His parents said these things because they feared the Jews; for the Jews had already agreed that if any man would confess him as Christ, he would be put out of the synagogue. Therefore his parents said, “He is of age. Ask him.”
So they called the man who was blind a second time, and said to him, “Give glory to God. We know that this man is a sinner.”
He therefore answered, “I don’t know if he is a sinner. One thing I do know: that though I was blind, now I see.”
They said to him again, “What did he do to you? How did he open your eyes?”
He answered them, “I told you already, and you didn’t listen. Why do you want to hear it again? You don’t also want to become his disciples, do you?”
They insulted him and said, “You are his disciple, but we are disciples of Moses. We know that God has spoken to Moses. But as for this man, we don’t know where he comes from.”
The man answered them, “How amazing! You don’t know where he comes from, yet he opened my eyes. We know that God doesn’t listen to sinners, but if anyone is a worshiper of God, and does his will, he listens to him. Since the world began it has never been heard of that anyone opened the eyes of someone born blind. If this man were not from God, he could do nothing.”
They answered him, “You were altogether born in sins, and do you teach us?” Then they threw him out.
Jesus heard that they had thrown him out, and finding him, he said, “Do you believe in the Son of God?”
He answered, “Who is he, Lord, that I may believe in him?”
Jesus said to him, “You have both seen him, and it is he who speaks with you.”
He said, “Lord, I believe!” and he worshiped him.
John Calvin 1540 · Public Domain On vv22, 24, 25, 26, 28, 29, 30, 31, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38 22. The Jews had determined. This passage shows that…
22. The Jews had determined. This passage shows that the custom of excommunication is ancient, and has been observed in all ages; for excommunication was not then for the first time invented, but it was a custom which had been anciently used against apostates and despisers of the Law, and was turned against the disciples of Christ. We learn, therefore, that the practice of excommunication arose out of the most ancient discipline of the Church. We learn also that it is a crime which has not been of recent origin, and has not been peculiar to a single age, that wicked and unbelieving men should corrupt the holy ordinances of God by their deeds of sacrilege. God determined, from the beginning of the world, that there should be some form of correction, by which rebels should be restrained. The priests and scribes not only abused this power in a tyrannical manner to oppress innocent men; but at length they basely attacked God himself and his doctrine. The truth of Christ being so powerful that they were not able to put it down by law, or by a regular course of proceedings, they launched the thunders of excommunications to crush it.
The same thing has also been done with the Christian people; for it is impossible to express the barbarous tyranny which the pretended bishops have exercised in enslaving the people, so that no man dared to whisper; and now we see with what cruelty they throw this dart of excommunication against all who worship God. But we ought to believe that excommunication, when it is violently applied to a different purpose by the passions of men, may safely be treated with contempt. For when God committed to his Church the power of excommunicating, he did not arm tyrants or executioners to strangle souls, but laid down a rule for governing his people; and that on the condition that he should hold the supreme government, and that he should have men for his ministers. Let the pretended bishops then thunder as they think fit, by their empty noises they will not terrify any but those who wander about in doubt and uncertainty, not having yet been instructed, by the voice of the Chief Shepherd, what is the true fold.
Read full note →
In short, nothing can be more certain than that those who, we see, are not subject to Christ are deprived of the lawful power of excommunicating. Nor ought we to dread being excluded by them from their assembly, since Christ, who is our life and salvation, is banished from it. So far are we from having any reason to dread being thrown out, that, on the contrary, if we desire to be united to Christ, we must, of our own accord, withdraw from the synagogues of Satan. Yet though the ordinance of excommunication was so basely corrupted in the ancient Church, still Christ did not intend that it should be abolished by his coming, but restored it to its purity, that it might be in full vigor amongst us. Thus, though at the present day there prevails in Popery a base profanation of this holy discipline, yet, instead of abolishing it, we ought rather to give the utmost diligence to restore it to its former completeness. There never will be so good order the world, that even the holiest Laws of God shall not degenerate into corruption, through the fault of men. Assuredly, it would give too much power to Satan, if he could reduce to nothing every thing that he corrupts. We would then have no Baptism, no Lord’s Supper, and, in short, no religion; for there is no part of it which he has left uncontaminated by its pollutions.
