Subscription Lists

I Went, I Washed, and I Received My Sight! The beauty of simplicity is illustrated over and over again in John 9 by the story of the blind man whose sight was granted by Jesus. Simplicity gets to the heart of the matter and strips away the irrelevant and incidental details. That is exactly what is done in this story. As a reader, you are challenged to review the entire record of these events as we proceed through this series of messages. We resume today's message just at the point where the blind beggar returned to the presence of people who had routinely seen him with his disability.

“Therefore the neighbors and those who previously had seen that he was blind said, 'Is not this he who sat and begged?' Some said, 'This is he.' Others said, 'He is like him.' He said,'I am he.' Therefore they said to him, 'How were your eyes opened?' He answered and said, 'A Man called Jesus made clay and anointed my eyes and said to me, “Go to the pool of Siloam and wash.” So I went and washed, and I received sight.' Then they said to him, 'Where is He?' He said, 'I do not know.'” (John 9.8-12).

The first question as to this man's identity was asked by people who has seen him, but they had seen far more than that. They were people “...who previously had seen that he was blind.” They were eyewitnesses of his previous condition and they were eyewitnesses of his current condition. They knew that an unexplained and marvellous change had taken place! I don't know whether their question, "Is not this he who sat and begged,” was a question seeking information or one seeking to point out the obvious; I tend to think the latter and see their question as rhetorical. Of course this was he who sat and begged! Furthermore, anyone who wondered about the matter could easily confirm the facts of the case. He was blind but now he could see!

However with evidence as obvious as a sign post, some wanted to rationalize away the miracle that had occurred. While some said, “This is he,” others said, “This is like [resembles] him!” In other words, the reports of the eyewitnesses were challenged. Rather than accept the facts, detractors were claiming some sort of trickery or sleight of hand. Those who were saying, “This is like him,” were by implication saying “This is not him!” Now who is blind!

Eyewitnesses are a great source of information, but those who are actually involved in a matter can be even better. There was apparently nothing wrong with the blind man's hearing; he could hear the controversy and it caused him some concern inasmuch as he was at its very center. Was he the blind man or did he just resemble the blind man? There can be nothing like going to the horse's mouth and that is just what the inspired writer did; he went to the main subject and recorded his testimony; it is short and sweet. “I am he!”

Inquiring minds wanted to know more so they asked, “How were your eyes opened?” I don't know what they expected to hear, but something tells me that they did not expect to hear the simple response that was forthcoming. Everything that was superfluous was stripped away! Two and only people were involved; a man called Jesus did three things; He made clay, He anointed the blind man's eyes, and He told him to go wash in the pool of Siloam. The blind man did three things; he went, he washed, and he received his sight! Simplicity is a beautiful thing!

Justification has two sides to it; the Divine side and the human side (the blinded ones). We do not have to understand the Divine side to rejoice in the benefits of the human side! Simplicity is a beautiful thing!

Questions:

1. What evidence, it any, was there that some back room collusion had taken place which gave the appearance of the blind man receiving his sight?

2. Why would anyone question the obvious in this case, i.e. a blind man receiving his sight?

3. What could the blind man know? What, if anything, could he know that no one else could know? In such a case, whose testimony would be more weighty?

4. Did the blind man understand the Divine side of events that restored his sight? Did that reduce the significance of the fact that he could see?

"Chip Shots from the Ruff of Life" from Tom Kelley

Choking can be Hazardous to Your Eternal Health