of the neighbours (John 9:8, John 9:9).Therefore (ουν oun). Since he has been brought to the Pharisees who must make a show of wisdom. Also asked him (ηρωτων αυτον και ērōtōn auton kai). Inchoative imperfect active of ερωταω erōtaō “began also to question him.” How he received his sight (πως ανεβλεπσεν pōs aneblepsen). No denial as yet of the fact, only interest in the “how.” He put (επετηκεν epethēken). Genuine here, but see John 9:6. And lo see (και βλεπω kai blepō). That is the overwhelming fact.
Because he keepeth not the sabbath (οτι το σαββατον ου τηρει hoti to sabbaton ou tērei). This is reason (causal οτι hoti) enough. He violates our rules about the Sabbath and therefore is a Sabbath-breaker as charged when here before (John 5:10, John 5:16, John 5:18). Hence he is not “from God” (παρα τεου para theou). So some.How can a man that is a sinner do such signs? (Πως δυναται αντρωπος αμαρτωλος τοιαυτα σημεια ποιειν Pōs dunatai anthrōpos hamartōlos toiauta sēmeia poiein). This was the argument of Nicodemus, himself a Pharisee and one of the Sanhedrin, long ago (John 3:2). It was a conundrum for the Pharisees. No wonder there was “a division” (σχισμα schisma schism, split, from σχιζω schizō) as in John 7:43; John 10:19.
Unto the blind man again (τωι τυπλωι παλιν tōi tuphlōi palin). The doctors disagree and they ask the patient whose story they had already heard (John 9:15).In that he opened thine eyes (οτι ηνεωιχεν σου τους οπταλμους hoti ēneōixen sou tous ophthalmous). Causal use of οτι hoti and triple augment in the first aorist active indicative of ανοιγω anoigō They offer the excuse that the man‘s experience particularly qualified him to explain the “how,” overlooking the fact he had already told his story and also trying to conceal their own hopeless division of opinion. He is a prophet (προπητης εστιν prophētēs estin). The man will go that far anyhow.
The Jews (οι Ιουδαιοι hoi Ioudaioi). Probably the incredulous and hostile section of the Pharisees in John 9:16 (cf. John 5:10).Did not believe (ουκ επιστευσαν ouk episteusan). The facts told by the man, “that he had been blind and had received his sight” (οτι ην τυπλος και ανεβλεπσεν hoti ēn tuphlos kai aneblepsen), conflicted with their theological views of God and the Sabbath. So they refused belief “until they called the parents” (εως οτου επωνησαν τους γονεις heōs hotou ephōnēsan tous goneis). Usual construction of εως οτου heōs hotou (= until which time, like εως heōs alone) with aorist active indicative of πωνεω phōneō old verb from πωνη phōnē (voice, sound). They called out loud for his parents to throw light on this grave problem to cover up their own stupidity.
Is this your son who ye say was born blind? how doth he now see? (ουτος εστιν ο υιος υμων ον υμεις ληγετε οτι τυπλος εγεννητη πως ουν βλεπει αρτι Houtos estin ho huios humōn class="translit"> hon humeis lēgete hoti tuphlos egennēthē pōs oun blepei arti). It was shrewdly put with three questions in one in order to confuse the parents if possible and give the hostile Pharisees a handle.
We know that this is our son, and that he was born blind (Οιδαμεν οτι ουτος εστιν ο υιος ημων και οτι τυπλος εγεννητη Oidamen hoti houtos estin ho huios hēmōn kai hoti tuphlos egennēthē). These two questions the parents answer clearly and thus cut the ground from under the disbelief of these Pharisees as to the fact of the cure (John 9:18). So these Pharisees made a failure here.
But how he now seeth we know not (πως δε νυν βλεπει ουκ οιδαμεν pōs de nun blepei ouk oidamen). Concerning the third question they profess ignorance both as to the “how” (πως pōs) and the “who” (τις tis).Opened (ηνοιχεν ēnoixen). First aorist active indicative with single augment of ανοιγω anoigō same form as ηνεωιχεν ēneōixen (triple augment) in John 9:17. They were not witnesses of the cure and had the story only from the son as the Pharisees had. He is of age (ηλικιαν εχει hēlikian echei). “He has maturity of age.” He is an adult. A regular classical phrase in Plato, etc. The parents were wholly right and within their rights.
