174 Verse 1. ― “Blind from birth.” Symbolical of Israel as a people (Deut. 29:44Yet the Lord hath not given you an heart to perceive, and eyes to see, and ears to hear, unto this day. (Deuteronomy 29:4)). D’Alma imagines that the Evangelist had Paul in his mind; but the Apostle of the Gentiles, instead of being “a proselyte of the gate,” was “a Hebrew of the Hebrews.”
175 Verse 2.―The Pharisees supposed that the souls of good men passed from one body to another (Josephus, “Antiquities,” 18:1, 3; “B.J.,” 2:8, 14). So Herod, of John the Baptist. By the “pious and learned author” referred to in the Exposition Tholuck would seem to be meant, for such is the view that he propounds.
177 Verse 7.― “Siloam.” The Shiloah of Isa. 8:66Forasmuch as this people refuseth the waters of Shiloah that go softly, and rejoice in Rezin and Remaliah's son; (Isaiah 8:6) (cf. Ps. 46:4). That the name meant “sent” has been questioned in “Supernatural Religion,” (p. 419), but not by Schmiedel, Mr. Cassels’ German counterpart. Reference should here be made to 8:16-18, 26-29, besides verse 4 of this chapter. For the use of clay as eye-salve, cf. that made of the brazen serpent, and for the water here, cf. Acts 2:33, 3833Therefore being by the right hand of God exalted, and having received of the Father the promise of the Holy Ghost, he hath shed forth this, which ye now see and hear. (Acts 2:33)
38Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. (Acts 2:38) f., of the Holy Spirit sent down to dispel Jewish blindness.
178 Verse 16.― “How can,” etc. See 3:2, the “we” of which finds further illustration here. There were some who agreed with Nicodemus. Cf. verse 33 of the present chapter.
179 Verse 22.―The opposition to our Lord’s Messianic claim had now become acute, at an advanced stage of His ministry. As to exclusion from the fellowship of the synagogue, see Edersheim, ii. 184.
180 Verse 24.― “Give glory to God.” This formula takes us back to the time of Joshua (7:19).
181 Verse 29.― “We know not whence He is.” Schmiedel (following Holtzmann, etc.) says that the Evangelist “sometimes contradicts his own precise statements” (col. 2,537). The reference here is, of course, to 7:27. Westcott explains that here it is a question of His prophetic function of the commission, the authority by which JESUS comes. So the healed man’s “the wonderful thing.” Is it not simply a question of “the Jews,” learned and acute as the man knew them to be, stultifying themselves? Govett’s comment is: “Unbelievers will at last be condemned out of their own mouths and by their own principles.” The “common sense” which governs men in ordinary concerns has a way of forsaking them in religious matters; the soundness of the head is here regulated so much by the state of the heart. Weiss notes the emphatic ἡμεῖς, “we.” Cf. the man’s ὑμεῖς, “ye” ― “they, the people’s spiritual leaders, who alone have to judge in such matters”! Have we not their analogues in our own day?
182a Verse 34.―This was the sole attempt the Jews made to disprove any of the Lord’s miracles. Cf. 3: 2, 11:47.
183 Verse 35.― “The Son of God.” See 3:18, 5:25, 10:36, 11:4. For “Son of man,” see 3:15, 6:27 (and Exposition), 34-36 (the same). It may be said, on the one hand, that any alteration would be more likely made from “man” to “God” than vice versa, because of the frequency of “Son of God” in this Gospel (so Zahn); but, on the other, that a copyist, from the fact that the “Son of man” was Christ’s usual mode of designating Himself, would be very likely to alter “Son of God” into “Son of man.” In support of “Son of God,” see “Irrationalism of Infidelity,” p. 293. Godet, too, adheres to this reading, because of the worship rendered by the man. Indeed, vi. 27, 29 seems to the present writer to settle the whole point. The “Son of man” is there said to be sealed (attested) as “Son of God” (cf. note 122). Before He could be Son of man He must have been sent as Son of God. By acknowledgment of the truth of this, the object of the miracle became the first “martyr” confessor of the new community (Carr). See also note 238.
184 Verse 39.―The Lord here fulfils Isa. 28:9-139Whom shall he teach knowledge? and whom shall he make to understand doctrine? them that are weaned from the milk, and drawn from the breasts. 10For precept must be upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line, line upon line; here a little, and there a little: 11For with stammering lips and another tongue will he speak to this people. 12To whom he said, This is the rest wherewith ye may cause the weary to rest; and this is the refreshing: yet they would not hear. 13But the word of the Lord was unto them precept upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line, line upon line; here a little, and there a little; that they might go, and fall backward, and be broken, and snared, and taken. (Isaiah 28:9‑13). The judgment is a sifting process. Cf. Luke 2:3434And Simeon blessed them, and said unto Mary his mother, Behold, this child is set for the fall and rising again of many in Israel; and for a sign which shall be spoken against; (Luke 2:34): “for the falling and rising up of many in Israel,” leaving men either better or worse, with “they that see not”; also 3:19, ff. Carr aptly compares the words of 7:49 “They that see” of course calls up Isa. 42:1919Who is blind, but my servant? or deaf, as my messenger that I sent? who is blind as he that is perfect, and blind as the Lord's servant? (Isaiah 42:19). Only those who fail to see the different bearing of 3:17 and the present passage “as to judgment,” could, with H. Holtzmann, find a contradiction. Cf. McRory, ad loc.
185 Verse 41.―Cf. 15:22. “Remaineth,” attacheth, is unforgiven. “Forgiveness” is not a term of this Gospel, which, however, expresses the idea in various ways, as in 8:32, “the truth shall make you free.” For the attitude of unbelief towards the Christian doctrine of forgiveness, see Greg, “Creed of Christendom,” or “Essays” of Miss Edith Simcox in the same strain; and on the believing side Sir R. Anderson, “Christianized Rationalism,” p. 193.
Heitmüller “Sin reposes essentially on ignorance; if a man have proper insight, he will act rightly” (p. 174). Such is Tolstoy’s doctrine. See record of interview between him and the late Dr. F. W. Baedeker, in “Memoir” of the latter. The Russian Count had not reckoned with Luke 11:2121When a strong man armed keepeth his palace, his goods are in peace: (Luke 11:21) f. Cf. note 49 on Mark, as to Humanitarianism.