John Calvin's Commentaries (1540-1563) — public domain. Text from the Calvin Translation Society English edition (1840s-50s) via the Christian Classics Ethereal Library (ccel.org). Calvin's coverage is partial (roughly two-thirds of the Bible); uncommented books and verses are honest gaps, never fabricated. The 19th-century editor's footnotes and remarks are omitted so the notes are faithfully Calvin's own voice.
Geneva Bible translators 1599 · Public Domain On vv24, 28, 34, 35 A solemn order, whereby men were constrained in old…
A solemn order, whereby men were constrained in old time to acknowledge their fault before God, as if they should say, Consider thou art before God, who knoweth the whole matter, and therefore see thou reverence his majesty, and do him this honor, rather to confess the whole matter openly, than to lie before him, Josh. 7:19; 1 Sam. 6:5.
He is called a sinner in the Hebrew tongue, which is a wicked man, and maketh as it were an art of sins.
Geneva Bible (1599) marginal notes — public domain.
John Trapp 1656 · Public Domain On vv22–38 22 These words spake his parents, because they feared…
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.
Ver. 22. Put out of the synagogue] This was that kind of excommunication they called Niddui, or separation; and such were by the Greeks called Αποδεδοκιμασμενοι and Αμνημονευτοι. There were two other more heavy kind of excommunications in use among the Jews, Cherem and Samatha or Maranatha, which they derive as low as from Enoch, Jdg 1:14. The heathens also had their public execrations, not rashly to be used against any; Est enim execratio res tristis, et mali ominis, saith Plutarch; who therefore highly commends that Athenian priest, that being commanded by the people to curse Alcibiades, refused to do it. That archflamen of Rome, the pope, is like a wasp; no sooner angry but out comes a sting (an excommunication), which, being once out, is like a fool’s dagger, rattling and snapping without an edge. Cum Pontifex Rom. diras in Ludovic 12, Gall. Regem evomeret; Atqui (ait rex) Precandi ille, non imprecandi causa pontifex constitutus est. (Firron. lib. 2. de Gestu. Gallor.) It was grown to a proverb among our forefathers, In nomine Domini incipit omne malum. In the name of God, begins all evil. John Cornford (one of the six last that were burnt in England for the true religion), when he heard himself and his fellows excommunicated, stirred with a vehement zeal of God, and proceeding in a more true excommunication against the Papists, in the name of them all, pronounced sentence against them in these words, In the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by the power of his Holy Spirit and the authority of his holy Catholic and Apostolic Church, we do give here into the hands of Satan to be destroyed, the bodies of all those blasphemers and heretics that do maintain any error against his most holy word, or do condemn his most holy truth for heresy, to the maintaining of any false Church or feigned religion; so that by this thy just judgment, most mighty God, against thine adversaries, thy true religion may be known, to thy glory, and our comforts, and to the edifying of all our nation. Good Lord, so be it.
John Trapp, A Commentary or Exposition upon All the Books of the Old and New Testament (1647–1656) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Matthew Poole 1685 · Public Domain On vv22, 23, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38 The reason why his parents answered so very warily,…
The reason why his parents answered so very warily, and avoided saying any thing to the Pharisees third question, which probably they could not go of their particular personal knowledge, was, that they were afraid of the rulers of the Jews. Solomon saith,
The fear of man bringeth a snare, Pro 29:25; it is often a temptation to men to deny the truth, or, at least, not to own and confess it when God calls to them for a public owning and confession of it: but nothing of that nature appeareth in this case; for it doth not appear that his parents were present when Christ wrought this great miracle; which if they were not, they were not obliged to tell the Pharisees what themselves had only received by rumour and hearsay: so that their answer seems but a prudential answer, to avoid an eminent danger. For they were not ignorant of a decree made by the Jewish sanhedrim. That if any did publicly say, or declare, that Jesus was Christ, he should be excommunicated; for that is meant by being
Read full note →
put out of the synagogue.
Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible (1683–1685) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.
