Sections 79-81
Section 79
THE STORY OF THE ADULTERESS (Jerusalem)
JOHN 7:53-8:11
The authenticity of this story is hotly contested among scholars as it is not in many early manuscripts. I'm not sure what I think about the issue and would have to dig more. In terms of it being consistent with Christ's other teachings, in some ways it is keeping with Christ's emphasis on forgiveness but the part about he who is without sin, cast the first stone does not necessarily seem consistent. It's hard to put my finger on, but I feel like Christ would say it's not our business to cast stones either way. It's not the "sin" that makes the judgement okay or not okay. One could argue that Christ's goal was to provoke the accusers to think about the condition of their own hearts through this statement. But Christ doesn't seem intent upon trying to teach his opponents. Typically he acknowledges their blindness and comments upon it, but reserves his more teachable comments for the disciples and crowds. If he were to teach this concept, I feel like it would be to the disciples or in a parable. These are just initial thoughts---flawed and premature, I'm sure.
Section 80
MESSIANIC CLAIMS MET BY ATTEMPT TO STONE JESUS
(Jerusalem. October, A. D. 29)
JOHN 8:12-59
Both of these feature increased attention, questions, and attacks from the Pharisees and Jews in general.
Section 81
CONTENTION OVER THE MAN BORN BLIND
(Jerusalem.)
JOHN 9:1-41
On the Nature and Origin of Sin
The blind man comes under notice after the disciples ask whether he or his parents sinned, resulting in his blindness. Christ responds that neither is the case, which commentators take pains to clarify meant that this man's blindness was not a result of a specific sin but of the fallen nature of the world in general.
Nothing is new under the sun as Solomon observed; to this day we still struggle with questions on the nature and origin of sin. In this story of the man blind from birth, the disciples begin the discussion, asking whose fault it is that the man was born blind--his or his parent's?
I've taken time to trace some of the differing Biblical perspectives on sin from the references of Roberson's Word Pictures. On the idea that suffering/illness is the result of specific sin a person's life, there is precedence of the generational repercussions of sin in Exodus:
"You shall not bow down to them or serve them, for I the LORD your God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the children to the third and the fourth generation of those who hate me, but showing steadfast love to thousands of those who love me and keep my commandments." Exodus 20:5-6
Ezekiel teaches the concept of the individual's responsibility for sin:
"The soul who sins shall die. The son shall not suffer for the iniquity of the father, nor the father suffer for the iniquity of the son. The righteousness of the righteous shall be upon himself, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon himself." Ezekiel 18:20
Preserving the larger context is important, and the larger teaching of this passage is the value of turning from one's sin--that there is significance in a person's "turning" for good or evil, whether you are righteous person who unfortunately falls into sin or a wicked person who fortunately turns from their sin. Both ways, Ezekiel is clear that Lord only wants the best for us:
"For I have no pleasure in the death of anyone, declares the Lord GOD; so turn, and live.” Ezekiel 18:32
In Luke, Jesus likewise refocuses the issue to present repentance as well:
"There were some present at that very time who told him about the Galileans whose blood Pilate had mingled with their sacrifices. And he answered them, “Do you think that these Galileans were worse sinners than all the other Galileans, because they suffered in this way? No, I tell you; but unless you repent, you will all likewise perish." Luke 13:1-3
The book of Job teaches that there are exceptions---a righteous man may suffer without personal fault. But note that the thrust of this book is to teach this exception. From the beginning, the narrative takes pains to establish that Job was a righteous man who suffered without fault:
"There was a man in the land of Uz whose name was Job, and that man was blameless and upright, one who feared God and turned away from evil." Job 1:1
Is the book setting forth a general principle or an exception to that principle? It's a complex question that would require me to dive into Job fully to answer with any degree of intelligence.
Our Fascination with the How of Healing
One thing that interests me in this narrative is the progression of the blind man's understanding and faith. Again,we have a Sabbath Day healing which sparks the criticism of the Pharisees.
The neighbors stir up trouble after the healing; instead of being happy for the man, they become over fascinated to determine the cause and report Christ's actions to the Pharisees.
"The neighbors and those who had seen him before as a beggar were saying, “Is this not the man who used to sit and beg?”
He kept saying, “I am the man.”
So they said to him, “Then how were your eyes opened?”
He answered, “The man called Jesus made mud and anointed my eyes and said to me, ‘Go to Siloam and wash.’ So I went and washed and received my sight.” They said to him, “Where is he?” He said, “I do not know.”"
-John 9:8-12
And the Pharisees follow their lead:
"So they said again to the blind man, “What do you say about him, since he has opened your eyes?” He said, “He is a prophet.” -John 9:17
"So for the second time they called the man who had been blind and said to him, “Give glory to God. We know that this man is a sinner.”
He answered, “Whether he is a sinner I do not know. One thing I do know, that though I was blind, now I see.” John 9:24-25
The healed man becomes a witness:
"If this man were not from God, he could do nothing.” John 9:33
And then a convert:
He said, “Lord, I believe,” and he worshiped him. John 9:38
THE STORY OF THE ADULTERESS (Jerusalem)
JOHN 7:53-8:11
The authenticity of this story is hotly contested among scholars as it is not in many early manuscripts. I'm not sure what I think about the issue and would have to dig more. In terms of it being consistent with Christ's other teachings, in some ways it is keeping with Christ's emphasis on forgiveness but the part about he who is without sin, cast the first stone does not necessarily seem consistent. It's hard to put my finger on, but I feel like Christ would say it's not our business to cast stones either way. It's not the "sin" that makes the judgement okay or not okay. One could argue that Christ's goal was to provoke the accusers to think about the condition of their own hearts through this statement. But Christ doesn't seem intent upon trying to teach his opponents. Typically he acknowledges their blindness and comments upon it, but reserves his more teachable comments for the disciples and crowds. If he were to teach this concept, I feel like it would be to the disciples or in a parable. These are just initial thoughts---flawed and premature, I'm sure.