Because they feared the Jews (οτι εποβουντο τους Ιουδαιους hoti ephobounto tous Ioudaious). Imperfect middle, a continuing fear and not without reason. See note on the whispers about Jesus because of fear of the Jews (John 7:13).Had agreed already (ηδη συνετετειντο ēdē sunetetheinto). Past perfect middle of συντιτημι suntithēmi to put together, to form a compact (John 7:32, John 7:47-49). If any man should confess him to be Christ (εαν τις αυτον ομολογησηι Χριστον ean tis auton homologēsēi Christon). Condition of third class with εαν ean and first aorist active subjunctive of ομολογεω homologeō and predicate accusative Χριστον Christon Jesus had made confession of himself before men the test of discipleship and denial the disproof (Matthew 10:32; Luke 12:8). We know that many of the rulers nominally believed on Jesus (John 12:42) and yet “did not confess him because of the Pharisees” (αλλα δια τους Παρισαιους ουχ ωμολογουν alla dia tous Pharisaious ouch hōmologoun), for the very reason given here, “that they might not be put out of the synagogue” (ινα μη αποσυναγωγοι γενωνται hina mē aposunagōgoi genōntai). Small wonder then that here the parents cowered a bit. That he should be put out of the synagogue (ινα αποσυναγωγος γενηται hina aposunagōgos genētai). Sub-final use of ινα hina with second aorist middle subjunctive of γινομαι ginomai Αποσυναγωγος Aposunagōgos (απο apo and συναγωγη sunagōgē) is found in N.T. only here and John 12:42; John 16:2. A purely Jewish word naturally. There were three kinds of excommunication (for thirty days, for thirty more, indefinitely).
Therefore (δια τουτο dia touto). “For this reason.” Reason enough for due caution.
A second time (εκ δευτερου ek deuterou). He had given the Pharisees the facts the first time (John 9:15). It was really the third time (see παλιν palin in John 9:17). Now it was like a joke unless the Pharisees meant to imply that his previous story was untrue.Give glory to God (δος δοχαν τωι τεωι dos doxan tōi theōi). Second aorist active imperative of διδωμι didōmi (cf. σχεσ ες sches class="normal greek">αμαρτωλος εστιν hes). This phrase does not mean gratitude to God as in Luke 17:18. It is rather an adjuration to speak the truth (Joshua 7:19; 1 Samuel 6:5) as if he had not done it before. Augustine says: “Quid est Da gloriam Deo? Nega quod accepisti. ” Is a sinner (δικαιος hamartōlos estin). They can no longer deny the fact of the cure since the testimony of the parents (John 9:19) and now wish the man to admit that he was lying in saying that Jesus healed him. He must accept their ecclesiastical authority as proving that Jesus had nothing to do with the cure since Jesus is a sinner. They wish to decide the fact by logic and authority like all persecutors through the ages. Recall the Pharisaic distinction between αμαρτωλος dikaios (righteous) and hamartōlos (sinner).
One thing I know (εν οιδα hen oida). This man is keen and quick and refuses to fall into the trap set for him. He passes by their quibbling about Jesus being a “sinner” (αμαρτωλος hamartōlos) and clings to the one fact of his own experience.Whereas I was blind, now I see (τυπλος ων αρτι βλεπω tuphlos ōn arti blepō). Literally, “Being blind I now see.” The present active participle ων ōn of ειμι eimi by implication in contrast with αρτι arti (just now, at this moment) points to previous and so past time. It must be borne in mind that the man did not at this stage know who Jesus was and so had not yet taken him as Saviour (John 9:36-38).
What did he do to thee? (Τι εποιησεν σοι Ti epoiēsen soi). Another cross-examination, now admitting that Jesus opened his eyes and wishing again (John 9:15, John 9:17) to know “how.”
I told you even now (ειπον υμιν ηδη eipon humin ēdē). In John 9:15, John 9:17, John 9:25.Would ye also become his disciples? (Μη και υμεις τελετε αυτου ματηται γενεσται Mē kai humeis thelete autou mathētai genesthai). Negative answer formally expected, but the keenest irony in this gibe. Clearly the healed man knew from the use of “also” (και kai) that Jesus had some “disciples” (ματηται mathētai predicate nominative with the infinitive γενεσται genesthai) and that the Pharisees knew that fact. “Do ye also (like the Galilean mob) wish, etc.” See John 7:45-52. It cut to the bone.
They reviled him (ελοιδορησαν αυτον eloidorēsan auton). First aorist active indicative of λοιδορεω loidoreō old verb from λοιδορος loidoros (reviler, 1 Corinthians 5:11), in N.T. only here, Acts 23:4; 1 Corinthians 4:12; 1 Peter 2:23.Thou art his disciple (συ ματητης ει εκεινου su mathētēs ei ekeinou). Probably a fling in εκεινου ekeinou (of that fellow). He had called him a prophet (John 9:17) and became a joyful follower later (John 9:36-38). But we are disciples of Moses (ημεις δε του Μωυσεως εσμεν ματηται hēmeis de tou Mōuseōs esmen mathētai). This they said with proud scorn of the healed beggar. All orthodox rabbis so claimed.