William Burkitt 1703 · Public Domain On vv24, 30, 34 Here we have an account of the Pharisees farther…
Here we have an account of the Pharisees farther practising upon this blind man, to rob Christ of the glory of this miracle; first, they insinuate with him, and then they frown upon him.
First, they insinuate with him, saying, give God, the praise. As if they had said, "Ascribe the cure to God, not to this man," whom they conclude to be a sinner, because he broke (as they thought) the sabbath. It is no new thing to see men pretend to aim at the glory of God, when at the same time they are maliciously opposing Christ and persecuting his members.
Read full note →
Next, they they attempted to frown this poor man into a denial of this miracle wrought upon him, or to persuade the people that it was a cheat: but it is wonderful to observe, how the boldness and confidence of this poor man increased, God giving him that wisdom and courage which all his adversaries were not able to resist or gainstay. Therefore the Pharisees being angry at this boldness of the man, they revile him for being so silly, as to become a disciple to Christ, whose office and authority they knew not; whereas they were the disciples of Moses, whom they knew God spake unto.
Learn hence, That such as are led by malice, and prepossessed with prejudice against Christ, will not only think basely of his person, but refuse to see the clearest evidences of his authority and commission. As for this fellow, say the malicious Pharisees, we know not whence he is, or who gave him this commission.
William Burkitt's Expository Notes on the New Testament (1700–1703) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Matthew Henry 1710 · Public Domain On v35 In these verses we may observe,
In these verses we may observe,
I. The tender care which our Lord Jesus took of this poor man (Joh 9:35): When Jesus heard that they had cast him out (for it is likely the town rang of it, and everybody cried out shame upon them for it), then he found him, which implies his seeking him and looking after him, that he might encourage and comfort him, 1. Because he had, to the best of his knowledge, spoken so very well, so bravely, so boldly, in defence of the Lord Jesus. Note, Jesus Christ will be sure to stand by his witnesses, and own those that own him and his truth and ways. Earthly princes neither do, nor can, take cognizance of all that vindicate them and their government and administration; but our Lord Jesus knows and observes all the faithful testimonies we bear to him at any time, and a book of remembrance is written, and it shall redound not only to our credit hereafter, but our comfort now. 2. Because the Pharisees had cast him out and abused him. Besides the common regard which the righteous Judge of the world has to those who suffer wrongfully (Psa 103:6), there is a particular notice taken of those that suffer in the cause of Christ and for the testimony of a good conscience. Here was one poor man suffering for Christ, and he took care that as his afflictions abounded his consolations should much more abound. Note, (1.) Though persecutors may exclude good men from their communion, yet they cannot exclude them from communion with Christ, nor put them out of the way of his visits. Happy are they who have a friend from whom men cannot debar them. (2.) Jesus Christ will graciously find and receive those who for his sake are unjustly rejected and cast out by men. He will be a hiding place to his outcasts, and appear, to the joy of those whom their brethren hated and cast out.
Read full note →
II. The comfortable converse Christ had with him, wherein he brings him acquainted with the consolation of Israel. He had well improved the knowledge he had, and now Christ gives him further instruction; for he that is faithful in a little shall be entrusted with more, Mat 13:12.
1. Our Lord Jesus examines his faith: "Dost thou believe on the Son of God? Dost thou give credit to the promises of the Messiah? Dost thou expect his coming, and art thou ready to receive and embrace him when he is manifested to thee?" This was that faith of the Son of God by which the saints lived before his manifestation. Observe, (1.) The Messiah is here called the Son of God, and so the Jews had learned to call him from the prophecies, Psa 2:7; Psa 89:27. See Joh 1:49, Thou art the Son of God, that is, the true Messiah. Those that expected the temporal kingdom of the Messiah delighted rather in calling him the Son of David, which gave more countenance to that expectation, Mat 22:42. But Christ, that he might give us an idea of his kingdom, as purely spiritual and divine, calls himself the Son of God, and rather Son of man in general than of David in particular. (2.) The desires and expectations of the Messiah, which the Old Testament saints had, guided by and grounded upon the promise, were graciously interpreted and accepted as their believing on the Son of God. This faith Christ here enquires after: Dost thou believe? Note, The great thing which is now required of us (Jo1 3:23), and which will shortly be enquired after concerning us, is our believing on the Son of God, and by this we must stand or fall for ever.
