HolyStudy
Bible IndexRead BibleNotesChurchesMissionPrivacyTermsContact
© 2026 HolyStudy
HomeRead BibleBible NotesChurchesSign in
HolyStudy
HomeRead BibleBible NotesChurches
Sign in

John 9

1

And as Jesus passed by, he saw a man which was blind from his birth.

1
1
2

And his disciples asked him, saying, Master, who did sin, this man, or his parents, that he was born blind?

3

Jesus answered, Neither hath this man sinned, nor his parents: but that the works of God should be made manifest in him.

4

I must work the works of him that sent me, while it is day: the night cometh, when no man can work.

5

As long as I am in the world, I am the light of the world.

6

When he had thus spoken, he spat on the ground, and made clay of the spittle, and he anointed the eyes of the blind man with the clay,

7

And said unto him, Go, wash in the pool of Siloam, (which is by interpretation, Sent.) He went his way therefore, and washed, and came seeing.

1
8

The neighbours therefore, and they which before had seen him that he was blind, said, Is not this he that sat and begged?

1
9

Some said, This is he: others said, He is like him: but he said, I am he.

2
10

Therefore said they unto him, How were thine eyes opened?

11

He answered and said, A man that is called Jesus made clay, and anointed mine eyes, and said unto me, Go to the pool of Siloam, and wash: and I went and washed, and I received sight.

12

Then said they unto him, Where is he? He said, I know not.

13

They brought to the Pharisees him that aforetime was blind.

14

And it was the sabbath day when Jesus made the clay, and opened his eyes.

2
15

Then again the Pharisees also asked him how he had received his sight. He said unto them, He put clay upon mine eyes, and I washed, and do see.

16

Therefore said some of the Pharisees, This man is not of God, because he keepeth not the sabbath day. Others said, How can a man that is a sinner do such miracles? And there was a division among them.

17

They say unto the blind man again, What sayest thou of him, that he hath opened thine eyes? He said, He is a prophet.

18

But the Jews did not believe concerning him, that he had been blind, and received his sight, until they called the parents of him that had received his sight.

19

And they asked them, saying, Is this your son, who ye say was born blind? how then doth he now see?

20

His parents answered them and said, We know that this is our son, and that he was born blind:

21

But by what means he now seeth, we know not; or who hath opened his eyes, we know not: he is of age; ask him: he shall speak for himself.

22

These words spake his parents, because they feared the Jews: for the Jews had agreed already, that if any man did confess that he was Christ, he should be put out of the synagogue.

23

Therefore said his parents, He is of age; ask him.

24

Then again called they the man that was blind, and said unto him, Give God the praise: we know that this man is a sinner.

25

He answered and said, Whether he be a sinner or no, I know not: one thing I know, that, whereas I was blind, now I see.

1
26

Then said they to him again, What did he to thee? how opened he thine eyes?

27

He answered them, I have told you already, and ye did not hear: wherefore would ye hear it again? will ye also be his disciples?

28

Then they reviled him, and said, Thou art his disciple; but we are Moses’ disciples.

29

We know that God spake unto Moses: as for this fellow, we know not from whence he is.

30

The man answered and said unto them, Why herein is a marvellous thing, that ye know not from whence he is, and yet he hath opened mine eyes.

31

Now we know that God heareth not sinners: but if any man be a worshipper of God, and doeth his will, him he heareth.

32

Since the world began was it not heard that any man opened the eyes of one that was born blind.

33

If this man were not of God, he could do nothing.

34

They answered and said unto him, Thou wast altogether born in sins, and dost thou teach us? And they cast him out.

35

Jesus heard that they had cast him out; and when he had found him, he said unto him, Dost thou believe on the Son of God?

36

He answered and said, Who is he, Lord, that I might believe on him?

37

And Jesus said unto him, Thou hast both seen him, and it is he that talketh with thee.

38

And he said, Lord, I believe. And he worshipped him.

39

And Jesus said, For judgment I am come into this world, that they which see not might see; and that they which see might be made blind.

40

And some of the Pharisees which were with him heard these words, and said unto him, Are we blind also?

