Blinded

Blinded

As he went along, he saw a man blind from birth. His disciples asked him, “Rabbi, who sinned, this man or his parents, that he was born blind?” “Neither this man nor his parents sinned,” said Jesus, “but this happened so that the works of God might be displayed in him. As long as it is day, we must do the works of him who sent me. Night is coming, when no one can work. While I am in the world, I am the light of the world.”

After saying this, he spat on the ground, made some mud with the saliva, and put it on the man’s eyes. “Go,” he told him, “wash in the Pool of Siloam” (this word means “Sent”). So the man went and washed, and came home seeing.

His neighbors and those who had formerly seen him begging asked, “Isn’t this the same man who used to sit and beg?” Some claimed that he was. Others said, “No, he only looks like him.” But he himself insisted, “I am the man.” “How then were your eyes opened?” they asked.

He replied, “The man they call Jesus made some mud and put it on my eyes. He told me to go to Siloam and wash. So I went and washed, and then I could see.” “Where is this man?” they asked him. “I don’t know,” he said. (John 9:1-12)

About the only thing a blind man could do in those days was beg for a living. But the disciples didn’t look at the blind man so much as an object of mercy, but as a subject for theological debate. (It’s so much easier to talk about sin in the abstract, isn’t it?) Because the disciples were sure that the man's congenital blindness was caused by sin – either his own or his parents'. Jesus disagreed. Oh, there’s no doubt that both the man and his parents had, at some time, committed sin, but Jesus didn’t see their sin as the cause of the man’s blindness.

But the ensuing miracle led to a big problem: identification. Was this really the blind guy, and if so, who made him see? First the neighbors asked the man how he was healed, and then the Pharisees asked him. Not satisfied with his answer, the Pharisees then asked the man's parents, and then gave the son one final interrogation. But when you really think about it, they were really asking the wrong question, weren’t they? Because instead of asking “How,” shouldn’t they have been asking “Who?” (A simply rearranging of the letters)

When asked to describe his experience, the man simply told his questioners what had happened: all he knew was that the man who caused him to see was called “Jesus," (because he hadn’t actually seen him), and he didn’t know where he went. (For the same reason) In other words, the man had been healed, but he hadn’t been saved.

Now, since the Pharisees were the FBI of the faith, it was appropriate that the healed man be brought to them for questioning. The fact that they studied this miracle in such detail, however, is only further proof that Jesus actually healed the guy. But working on the Sabbath was illegal. Therefore, anybody who broke the Sabbath couldn’t possibly be a true prophet of God – even though this man had been cured of his congenital blindness.

But the beggar wasn’t intimidated by the Pharisees’ threats because when he was asked who he thought Jesus was, the man said, "He’s a prophet!" Of course, the religious leaders didn’t want to see Jesus given that kind of high designation. So, they had to come up with an explanation. And the explanation they chose? Obviously, Jesus had "switched" beggars.

Now, if you’re the FBI, you’ve got to get some evidence of the big “switcharoo.” And the best way to get that kind of evidence would be to interrogate the parents of the beggar. Hey, they should know, right? So they called them in and asked them two questions: "Is this your son?" and, if so, “How does he now see?" Well, the first one was a no-brainer, but that second one was a little tricky. So, they passed the buck and suggested that the inquisitors ask the boy himself because he was of age. (Talk about getting thrown under the bus!)

Anxious to settle the investigation, the Pharisees called him in, but this time put him under oath. The problem, however, is that the court was prejudiced from the start since they started the questioning with "We know that this Man is a sinner!" In other words, “You’d better cooperate; otherwise we’ll kick you out of church.” But the beggar didn’t flinch. He’d experienced a miracle, and wasn’t about to debate Jesus’ character. And for the fourth time, he’s asked again, "How did He open your eyes?"

By this time, the man’s lost his patience. I mean, he’s been blind all of his life and there’s so much to see. He certainly didn’t want to spend a lot of time in a courtroom looking at the faces of twelve angry men. But the Pharisees were cautious men who considered themselves conservatives, when in reality they were more like preservatives. At least a conservative takes the best of the past and uses it; a preservative simply pickles it.