2. The poor man solicitously enquires concerning the Messiah he was to believe in, professing his readiness to embrace him and close with him (Joh 9:36): Who is he, Lord, that I may believe on him? (1.) Some think he did know that Jesus, who cured him, was the Son of God, but did not know which was Jesus, and therefore, supposing this person that talked with him to be a follower of Jesus, desired him to do him the favour to direct him to his master; not that he might satisfy his curiosity with the sight of him, but that he might the more firmly believe in him, and profess his faith, and know whom he had believed. See Sol 5:6, Sol 5:7; Sol 3:2, Sol 3:3. It is Christ only that can direct us to himself. (2.) Others think he did know that this person who talked with him was Jesus, the same that cured him, whom he believed a great and good man and a prophet, but did not yet know that he was the Son of God and the true Messiah. "Lord, I believe there is a Christ to come; thou who hast given me bodily sight, tell me, O tell me, who and where this Son of God is." Christ's question intimated that the Messiah was come, and was now among them, which he presently takes the hint of, and asks, Where is he, Lord? The question was rational and just: Who is he, Lord, that I may believe on him? For how could he believe in one of whom he had not heard; the work of ministers is to tell us who the Son of God is, that we may believe on him, Joh 20:31.
3. Our Lord Jesus graciously reveals himself to him as that Son of God on whom he must believe: Thou hast both seen him, and it is he that talketh with thee, Joh 9:37. Thou needest not go far to find out the Son of God, Behold the Word is nigh thee. We do not find that Christ did thus expressly, and in so many words, reveal himself to any other as to this man here and to the woman of Samaria: I that speak unto thee am he. He left others to find out by arguments who he was, but to these weak and foolish things of the world he chose to manifest himself, so as not to the wise and prudent. Christ here describes himself to this man by two things, which express his great favour to him: - (1.) Thou hast seen him; and he was much indebted to the Lord Jesus for opening his eyes, that he might see him. Now he was made sensible, more than ever, what an unspeakable mercy it was to be cured of his blindness, that he might see the Son of God, a sight which rejoiced his heart more than that of the light of this world. Note, The Greatest comfort of bodily eyesight is its serviceableness to our faith and the interests of our souls. How contentedly might this man have returned to his former blindness, like old Simeon, now that his eyes had seen God's salvation! If we apply this to the opening of the eyes of the mind, it intimates that spiritual sight is given principally for this end, that we may see Christ, Co2 4:6. Can we say that by faith we have seen Christ, seen him in his beauty and glory, in his ability and willingness to save, so seen him as to be satisfied concerning him, to be satisfied in him? Let us give him the praise, who opened our eyes. (2.) It is he that talketh with thee; and he was indebted to Christ for condescending to do this. He was not only favoured with a sight of Christ, but was admitted into fellowship and communion with him. Great princes are willing to be seen by those whom yet they will not vouchsafe to talk with. But Christ, by his word and Spirit, talks with those whose desires are towards him, and in talking with them manifests himself to them, as he did to the two disciples, when he talked their hearts warm, Luk 24:32. Observe, This poor man was solicitously enquiring after the Saviour, when at the same time he saw him, and was talking with him. Note, Jesus Christ is often nearer the souls that seek him than they themselves are aware of. Doubting Christians are sometimes saying, Where is the Lord? and fearing that they are cast out from his sight when at the same time it is he that talks with them, and puts strength into them.
4. The poor man readily entertains this surprising revelation, and, in a transport of joy and wonder, he said, Lord, I believe, and he worshipped him. (1.) He professed his faith in Christ: Lord, I believe thee to be the Son of God. He would not dispute any thing that he said who had shown such mercy to him, and wrought such a miracle for him, nor doubt of the truth of a doctrine which was confirmed by such signs. Believing with the heart, he thus confesses with the mouth; and now the bruised reed was become a cedar. (2.) He paid his homage to him: He worshipped him, not only gave him the civil respect due to a great man, and the acknowledgments owing to a kind benefactor, but herein gave him divine honour, and worshipped him as the Son of God manifested in the flesh. None but God is to be worshipped; so that in worshipping Jesus he owned him to be God. Note, True faith will show itself in a humble adoration of the Lord Jesus. Those who believe in him will see all the reason in the world to worship him. We never read any more of this man; but, it is very likely, from henceforth he became a constant follower of Christ.