We know that God hath spoken unto Moses (ημεις οιδαμεν οτι Μωυσει λελαληκεν ο τεος hēmeis oidamen hoti Mōusei lelalēken ho theos). Perfect active indicative of λαλεω laleō so still on record. See Exodus 33:11. For λαλεω laleō used of God speaking see Hebrews 1:1. They are proud to be disciples of Moses.But as for this man, we do not know whence he is (τουτον δε ουκ οιδαμεν ποτεν εστιν touton de ouk oidamen pothen estin). “This fellow” they mean by “τουτον touton ” in emphatic position, we do not even know whence he is. Some of the people did (John 7:27), but in the higher sense none of the Jews knew (John 8:14). These Pharisees neither knew nor cared.
Why, herein is the marvel (εν τουτωι γαρ το ταυμαστον εστιν en toutōi gar to thaumaston estin). This use of γαρ gar (γε αρα ge +ταυμαστον ara accordingly indeed) to bring out an affirmation from the previous words is common enough. “Why in this very point is the wonder” (ταυμαζω thaumaston old verbal adjective from και thaumazō as in Matthew 21:42). The man is angry now and quick in his insight and reply. You confess your ignorance of whence he is, ye who know everything, “and yet (adversative use of και ηνοιχεν μου τους οπταλμους kai again) he opened my eyes” (kai ēnoixen mou tous ophthalmous). That stubborn fact stands.
God does not hear sinners (ο τεος αμαρτωλων ουκ ακουει ho theos hamartōlōn ouk akouei). Note genitive case with ακουει akouei This was the argument of the Pharisees in John 9:16. It is frequent in the O.T. (Job 27:9; Psalm 66:18; Isaiah 1:15; Isaiah 59:2, etc.). The conclusion is inevitable from this premise. Jesus is not αμαρτωλος hamartōlosIf any man be a worshipper of God (εαν τις τεοσεβης ηι ean tis theosebēs ēi). Condition of third class with εαν ean and present active subjunctive ηι ēi Τεοσεβης Theosebēs (τεος theos God, σεβομαι sebomai to worship) is an old compound adjective, here alone in the N.T. And do his will (και το τελημα αυτου ποιει kai to thelēma autou poiei). Same condition with present active subjunctive of ποιεω poieō “keep on doing his will.”
Since the world began (εκ του αιωνος ek tou aiōnos). Literally, “from the age,” “from of old.” Elsewhere in the N.T. we have απο του αιωνος apo tou aiōnos or απ αιωνος ap 'aiōnos (Luke 1:70; Acts 3:21; Acts 15:18) as is common in the lxx.Of a man born blind (τυπλου γεγεννημενου tuphlou gegennēmenou). Perfect passive participle of γενναω gennaō This is the chief point and the man will not let it be overlooked, almost rubs it in, in fact. It was congenital blindness.
If this man were not from God (ει μη ην ουτος παρα τεου ei mē ēn houtos para theou). Negative condition of second class with imperfect indicative. Assuming that Jesus is not “from God” (παρα τεου para theou) as some argued in John 9:16, “he could do nothing” (ουκ ηδυνατο ποιειν ουδεν ouk ēdunato poiein ouden). Conclusion of the second-class condition with imperfect indicative (double augment in ηδυνατο ēdunato) without αν an as is usual in conditions of possibility, propriety, obligation (Robertson, Grammar, pp. 920, 1014). The man has scored with terrific power in his use of Scripture and logic.
Thou wast altogether born in sin (εν αμαρτιαις συ εγεννητης ολος en hamartiais su egennēthēs holos). First aorist passive indicative of γενναω gennaō “In sins thou wast begotten (or born) all of thee.” ολος Holos is predicate nominative and teaches total depravity in this case beyond controversy, the Pharisees being judges.And dost thou teach us? (και συ διδασκεις ημασ kai su didaskeis hēmas). The audacity of it all. Note emphasis on συ su (thou). It was insufferable. He had not only taught the rabbis, but had utterly routed them in argument. And they cast him out (και εχεβαλον αυτον εχω kai exebalon auton exō). Effective second aorist active indicative of εκβαλλω ekballō intensified by the addition of εχω exō Probably not yet expulsion from the synagogue (John 9:22) which required a formal meeting of the Sanhedrin, but certainly forcible driving of the gifted upstart from their presence. See note on John 6:37 for another use of εκβαλλω εχω ekballō exō besides John 9:35.
Finding him (ευρων αυτον heurōn auton). Second aorist active participle of ευρισκω heuriskō after search because of what he had heard (ηκουσεν ēkousen).Dost thou believe on the Son of God? (Συ πιστευεις εις τον υιον του τεου Su pisteueis eis ton huion tou theou). So A L Theta and most versions, but Aleph B D W Syr-sin read του αντρωπου tou anthrōpou (the Son of Man), almost certainly correct. In either case it is a distinct Messianic claim quite beyond the range of this man‘s limited knowledge, keen as he is.