It seemed incredible to the healed man that the Pharisees didn’t know who the man was that had opened his eyes. I mean, how many people were going around Jerusalem opening the eyes of blind people? But instead of investigating the miracle worker, they were investigating the miracle. So, the beggar gave the experts a lesson in practical theology: if Jesus healed a man born blind (which had never happened before), how could Jesus be a sinner? But religious bigots don’t want to face either evidence or logic, so they accuse the witness of being born in sin, and then excommunicate him from the local synagogue. So much for seeking the truth.

The good news is that The Good Shepherd always cares for his sheep, and he knew that the man had been excommunicated. So, he went out searching for the man, and then having found him revealed himself to him. And that’s when the real miracle happened. You see, it’s not enough to believe that he was "a man called Jesus," or even "a prophet," or "a man of God." Once Jesus identified himself as the Son of God, the beggar believed and was saved. (John 9:38) And then Jesus turns to give the Pharisees a little lesson on spiritual blindness.

You know, the same sun that brings the beauty out of a seed also exposes the vermin under the rock. The religious leaders were blind and wouldn’t admit it, and the light of the truth had only made them blinder. “In them is fulfilled the prophecy of Isaiah: ‘You will be ever hearing but never understanding; you will be ever seeing but never perceiving. For this people’s heart has become calloused; they hardly hear with their ears, and they have closed their eyes. Otherwise they might see with their eyes, hear with their ears, understand with their hearts and turn, and I would heal them.’” (Matt. 13:14-15)

Stung by the prophet’s words, the listening Pharisees ask, "Are we blind also?" fully expecting Jesus to say, “No.” But Jesus had already called them "blind leaders of the blind," (Matt 15:14) so they already had their answer. You see, they were blinded by their pride, their self-righteousness, their tradition and their false interpretation of the Word of God.

And Jesus’ reply to these smart guys was a paradox of epic proportion. "If you were blind, you would be better off. But you claim to see. Therefore, you are guilty!" (John 9:40-41) In other words, blindness would at least be an excuse for not knowing what was going on. But they knew what was going on because Jesus had performed so many miracles in their presence. However, the religious leaders simply ignored the evidence so that they could come up with a results-oriented decision that fit their theology.

In contrast, the beggar was both physically and spiritually blind, yet both his eyes and his heart were opened. Why? Because he listened to the Word, believed it, obeyed it, and experienced the grace of God. The Pharisees, on the other hand, had good physical vision, but they were blind spiritually. Had they listened to the Word and sincerely considered the evidence, they too would have believed on Jesus Christ and been born again.

So, in what sense did the Pharisees actually see? Well, they saw the change in the blind beggar and couldn’t deny that he’d been healed. Even Nicodemus, one of their own, was impressed with the Lord's miracles. (John 3:2) If they’d simply examined the evidence with honesty, they would have seen the truth clearly. "If anyone is willing to do God’s will, he will know the teaching….” (John 7:17) "Yet you refuse to come to me to receive this life.” (John 5:40)

You see, the real crux of the problem was that the religious know-it-alls couldn’t control Jesus. I mean, here’s God with skin on walking among His people, and the God police are upset because He doesn’t act the way they think He should act. They say, “This man can’t be of God. Look, he breaks the Sabbath, goes against our customs, has no respect for our authority and doesn’t even bother to recognize our vast knowledge of God! We know the scriptures, and our interpretations of them are the only true way to understand God. We know God, by golly, and this man is not from God!” In other words, they thought they had it all figured out, and had put God in the prison of their own understanding.

We should never become so tied down to our own beliefs that we are blind to see how God is working in the world today. The Spirit of God is alive and well, and He is all around us, whether we accept it or not. And whether we believe it or not, God is moving in our lives. So, who are we to tell Him what He should be doing? All we can do is stand back in awe and wonder at His magnificence.

We never meet this healed beggar again. And while being excommunicated from the synagogue was certainly a painful experience for him, he found in his fellowship with Jesus far more spiritual help and encouragement than he could have ever have found in his Jewish traditions, or even church for that matter. Now don’t get me wrong. I’m all for church. But Christ died for a relationship, not a religion. And if our “religion” blinds us to the person of Jesus, then, as the great Biblical commentator, Matthew Henry, so plainly stated, there are “(n)one so blind as those who will not see.”

So, let’s quit switching beggars because life’s not a shell game.

Grace,

Randy