The objective of this lesson: to illustrate that Jesus cared about the person even when the person's condition was used to demonstrate God's power.
Sometimes we think that only Christians of the modern ages have theological issues that are difficult to figure out. "What happens to a person after he/she dies?" "Will we have a body when we are resurrected?" "What will actually occur in the judgment?"
Our common curiosity concerning the resolution of "unanswerable" theological questions [answers commonly depend on the perspective and view of the answerer rather than clear revelation] is not unique to us and now.
To think that only modern Christians have theological questions is simply not true. As Jesus and his disciples were walking in Jerusalem, the disciples saw a blind man. For a long time it was the view of most Jews that suffering was a punishment from God for sins committed by the person or the person's parents (see Exodus 20:5, etc.). Thus, when someone with an obvious defect was seen, it was assumed that the person or his/her parents were guilty of a sin, and he/she was enduring God's punishment.
The incident in John 9 began with a theological question from the disciples to Jesus. It concerned the origin of human suffering. Today we still seek answers to questions rooted in the same issue, especially when the answers from the past prove ineffective in addressing our present day experiences. The disciples approached the issue from a view of consequence. Jesus approached the specific situation from the view of godly opportunity.
When the disciples saw the blind man, they asked Jesus who sinned, him or his parents--a theological question. Jesus' answer troubles us. He responded, "Neither sinned. This adult male is blind in order to display God's work." This man had been blind from birth! He spent years in a blind existence so God could use that moment!
That God can use a situation created by the existence of evil to achieve a godly objective is troubling to us, but consistent with God's actions. He used the Assyrians to destroy the northern ten tribes of Israel as a nation, and He used the Babylonians to place Judah in captivity. [When Habakkuk began his writing, he had difficulty understanding how God could use the evil Babylonians to punish Judah.] God used the unbelieving to execute Jesus and to strengthen believers. Satan opposed God, and God used his opposition. The purposes of God are larger than what humans call justice. [Acknowledge the problem, but do not spend the class' time discussing it.]
After Jesus' discussion with his disciples, he healed the man from his blindness. Jesus made a paste from his spit and the clay, put the paste on the blind man's eyes, and told him to go to the pool of Siloam [no small request!] and wash the paste off. The blind man went, washed, and returned seeing.
Jesus used the situation to affirm a truth about himself and God. Most spiritual problems occur because people's views obscure the truth about Jesus' identity or God's work.
This miracle caused a tremendous reaction. A man who had never seen from his first day of life began to see. Such an incredible occurrence demanded an explanation! Such things simply did not happen! First, the neighbors reacted. Some said it was the man. Others said it was a different man who looked like the blind man. All the time, he kept saying, "I am the man who was blind!" The neighbors asked, "Then how do you explain the fact that you can see now?" He told them what happened--what a cure for blindness! The neighbors wanted to know where the man was, and all the former blind man could say was, "I do not know."
It is not uncommon for people to be disturbed when God works. In this American society, we never like spiritual answers to materialistic questions. We pride ourselves on being scientific, so many regard such answers as being "non-answers." Many like to think they can exclude God from the equation and find a "factual" answer for everything. When experience and our facts are at odds, typically we become concerned and upset.
Second, the neighbors took the former blind man to the Pharisees. This all occurred on a Sabbath day. The Pharisees again asked how this happened. The result was a division among the Pharisees. Some said the one who did this obviously was not a man of God because he failed to respect the Sabbath. However, others said, "How can a sinner do such acts?"
This was a classic example of those who refused the value of "faith not like my faith" saying "if x is true then y is true--case closed!" Some who did not believe in Jesus refused to acknowledge the obvious. The miracle occurred on a Sabbath day. The unbelievers reasoned that it violated the Sabbath to perform a miracle on the Sabbath if the situation was not life threatening. Their reasoning: "He is obviously an ungodly man because he violated the Sabbath." These people never addressed what happened.
Some unbelieving people saw the obvious: "How can a sinner do such acts?" The Sabbath evasion was an insufficient explanation of what actually happened!