41

Jesus said unto them, If ye were blind, ye should have no sin: but now ye say, We see; therefore your sin remaineth.

← Previous ChapterNext Chapter →

John 9

The man born blind (the sixth sign) becomes the instrument through which Jesus enacts his declaration "I am the light of the world," and whose progressive confession mirrors the Gospel's own growing clarification of Jesus' identity. When the disciples ask whether his blindness resulted from his sin or his parents', Jesus reframes the question: this happened so that the works of God might be displayed in him, and he anoints the blind man's eyes with spittle and mud—a sacramental touch reminiscent of creation and covenant. The man's journey to sight parallels a deepening faith: first he describes Jesus as "a man called Jesus," then recognizes him as a prophet, then acknowledges him as from God (para theou), and finally confesses "Lord, I believe" when Jesus reveals himself as the Son of Man—a progression from sensory experience through reasonable inference to committed faith. The Pharisees' interrogation grows increasingly hostile, expelling the man from the synagogue when he insists that Jesus is from God, yet unable to explain how a sinner could perform such signs. Jesus returns to pronounce a final judgment: "For judgment I have come into this world, so that those who are blind may see and those who see may become blind," revealing that the willful refusal to accept Jesus as the light results in deeper spiritual darkness. The chapter thus inverts the categories of sight and blindness: the physically blind man sees and believes, while the spiritually sighted Pharisees choose darkness and become blind.

John 9:41

Jesus said unto them, If ye were blind, ye should have no sin: but now ye say, We see; therefore your sin remaineth — Jesus's response reveals the paradox of the Pharisees' condition: if they were truly blind (ignorant), they would have no responsibility for sin. But they claim to see ('we see'), to have knowledge, understanding, and authority. Their sin is not ignorance but willful refusal of truth—the claim to see while rejecting the light. 'Therefore your sin remaineth'—their sin is not forgiven because it is not acknowledged. They stand in judgment: convicted by their own claim to knowledge, they are bound by their refusal of truth. The Gospel ends on this note of tragic judgment: those who see themselves as sighted are actually blind; those who acknowledge blindness receive sight.

John 9:38

And he said, Lord, I believe. And he worshipped him — the man's response is faith ('I believe') and worship ('he worshipped him,' prosekynēsen autōi). His journey from 'a man called Jesus' to 'prophet' to 'one whom God hears' culminates in recognition of Jesus as the Son of God and worship. Worship (proskuneō) is the response due to God and to God's representative. The man's faith is complete, and it is expressed in adoration.

John 9:39

And Jesus said, For judgment I am come into this world, that they which see not might see; and that they which see might be made blind — Jesus states the paradoxical purpose of his coming: judgment. Those who are spiritually blind ('see not') will receive sight through faith; those who claim to see (the authorities who trust in their own understanding) will be made blind. This reversal is the judgment: the world's values are overturned. The supposedly blind beggar sees and believes; the supposedly learned authorities remain blind to the truth.

John 9:40

And some of the Pharisees which were with him heard these words, and said unto him, Are we blind also? — some Pharisees are present and hear Jesus's statement. They understand it as an accusation and ask, 'Are we blind also?' (implying, 'Surely you don't mean us'). The question reveals their defensive reaction: they do not accept the judgment pronounced upon them. Yet in asking whether they are blind, they inadvertently confess the possibility—they are worried about the very condemnation Jesus implies.

John 9:5

As long as I am in the world, I am the light of the world — Jesus reasserts the claim from 8:12 within the context of this healing. As long as he is present ('as long as I am in the world'), he is the light of the world. The healing of blindness is the manifestation of this light: bringing sight to one born blind is bringing light into darkness. The statement affirms that Jesus's presence in the world is characterized by light-bringing, healing, and the revelation of truth.