And who is he, Lord, that I may believe on him? (Και τις εστιν κυριε Kai tis estin class="normal greek">και kurie). The initial κυριε kai (and) is common (Mark 10:26; Luke 10:29; Luke 18:26). Probably by ινα πιστευσω εις αυτον kurie he means only “Sir.” It usually comes at the beginning of the sentence, not at the end as here and John 9:38.That I may believe on him (hina pisteusō eis auton). Ellipsis to be supplied before this final clause. He catches up the words of Jesus in the preceding verse, though he does not yet know who the Son of Man (or Son of God) is, but he trusts Jesus.
Thou hast both seen him (και εωρακας αυτον kai heōrakas auton). Perfect active indicative (double reduplication) of οραω horaō Since his eyes were opened.And he it is that speaketh with thee (και ο λαλων μετα σου εκεινος εστιν kai ho lalōn meta sou ekeinos estin). “And the one speaking with thee is that man.” See John 19:35 for εκεινος ekeinos used of the speaker. In John 4:26 Jesus reveals himself in like manner to the Samaritan woman as Messiah while here as the Son of Man (or the Son of God).
Lord, I believe (Πιστευω κυριε Pisteuō class="normal greek">Κυριε kurie). και προσεκυνησεν αυτωι Kurie here = Lord (reverence, no longer respect as in John 9:36). A short creed, but to the point.And he worshipped him (προσκυνεω kai prosekunēsen autōi). Ingressive first aorist active indicative of proskuneō old verb to fall down in reverence, to worship. Sometimes of men (Matthew 18:26). In John (see John 4:20) this verb “is always used to express divine worship” (Bernard). It is tragic to hear men today deny that Jesus should be worshipped. He accepted worship from this new convert as he later did from Thomas who called him “God” (John 20:28). Peter (Acts 10:25.) refused worship from Cornelius as Paul and Barnabas did at Lystra (Acts 14:18), but Jesus made no protest here.
For judgment (εις κριμα eis krima). The Father had sent the Son for this purpose (John 3:17). This world (κοσμος kosmos) is not the home of Jesus. The κριμα krima (judgment), a word nowhere else in John, is the result of the κρισις krisis (sifting) from κρινω krinō to separate. The Father has turned over this process of sifting (κρισις krisis) to the Son (John 5:22). He is engaged in that very work by this miracle.They which see not (οι μη βλεποντες hoi mē blepontes). The spiritually blind as well as the physically blind (Luke 4:18; Isaiah 42:18). Purpose clause with ινα hina and present active subjunctive βλεπωσιν blepōsin (may keep on seeing). This man now sees physically and spiritually. And that they which see may become blind (και οι βλεποντες τυπλοι γενωνται kai hoi blepontes tuphloi genōntai). Another part of God‘s purpose, seen in Matthew 11:25; Luke 10:21, is the curse on those who blaspheme and reject the Son. Note ingressive aorist middle subjunctive of γινομαι ginomai and predicate nominative. οι βλεποντες Hoi blepontes are those who profess to see like these Pharisees, but are really blind. Blind guides they were (Matthew 23:16). Complacent satisfaction with their dim light.
Are we also blind? (Μη και ημεις τυπλοι εσμεν Mē kai hēmeis tuphloi esmen). Negative answer expected (μη mē) and yet these Pharisees who overheard the words of Jesus to the new convert vaguely suspected that Jesus was referring to them by the last clause. Up in Galilee Jesus had called the Pharisees blind guides who stumble into the pit (Matthew 15:14).
If ye were blind (ει τυπλοι ητε ei tuphloi ēte). Condition of second class with imperfect indicative in the protasis. The old word τυπλος tuphlos is from τυπω tuphō to raise a smoke, to blind by smoke (literally and metaphorically). Here, of course, it is moral blindness. If the Pharisees were born morally blind, they would, like idiots, be without responsibility.Ye would not have sin (ουκ αν ειχετε αμαρτιαν ouk an eichete hamartian). Regular form for conclusion of second-class condition, αν an with imperfect. But now ye say (νυν δε λεγετε nun de legete). In contrast to the previous condition. See like contrast in John 15:22, John 15:24. They arrogantly asserted superior knowledge. We see (βλεπομεν blepomen). The ignorant mob do not (John 7:49). It is sin against light and is hopeless (Mark 3:29; Matthew 12:31.). “Ye are witnesses against yourselves” (μαρτυρειτε εαυτοις martureite heautois Matthew 23:31).
The Robertson's Word Pictures of the New Testament. Copyright © Broadman Press 1932,33, Renewal 1960. All rights reserved. Used by permission of Broadman Press (Southern Baptist Sunday School Board)
Robertson, A.T. "Commentary on John 9". "Robertson's Word Pictures of the New Testament". https://www.studylight.org/
the Second Week after Epiphany