John the biographer wanted his readers to note that the authorities had interrupted the blind-from-birth when he said “Do you not also desire to become his disciples?” After the interruption the born-blind continued, as above, by giving the reasons why he thought that the authorities would “desire to become his disciples”. The formerly-blind can see. They can’t.
They answered him, “You were born in utter sin, and would you teach us?” And they threw him out - outside.
It would have been OK for the man to have been religious. But it wasn’t OK for him to know Jesus for real.
Jesus heard that they had thrown him out, outside, and, having found him, said, “Do you trust in the Son of Man?” That same one was replying and said, “And who is he, lord, that I may trust in him?” “The Jesus”, he said to him, “and you have seen him, and it is that same one speaking with you.”
What do you think? Would the blind-from-birth beggar “trust in the Son of Man?” Would he trust in the one of whom he said, “If this man were not from God, he could do nothing.”
He himself in fact disclosed, “Lord, I trust,” and he worshipped him and Jesus said, “Towards a judicial decision I have come into this world, with the result that the ones not seeing may see, and the ones seeing may become blind.”
“Towards a judicial decision I have come into the world”? Who is to make that “judicial decision”? Can it be that the “judicial decision” now must be made by “those not seeing” – each one – and also by “those seeing” – each one? Has Jesus “come into the world” so that each one of us would make that “judicial decision” for herself or himself alone? Those decisions have now been made. But they can be changed.
|