John 9:6

When he had thus spoken, he spat on the ground, and made clay of his spittle, and he anointed the eyes of the blind man with the clay — Jesus performs the healing through a process: spitting on the ground, making clay (a mixing of saliva and earth), and anointing the blind man's eyes with the clay. The method is tactile and intimate. The use of spittle echoes Old Testament healing narratives (Mark 7:33) and suggests the transfer of life-power. The making of clay from earth recalls Genesis 2:7 (God forming man from dust), suggesting a re-creation. The healing is not instantaneous through a word but mediated through physical action and material.

John 9:7

And said unto him, Go, wash in the pool of Siloam, (which is by interpretation, Sent.) He went his way therefore, and washed, and came seeing — Jesus sends the man to the Pool of Siloam (shilōach, meaning 'sent'). The symbolic meaning is explicit: the pool's name ('Sent') echoes Jesus's own self-designation ('he that sent me,' the Father's sending of the Son). The healing is completed through obedience: the man goes, washes, and returns able to see ('came seeing,' ēlthen blepōn). The sight-giving occurs through the mediation of water, the sign of purification and new life. The man's act of faith (going to wash as instructed) cooperates with Jesus's healing power.

John 9:8

The neighbours therefore, and they which before had seen him that he was blind, said, Is not this he that sat and begged? — the man's neighbors and those familiar with his blindness (they had 'before had seen him that he was blind') now encounter him seeing and express astonishment. The question 'Is not this he that sat and begged?' indicates they recognize him despite the transformation. His identity as a blind beggar has been so fixed that his sudden sight triggers doubt about his identity.

John 9:9

Some said, He is he: others said, He is like him: but he said, I am he — the community divides over the man's identity. Some affirm it's the same person; others say he merely resembles the blind beggar. The man himself must assert his identity: 'I am he' (Egō eimi). The first response to the healing is the witness of the healed man to his own transformation. His testimony establishes the reality of the cure and his continuity of identity despite radical change. The simple testimony 'I am he' becomes a form of faith-witness.

John 9:10

Therefore said they unto him, How were thine eyes opened? — the neighbors ask how his eyes were opened (aneoichthēsan, were opened, passive voice, suggesting an external agent). They seek to understand the mechanism of the cure. The question opens the narrative to the man's account of what Jesus did, establishing a testimony that will be repeated and expanded throughout the chapter.

John 9:11

He answered and said, A man that is called Jesus made clay, and anointed mine eyes, and said unto me, Go to the pool of Siloam, and wash: and I went and washed, and I received sight — the healed man gives a straightforward account: Jesus (called by name 'Jesus,' not yet recognized as the Messiah by the man) made clay, anointed his eyes, and directed him to the pool. His obedience ('I went and washed') resulted in sight ('received sight,' anablepo, came to see). The man's testimony is factual and simple, based on his experience. He does not yet interpret the significance; he merely reports what happened.

John 9:12

Then said they unto him, Where is he? And he said, I know not — the neighbors ask where Jesus is. The man does not know ('I know not,' ouk oida). This establishes the man's innocence of any conspiracy: he has not been tutored or prepared. His only knowledge is what he has directly experienced. The question also sets up the next stage: Jesus has disappeared from the scene, and the healing becomes the focus of investigation without Jesus's immediate presence to explain or defend it.

John 9:13

They brought to the Pharisees him that aforetime was blind — the neighbors bring the healed man to the Pharisees. The institutional authorities must investigate and judge the event. The note that they bring him 'that aforetime was blind' (ton pote typhlon) emphasizes the notoriety: this man's blindness was well-known; his sudden sight is undeniable. The Pharisees will have to reckon with an authenticated miracle.

John 9:14

Now it was the sabbath day when Jesus made the clay, and opened his eyes — John notes the timing: the healing occurred on the Sabbath. This detail is crucial: just as in 5:9-10 (healing the lame man on the Sabbath), the healing on the Sabbath will trigger conflict. The violation of Sabbath law (making clay, anointing) becomes the legal ground for attacking the miracle, regardless of its redemptive power. The Pharisees' legal framework will prioritize Sabbath observance over mercy.