Matthew Henry's Commentary on the Whole Bible (1708–1710) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.
John Gill 1763 · Public Domain On vv22–38 These words spake his parents,.... these were the answers…
These words spake his parents,.... these were the answers they returned to the three questions put to them: and the reason why they answered in the manner they did to the third, was,
because they feared the Jews; the Jewish sanhedrim, otherwise they were Jews themselves:
Read full note →
for the Jews had agreed already; the sanhedrim had made a decree, either at this time, upon this account, or some time before,
that if any man did confess that he was Christ; that Jesus of Nazareth was the Messiah,
he should be put out of the synagogue; which was not that sort of excommunication which they called "Niddui", a separation from civil society for the space of four cubits, and which held but thirty days, if the person repented; if he did not, it was continued to sixty days; and after that, in case of non-repentance, to ninety days; and if no amendment, then they proceeded to another excommunication called "Cherem", or "Shammatha", whereby such were anathematized, and cut off from the whole body of the Jewish church and people, called sometimes the synagogue and congregation of Israel (r); and this struck great terror in the minds of the people; and this was what intimidated the parents of the blind man, being what is intended here. Though these are sometimes put one for another, and signify the same thing; and he that was under the former of those censures, is said to be "separated from the congregation" (s), a phrase by which the word here used may be very well rendered: but in some things there was a difference between them; the one was without cursing, the other with; he that was under "Niddui", might teach others the traditions, and they might teach him; he might hire workmen, and be hired himself: but he that was under "Cherem" might neither teach others, nor they teach him; but he might teach himself, that he might not forget his learning; and he might neither hire, nor be hired; and they did not trade with him, nor did they employ him in any business, unless in very little, just to keep him alive (t); yea, the goods which he was possessed of, were confiscated, and which they conclude should be done from (u) Ezr 10:8, which may be compared with this passage; so that this greatly and chiefly affected them in the affairs of civil life, and which made it so terrible: for I do not find that they were obliged to abstain from the temple, or temple worship, or from the synagogue, and the worship of it, and which is the mistake of some learned men: it is certain, they might go into places of worship, though with some difference from others; for it is said (w), that
"all that go into the temple, go in, in the right hand way, and go round, and come out in the left, except such an one to whom anything has befallen him, and he goes about to the left; (and when asked) why dost thou go to the left? (he answers) because I am a mourner; (to whom it is replied) he that dwells in this house comfort thee: (or) , "because I am excommunicated"; (to whom they say) he that dwells in this house put it into thy heart (that thou mayest hearken to the words of thy friends, as it is afterwards explained) and they may receive thee.''
And it is elsewhere said (x), that
"Solomon, when he built the temple, made two gates, the one for bridegrooms, and the other for mourners and excommunicated persons; and the Israelites, when they went in on sabbath days, or feast days, sat between these two gates; and when anyone came in by the gate of the bridegrooms, they knew he was a bridegroom, and said unto him, he that dwells in this house make thee cheerful with sons and daughters: and when anyone came in at the gate of mourners, and his upper lip covered, they knew that he was a mourner, and said unto him, he that dwells in this house comfort thee: and when anyone came in at the gate of mourners, and his upper lip was not covered, they knew , "that he was excommunicated"; and said unto him, he that dwells in this house comfort thee, and put it into thy heart to hearken to thy friends.''