Those who doubted the former blind man's story called his parents. They confirmed the man was their son, and he had been born blind. However, they offered no explanation of how he was able to see. All they said was he was a man and old enough to speak for himself.
The man's testimony did not tell them what they wanted to hear. We are all guilty [at least on some occasions] of only wanting to hear that which confirms what we already thought. It is hard to be open when what we hear in honesty does major damage to our convictions. It is much easier to discredit what we hear then to honestly listen to what we hear.
The Jewish leaders who did not believe Jesus to be the Christ already agreed that any Jew who believed Jesus was the Christ would be barred from synagogue attendance. That was a significant consequence! The synagogue was an important source of Jewish news [Sanhedrin rulings and High Priest decrees], of Jewish help, as well as study of scripture [remember people did not own copies of scripture]. To be denied access to a local synagogue was a "big deal" that could radically influence a Jew's life!
Look at this approach: "If people do not say what we want said, then those people will suffer the consequences of their words! The more they hurt, the better!" Thus, "You had better believe what we want you to believe, or we will make you regret it!"
The disbelieving Jews came to the healed man a second time ordering him to give God credit for his miracle. Then he knew they were unconcerned about him. To him, one thing was obvious--the man who healed him was not a sinner! God did not work in this manner through sinners! When they again asked him to tell them how he got his sight, he sarcastically asked if they wanted to be the man's disciples. When they accused Jesus of being a sinner, he asked them why God would respond to the request of sinner? The angered men dismissed the healed man as a sinner [he was born blind!], and they were insulted that he would try to teach them! The end result: they barred the healed man from the synagogue.
According to the unbelieving Jewish leaders, to believe in Jesus was to oppose God. God could receive credit only if Jesus was discredited. To them, Jesus was a sinner, not a man from God. The man quickly sensed the unbelievers were not concerned about him. He was of not significance to them. It was his miracle that was an inconvenience to them. They did not care if he saw or if he was blind. Since he would not say what they wanted him to say, they did not want him around as a continual visual illustration of Jesus' power. [Do realize at this time, he did not know Jesus or his identify.]
Jesus, upon hearing the man was barred from the synagogue, found the man and confirmed his identity as the Christ.
The man mattered to Jesus. Though his blindness confirmed that God worked in Jesus, Jesus cared about the man and the consequences he suffered.
Jesus cared about the man, not merely about using the blind man's illness to illustrate God's power. Jesus was not content just to use the man's blindness. It was important for him to encourage the healed man as well. The first blessing was that the man received his sight. That was a temporary [but wonderful] blessing. The second blessing was that the man knew the Christ. That was a permanent blessing that reached beyond the man's death.
Jesus refused just to use the man for convenience. He encouraged the man. Knowing who Jesus was was an eternal blessing, not a temporary blessing.
Too often we are more impressed with what a person can do for "God's cause" than we are with what God can do for the person. May we, as God's people, ever be interested in the person and not just in what the person can do!
Christians are not users. They are encouragers.
For Thought and Discussion
We are the only ones who struggle with theological questions.
Physical suffering occurred as a consequence to sin.
Who committed the sin, the parents or the child?
This man's blindness existed to display God's works.
Jesus made a paste from his spit and clay, and put the paste on the man's eyes. He then instructed the man to go to Siloam and wash the paste off.
The discussion should focus on the fact that it was a difficult, inconvenient trip for the blind man.
Some said it was the man who was blind. Others said it was someone else who looked like the man who was blind.
It occurred on a Sabbath day.
Some said he [Jesus] was not from God because he violated the Sabbath. Others said a sinner could not perform such miracles.
They called the man's parents.
They confirmed he was their son and that he was born blind, but they refused to comment on how he was able to see.
The discussion should focus on the facts it was a place of information, help, study, and prayer.
They ordered him to give God credit for his miracle. [The contrast was between acknowledging the man who helped him and acknowledging God.]
His opponents did not care about him.
Did they wish to become disciples?
He found the man and talked with him.
Link to Student Guide
Lesson 2