John 9:15

Then again the Pharisees also asked him how he had received his sight. And he said unto them, He put clay upon mine eyes, and I washed, and do see — the Pharisees interrogate the man, asking how he received sight. He repeats his account: clay on the eyes, washing, sight. The repetition in 9:11 and 9:15 emphasizes the consistency of his testimony and the simplicity of the fact. He has seen what was not possible to see (given his congenital blindness); that fact is irrefutable.

John 9:16

Therefore said some of the Pharisees, This man is not of God, because he keepeth not the sabbath day. Others said, How can a man that is a sinner do such miracles? And there was a division among them — the Pharisees divide over the meaning of the miracle. Some conclude Jesus is 'not of God' because he violated the Sabbath (keepeth not the sabbath). Others argue that if he were a sinner, he could not perform miracles ('How can a man that is a sinner do such miracles?'). The logic of the second group is: miracles are works of God; sinners cannot do God's works; therefore, this man is not a sinner. The division (krisis, crisis/judgment) reflects the fundamental tension: law vs. grace, institutional authority vs. redemptive power.

John 9:17

They say unto the blind man again, What sayest thou of him, for that he hath opened thine eyes? And he said, He is a prophet — the Pharisees turn back to the healed man, asking his judgment of Jesus ('What sayest thou of him?'). The man's answer has developed: 'He is a prophet' (prophētēs). This is an advance from his initial identification ('a man called Jesus'); he now recognizes prophetic authority and function. A prophet, in Jewish thought, speaks for God and performs works of God. Yet the title 'prophet' falls short of the full truth (Jesus is more than prophet), and the Pharisees will press him to further positions.

John 9:18

But the Jews did not believe concerning him, that he had been blind, and received his sight, until they called the parents of the blind man that had received his sight — the authorities challenge the fact of the cure itself. They 'did not believe' that the man had been blind and now sees. To verify the claim, they call the man's parents. This establishes that the authorities' opposition is not based on the rejection of the fact (which they attempt to verify) but on the theological and legal implications they find unacceptable.

John 9:19

And they asked them, saying, Is this your son, who ye say was born blind? how then doth he now see? — the Pharisees interrogate the parents: Is this your son? Was he born blind? How does he now see? The questions imply skepticism: perhaps this is not their son, or his blindness was not complete, or the claim to sight is false. The parents must validate both the identity of their son and the reality of his former blindness.

John 9:20

His parents answered them and said, We know that this is our son, and that he was born blind — the parents confirm both points: this is their son, and he was indeed born blind. Their testimony is authoritative: they knew him from birth and witnessed his blindness throughout his life. The affirmation is straightforward and unambiguous.

John 9:21

But by what means he now seeth, we know not; neither know we who hath opened his eyes: ask him: he is of age; he shall speak for himself — the parents acknowledge they do not know the mechanism of the cure or the identity of the healer. Remarkably, they redirect the inquiry to their son: 'ask him: he is of age; he shall speak for himself.' The reference to the man's age ('of age,' hēlikian echei) suggests he is an adult capable of testifying for himself. The parents' strategy is protective: they affirm the cure but avoid commenting on Jesus or the violation of Sabbath law.

John 9:22

These words spake his parents, because they feared the Jews: for the Jews had agreed already, that if any man did confess that he was Christ, he should be put out of the synagogue — John provides the explanation: the parents fear 'the Jews' (the authorities). The institutional authorities have decreed that anyone confessing Jesus as the Messiah will be cast out of the synagogue (aposynagōgos, expelled from the community). This is an act of social death: excommunication. The parents' caution reflects the real threat: public alignment with Jesus means exile from the community, family, and religious life.

John 9:23

Therefore said his parents, He is of age; ask him — the parents' repetition of 'He is of age; ask him' emphasizes their strategy: they will not testify about Jesus or the healing mechanism. They defer entirely to their son, implicitly allowing him to speak freely while they maintain distance. The parental fear shapes their silence.

John 9:24

Then again called they the man that was blind, and said unto him, Give God the praise: we know that this man is a sinner — the Pharisees bring the healed man back for further interrogation. 'Give God the praise'—this phrase may mean 'tell the truth before God' (an oath formula invoking God as witness) or 'give God credit for any cure' (implying Jesus played no role). They assert: 'we know that this man is a sinner'—they claim definitive knowledge that Jesus is a sinner (violating the Sabbath). The interrogation attempts to separate the healed man's allegiance from Jesus.