And it is afterwards also said in the same place, that when the temple was destroyed, it was decreed that such persons should come into synagogues and schools; but then they were not reckoned as members of the Jewish church, but as persons cut off from the people of Israel, and scarce allowed to be of their commonwealth. And it may be further observed, that excommunication with the Jews was not only on religious accounts, but on civil accounts; on account of money, or when a man would not pay his debts, according to the decree of the sanhedrim (y). The twenty four reasons of excommunication, given by Maimonides (z), chiefly respect contempt of the sanhedrim, and of the wise men, and breach of the traditions of the elders; sometimes they excommunicated for immorality, particularly the Essenes, as Josephus relates, who says (a), that such who are taken in grievous sins, they cast them out of their order; and he that is so dealt with commonly dies a miserable death; for being bound by oaths and customs, he cannot eat the food of others, and so starves. The same is reported (b) by R. Abraham Zachuth: and sometimes excommunication was for Epicurism, or heresy, and such they reckoned the belief of Jesus of Nazareth, as the Messiah, on account of which this decree was made, and which continued with them; for not only this blind man was cast out of the synagogue by virtue of it, but our Lord tells his disciples, that they should be so treated by the Jews after his death; and we find it remained in force and practice many hundreds of years afterwards. Athanasius (c) relates of a Jew, that lived in Berytus, a city in Syria, between Tyre and Sidon, that an image of Christ being found in his house by another Jew, though unknown to him; and this being discovered to the chief priests and elders of the Jews, they cast him out of the synagogue. Sometimes this sentence was pronounced by word of mouth, and sometimes it was delivered in writing: the form of one is given us by Buxtorf (d), out of an ancient Hebrew manuscript; and a dreadful shocking one it is; and is as follows:
"according to the mind of the Lord of lords, let such an one, the son of such an one, be in "Cherem", or anathematized, in both houses of judgment, of those above, and those below; and with the anathema of the saints on high, with the anathema of the "Seraphim" and "Ophanim", and with the anathema of the whole congregation, great and small; let great and real stripes be upon him, and many and violent diseases; and let his house be an habitation of dragons; and let his star be dark in the clouds; and let him be for indignation, wrath, and anger; and let his carcass be for beasts and serpents; and let those that rise up against him, and his enemies, rejoice over him; and let his silver and his gold be given to others; and let all his children be exposed at the gate of his enemies, and at his day may others be amazed; and let him be cursed from the mouth of Addiriron and Actariel, (names of angels, as are those that follow,) and from the mouth of Sandalphon and Hadraniel, and from the mouth of Ansisiel and Pathchiel, and from the mouth of Seraphiel and Zaganzael, and from the mouth of Michael and Gabriel, and from the mouth of Raphael and Meshartiel; and let him be anathematized from the mouth of Tzabtzabib, and from tile mouth of Habhabib, he is Jehovah the Great, and from the mouth of the seventy names of the great king, and from the side of Tzortak the great chancellor; and let him be swallowed up as Korah and his company, with terror, and with trembling; let his soul go out; let the reproof of the Lord kill him; and let him be strangled as Ahithophel in his counsel; and let his leprosy be as the leprosy of Gehazi; and let there be no raising him up from his fall; and in the sepulchres of Israel let not his grave be; and let his wife be given to another; and let others bow upon her at his death: in this anathema, let such an one, the son of such an one be, and let this be his inheritance; but upon me, and upon all Israel, may God extend his peace and his blessing. Amen.''
And if he would, he might add these verses in Deu 29:19, "and it come to pass when he heareth the words of this curse, that he bless himself in his heart, saying, I shall have peace, though I walk in the imagination of mine heart, to add drunkenness to thirst: the Lord will not spare him, but then the anger of the Lord, and his jealousy shall smoke against that man, and all the curses that are written in this book shall lie upon him, and the Lord shall blot out his name from under heaven. And the Lord shall separate, him unto evil, out of all the tribes of Israel, according, to all the curses of the covenant, that are written in this book of the law". There were many rites and ceremonies, which in process of time were used, when such a sentence was pronounced, as blowing of horns and trumpets, and lighting of candles, and putting them out: hence, trumpets are reckoned (d) a among the instruments of judges. It is said (e) of R. Judah, that being affronted by a certain person, he resented the injury, and brought out the trumpets and excommunicated him: and they tell us (f), that Barak anathematized Meroz, whom they take to be some great person, with four hundred trumpets: and they also say (g), that four hundred trumpets were brought out, and they excommunicated Jesus of Nazareth; though these words are left out in some editions of the Talmud. Now this was done in order to inject terror both into those that were guilty, and also into the whole congregation of the people, that they might hear and fear; for the "Cherem", or that sort of excommunication which goes by that name, was done publicly before the whole synagogue, all the heads and elders of the church being gathered together; and then candles were lighted, and as soon as the form of the curse was finished, they were put out, as a sign that the excommunicated person was unworthy of the heavenly light (h). Very likely the Papists took their horrible custom from hence of cursing with bell, book, and candle.