Section 80
MESSIANIC CLAIMS MET BY ATTEMPT TO STONE JESUS
(Jerusalem. October, A. D. 29)
JOHN 8:12-59
Both of these feature increased attention, questions, and attacks from the Pharisees and Jews in general.
Section 81
CONTENTION OVER THE MAN BORN BLIND
(Jerusalem.)
JOHN 9:1-41
On the Nature and Origin of Sin
The blind man comes under notice after the disciples ask whether he or his parents sinned, resulting in his blindness. Christ responds that neither is the case, which commentators take pains to clarify meant that this man's blindness was not a result of a specific sin but of the fallen nature of the world in general.
Nothing is new under the sun as Solomon observed; to this day we still struggle with questions on the nature and origin of sin. In this story of the man blind from birth, the disciples begin the discussion, asking whose fault it is that the man was born blind--his or his parent's?
I've taken time to trace some of the differing Biblical perspectives on sin from the references of Roberson's Word Pictures. On the idea that suffering/illness is the result of specific sin a person's life, there is precedence of the generational repercussions of sin in Exodus:
"You shall not bow down to them or serve them, for I the LORD your God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers on the children to the third and the fourth generation of those who hate me, but showing steadfast love to thousands of those who love me and keep my commandments." Exodus 20:5-6
Ezekiel teaches the concept of the individual's responsibility for sin:
"The soul who sins shall die. The son shall not suffer for the iniquity of the father, nor the father suffer for the iniquity of the son. The righteousness of the righteous shall be upon himself, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon himself." Ezekiel 18:20
Preserving the larger context is important, and the larger teaching of this passage is the value of turning from one's sin--that there is significance in a person's "turning" for good or evil, whether you are righteous person who unfortunately falls into sin or a wicked person who fortunately turns from their sin. Both ways, Ezekiel is clear that Lord only wants the best for us:
"For I have no pleasure in the death of anyone, declares the Lord GOD; so turn, and live.” Ezekiel 18:32
In Luke, Jesus likewise refocuses the issue to present repentance as well:
"There were some present at that very time who told him about the Galileans whose blood Pilate had mingled with their sacrifices. And he answered them, “Do you think that these Galileans were worse sinners than all the other Galileans, because they suffered in this way? No, I tell you; but unless you repent, you will all likewise perish." Luke 13:1-3
The book of Job teaches that there are exceptions---a righteous man may suffer without personal fault. But note that the thrust of this book is to teach this exception. From the beginning, the narrative takes pains to establish that Job was a righteous man who suffered without fault:
"There was a man in the land of Uz whose name was Job, and that man was blameless and upright, one who feared God and turned away from evil." Job 1:1
Is the book setting forth a general principle or an exception to that principle? It's a complex question that would require me to dive into Job fully to answer with any degree of intelligence.
 |
| Medieval, unknown, “The Healing of the Blind Man and the Raising of Lazarus,” Honors Art at the Met 2016, accessed December 11, 2018, http://honorsartatthemet2016.ace.fordham.edu/items/show/25. |
Our Fascination with the How of Healing
One thing that interests me in this narrative is the progression of the blind man's understanding and faith. Again,we have a Sabbath Day healing which sparks the criticism of the Pharisees.
The neighbors stir up trouble after the healing; instead of being happy for the man, they become over fascinated to determine the cause and report Christ's actions to the Pharisees.
"The neighbors and those who had seen him before as a beggar were saying, “Is this not the man who used to sit and beg?”
He kept saying, “I am the man.”
So they said to him, “Then how were your eyes opened?”
He answered, “The man called Jesus made mud and anointed my eyes and said to me, ‘Go to Siloam and wash.’ So I went and washed and received my sight.” They said to him, “Where is he?” He said, “I do not know.”"
-John 9:8-12
And the Pharisees follow their lead:
"So they said again to the blind man, “What do you say about him, since he has opened your eyes?” He said, “He is a prophet.” -John 9:17
"So for the second time they called the man who had been blind and said to him, “Give glory to God. We know that this man is a sinner.”
He answered, “Whether he is a sinner I do not know. One thing I do know, that though I was blind, now I see.” John 9:24-25
The healed man becomes a witness:
"If this man were not from God, he could do nothing.” John 9:33
And then a convert:
He said, “Lord, I believe,” and he worshiped him. John 9:38
They said therefore unto him, What did he to thee? how opened he thine eyes? He answered them, I told you even now, and ye did not hear; wherefore would ye hear it again? would ye also become his disciples? John 9:26-27
"Perceiving that their boasted knowledge as to the frauds of Jesus was untrue, and that they were even then questioning him to obtain material to be used against Jesus, he declines to repeat his statement and shows them that he understands their sinister motive in questioning him by ironically asking them if they wished to become disciples of Jesus."-BKC
We agree with DeWette that his expulsion from a hall "would not be important enough to occasion verse 35."] 35 Jesus heard that they had cast him out [His was a sad plight, indeed. To be put out of the synagogue [466] was to be put on a level with the heathen, and to be left without a country or a religious fellowship]; and finding him, he said, Dost thou believe on the Son of God? [Being cut off from all that came through Moses, Jesus was leading him into all that came through the Son of God.]
Great observation: "To the outcast of the synagogue here and to the outcast of the nation at Jacob's well (John 4:26), how fully Jesus revealed himself!]-Fourfold
Comments