John 9:25

He answered and said, Whether he be a sinner or no, I know not: one thing I know, that, whereas I was blind, now I see — the man refuses to be drawn into the authorities' framework. 'Whether he be a sinner or no, I know not'—he does not claim to know Jesus's moral status. But there is 'one thing I know' (oida . . . hoti): the transformation of his own condition. His blindness is replaced by sight; that fact is undeniable and immediate. The man's logic is brilliant: he bases his witness not on theological arguments about Jesus but on his own experienced transformation. The authorities cannot argue with his testimony to his own sight.

John 9:26

Then said they to him again, What did he do to thee? how opened he thine eyes? — the Pharisees return to the factual question: What did he do? How were your eyes opened? Their repeated interrogation suggests frustration: the man keeps referring to his sight, not to theological analysis of Jesus. They seek to extract either a confession or a recantation.

John 9:27

He answered them, I have told you already, and ye did not hear: wherefore would ye hear it again? will ye also be his disciples? — the man shows growing boldness. He has already told them the account (9:11, 9:15); they 'did not hear' (ouk ēkousate, did not listen, did not pay attention). Why ask again? And then he adds a provocative question: 'will ye also be his disciples?' (thelete kai autoi mathētai autou genesthai, do you want to become his disciples also?). This is ironic boldness: the authorities interrogate him, and he turns the question back on them—are they perhaps interested in following Jesus? The question exposes the authorities' unwillingness to acknowledge what they have heard.

John 9:28

Then they reviled him, and said, Thou art his disciple; but we are Moses' disciples — the authorities respond with anger ('reviled him,' eloidorēsan auton, insulted/abused him). They call him 'his [Jesus's] disciple,' which he has not claimed but which his witness supports. They contrast themselves: 'we are Moses' disciples.' This appeals to the tradition and the law: Moses is their authority, not Jesus. The claim to be Moses' disciples implicitly rejects the possibility of also being Jesus's disciples.

John 9:29

We know that God spake unto Moses: as for this fellow, we know not from whence he is — the authorities assert: 'We know that God spake unto Moses'—they have the authority of the law and the prophets behind them. But concerning Jesus ('this fellow'), 'we know not from whence he is.' This echoes the earlier objection (7:27) about the Messiah's origins. Their claim to know Moses but not Jesus's origins becomes the basis for rejecting him. Yet John has established (8:14) that Jesus does know his origins (from the Father), while the authorities do not.

John 9:30

The man answered and said unto them, Why herein is a marvel, that ye know not from whence he is, and yet he hath opened mine eyes — the man expresses wonder ('herein is a marvel'). The authorities claim not to know Jesus's origins, yet he has done something extraordinary: opened blind eyes. The man's logic highlights the absurdity: if Jesus's origins are unknown, his works are known. A person whose works are unknown cannot perform such miracles. The authorities' claim to be ignorant is itself marvelous and implicitly condemning.

John 9:31

Now we know that God heareth not sinners: but if any man be a worshipper of God, and doeth his will, him he heareth — the man appeals to a theological principle: God hears (listens to, accepts the prayers of) those who are righteous and do God's will, but does not hear sinners. If Jesus performs such a work (opening blind eyes), and if his work succeeds, then Jesus must be one whom God hears—which means he must be a 'worshipper of God' who 'doeth his will.' By the logic of prayer and divine response, Jesus's work proves his righteousness.

John 9:32

Since the world began was it not heard that any man opened the eyes of one that was born blind — the man argues from the history of miracles: opening blind eyes is unprecedented. 'Since the world began'—no such cure has ever been recorded. The argument is theological: God's works are known and catalogued in scripture and tradition; this work surpasses them. If it is unprecedented, it must come from God.