(r) Vid. Maimon. Talmud Tora, c. 7. sect. 6. Buxtorf. Lex. Rab. col. 1303. & Epist. Heb. Institut. p. 57. (s) Maimon. Hilchod Talmud Tora, c. 7. sect. 4. (t) Ib. sect. 5. (u) T. Bab. Moed Katon, fol. 16. 1. (w) Misn. Middot, c. 2. sect. 2. (x) Pirke Eiiezer, c. 17. (y) T. Bab. Moed Katon, fol. 16. 1. & Gloss in ib. (z) Hilchot Talmud Tora, c. 6. sect. 14. (a) De Bello Jud. l. 2. c. 8. sect. 8. (b) Juchasin, fol. 139. 2. (c) Oper. ejus, Tom. 2. p. 12, 17. Ed. Commelin. (d) Lex Rab. col. 828. (d) T. Bab. Sanhedrin, fol 7. 2. (e) T. Bab. Kiddushin, c. 4. in Beth Israel, fol. 57. 1. (f) T. Bab. Moed Katon, fol. 16. 1. & Shebuot, fol. 36. 1. (g) T. Bab. Sanhedrin, fol. 107. 2. Ed. Venet. (h) Buxtorf. Epist. Heb. Institut. c. 6. p. 56.
John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible (1746–1763) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.
John Wesley 1765 · Public Domain On vv22, 27, 29, 30, 31, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 He should be put out of the synagogue -…
He should be put out of the synagogue - That is be excommunicated.
John Wesley, Explanatory Notes Upon the Whole Bible (1754–1765) — public domain. Text via the GEBible commentary corpus.
Adam Clarke 1810 · Public Domain On vv22, 24, 25, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 38 Verse 22. Put out of the synagogue.] That is,…
Verse 22. Put out of the synagogue.] That is, excommunicated - separated from all religious connection with those who worshipped God. This was the lesser kind of excommunication among the Jews and was termed nidui. The cherem, or anathema, was not used against the followers of Christ till after the resurrection.
Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible (1810–1826) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.
Joseph Benson 1811 · Public Domain On vv24, 30, 35 Joh 9:24-29. Then again called they the man —…
Joh 9:24-29. Then again called they the man — The court, finding that nothing could be learned from the man’s parents, by which the miracle could be disproved, called the man himself a second time, and tried, by fair words, to extort from him a confession to the disparagement of Jesus. They said, Give God the praise — If the cure was really wrought in the manner thou affirmest, acknowledge the power, sovereignty, and goodness of God, in working by so unworthy an instrument; for we certainly know this man, of whom thou speakest, is a profligate sinner, and deserves public punishment rather than esteem. Thus some explain the clause; and doubtless this would be the meaning of it, if the original words did properly signify, Give God the praise. But the expression, Δος δοξαν τω θεω, is literally, Give glory to God, that is, as they seem to have meant, by a free confession of the fraud, collusion, or artifice which they supposed was in this affair, and in which they believed the man to be an accomplice of Jesus. See Jos 7:19, where the Jewish general adjures Achan in similar terms to confess his sin. Their speech was to this effect: Thou canst not impose upon us by this incredible story. We know that the man thou speakest of, who openly profanes the sabbath, is a transgressor, and therefore can have no authority or commission from God: it will, consequently, be the wisest thing thou canst do, to profess the truth honestly, as thereby thou wilt give glory to God. “As it is greatly for the honour of the divine omniscience and providence, that persons who are guilty of crimes not fully proved against them, should freely confess them, and not presume, against the dictates of conscience, to maintain their own innocence; there is a propriety in the phrase, taken in this sense.” — Doddridge. He answered, Whether he be a sinner, I know not — Having no personal acquaintance with him; one thing I know — And will stand to the truth of it; that, whereas I was blind — Even from my birth; now I see — Perfectly well, and owe my sight to the very person whom you condemn. “In this answer of the beggar there is a strong and beautiful irony, founded on good sense; and therefore it must have been felt by the doctors, though they dissembled their resentment for a little, hoping that by gentle means they might prevail with him to confess the supposed fraud of this miracle. They desired him, therefore, to tell them again how it had been performed: saying, What did he to thee? how opened he thine eyes? — They asked him this