John 9:33

If this man were not of God, he could do nothing — the conclusion is stark: 'If this man were not of God' (ei mē ein houtos para tou Theou), he could not do such a thing. The works prove the origin: works of this magnitude and kind can only come from God. The man's testimony, beginning in personal experience ('I see'), has developed into theological argument: his cure demonstrates Jesus's relation to God.

John 9:34

They answered and said unto him, Thou wast altogether born in sins, and dost thou teach us? And they cast him out — the authorities respond with condemnation: 'Thou wast altogether born in sins'—they apply the discourse from 9:2 back to the man himself, dismissing him as a sinner (conflating physical disability with moral failing). 'Dost thou teach us?' expresses outrage: this social outcast presumes to instruct the official interpreters of the law. 'They cast him out' (exebalon auton, threw him out)—they excommunicate him, the very threat mentioned in 9:22. The man's growing faith and witnessing result in expulsion from the community.

John 9:35

Jesus heard that they had cast him out; and when he had found him, he said unto him, Dost thou believe on the Son of God? — Jesus learns of the man's excommunication and seeks him out ('when he had found him'). Jesus's question is not 'Do you believe on me?' but 'Do you believe on the Son of God?' (huios tou Theou). The title 'Son of God' carries the full weight of Jesus's identity: the unique Son, God's representative and agent. The question invites the man to move from intellectual recognition ('he is a prophet') to personal faith. The man has already testified to Jesus's works; now Jesus offers him an occasion for faith.

John 9:36

He answered and said, Who is he, Lord, that I might believe on him? — the man asks who the Son of God is, expressing readiness to believe ('that I might believe on him'). His address 'Lord' (Kyrie) shows respect and perhaps growing reverence. He does not yet identify the Son of God with Jesus, but his question opens the path to that recognition.

John 9:37

And Jesus said unto him, Thou hast both seen him, and it is he that talketh with thee — Jesus reveals himself: 'Thou hast both seen him'—the man has indeed seen the Son of God (physically, in Jesus's presence). 'It is he that talketh with thee'—the one before him, speaking to him, is the Son of God. The revelation is direct and personal: Jesus is not merely speaking about the Son of God; he is presenting himself as such.

John 9:1

And as Jesus passed by, he saw a man which was blind from his birth — Jesus encounters a man blind from birth (from childhood, ek koilias mētros, from his mother's womb). The blindness is congenital, total, and lifelong—the complete deprivation of sight. The encounter exemplifies John's principle: the sign is both physical and spiritual. Physical blindness will become the occasion for spiritual revelation and crisis. The man's absolute disability (not blind from an accident or illness but from birth) makes the cure maximally miraculous and maximally symbolic of spiritual blindness cured only by Jesus.

John 9:2

And his disciples asked him, saying, Master, who did sin, this man, or his parents, that he was born blind? — the disciples assume that physical disability results from personal or parental sin. This reflects a common theological view: suffering is punishment for sin (cf. Job 4:7, though Job itself questions this). The disciples' question frames blindness within the categories of moral causation and divine retribution. Jesus will reject this framework, reorienting understanding toward God's redemptive purposes rather than explanations of suffering rooted in sin-causation.

John 9:3

Jesus answered, Neither hath this man sinned, nor his parents: but that the works of God should be made manifest in him — Jesus rejects both possible sources of sin ('neither this man sinned, nor his parents') and reframes the blindness entirely. It is not a punishment but an occasion: 'that the works of God should be made manifest in him.' The blindness exists so that God's works (erga, deeds, particularly miraculous works) might be revealed. This is a radical reorientation: physical affliction becomes a canvas for divine action. The man's suffering serves a greater purpose—the revelation of God's power and Jesus's identity.

John 9:4

I must work the works of him that sent me, while it is day: the night cometh, when no man can work — Jesus establishes the necessity ('I must') of working the works the Father has sent him to do. The image of 'day' and 'night' (nyx) suggests the limited time of Jesus's ministry and the urgency of redemptive action. 'While it is day'—the time of Jesus's earthly ministry is the time for God's works. 'The night cometh, when no man can work'—once Jesus is gone, the opportunity for his direct miraculous ministry is ended. This creates urgency: the healing must happen now, in the day.