question before, (Joh 9:15,) but they now proposed it a second time, in order that the man, repeating his account of the servile work performed at his cure, might become sensible that Jesus had violated the sabbath thereby, and was an impostor. For gladly would they have prevailed with him to join them in the judgment which they passed upon Jesus. But their resistance of the truth appeared so criminal to him, that, laying aside fear, he answered, I have told you already, and you did not hear — That is, believe; wherefore would ye hear it again? — Are ye so affected with the miracle, and do ye entertain so high an opinion of the author of it, that ye take pleasure in hearing the account of it repeated, desiring to be more and more confirmed in your veneration for him? Will ye also — As well as I; be his disciples? — Being at length convinced of his divine mission. In this answer the irony was more plain, pointed, and severe, than in the former. By this, therefore, the rulers were provoked to the highest pitch; and reviled him, saying, Thou art his disciple — As is plain from the partiality thou discoverest toward him; but we are Moses’s disciples — And with great reason; for we know God spake to Moses — He clearly demonstrated his mission from God. As for this fellow, &c. — Whereas this fellow, who contradicts Moses, and breaks his laws, by his pretended cures performed on the sabbath; we know not whence he is —
Nor by what power or authority he does these things. “Their partiality here was inexcusable; for if they believed the mission of Moses, on the evidence of miracles, credibly attested indeed, but performed two thousand years before they were born, it was much more reasonable, on their own principles, to believe the mission of Jesus, on at least equal miracles, wrought daily among them, when they might, in many instances, have been eye-witnesses to the facts; and one of which, notwithstanding all their malice, they were here compelled to own, or, at least, found themselves utterly unable to disprove.”
Joseph Benson's Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1811–1818) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Albert Barnes 1834 · Public Domain On vv24, 25, 26, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 38 Give God the praise - This expression seems to…
Give God the praise - This expression seems to be a form of administering an oath. It is used in Jos 7:19, when Achan was put on his oath and entreated to confess his guilt. Joshua said, “My son, give, I pray thee, glory to the Lord God of Israel (in the Greek of the Septuagint, the very expression used in John, ‘Give God the praise’), and make confession unto him.” It is equivalent to an adjuration in the presence of God to acknowledge the truth; as the truth would be giving God praise, confessing the case before him, and trusting to his mercy. Compare 1Sa 6:5 The meaning here is not “give God praise for healing you,” for they were not willing to admit that he had been cured Joh 9:18, but confess that there is imposture in the case; that you have declared to us a falsehood, that you have endeavored to impose on us; and by thus confessing your sin, give praise and honor to God, who condemns all imposture and falsehood, and whom you will thus acknowledge to be right in your condemnation. To induce him to do this, they added that they knew, or were satisfied that Jesus was a sinner. As they considered that point settled, they urged him to confess that he had attempted to impose on them.
We know - We have settled that. He has broken the Sabbath, and that leaves no doubt.
Read full note →
A sinner - A violator of the law respecting the Sabbath, and an impostor. See Joh 9:16.
Albert Barnes' Notes on the Bible (1834–1885) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.
Haydock's Catholic Bible Commentary 1859 · Public Domain On vv22, 24, 27, 28, 31, 32 The Jews had already agreed, or combined together, that…
The Jews had already agreed, or combined together, that if any one owned him for the Messias, he should be turned out of their synagogues, as a person excommunicated. (Witham)
George Leo Haydock (1774–1849), Haydock's Catholic Family Bible and Commentary, 1859 edition — public domain. Excludes Psalms (Douay-Rheims chapter numbering differs from Protestant) and Deuterocanonical books (Catholic canon only).
Robert Jamieson, A. R. Fausset & David Brown 1871 · Public Domain On vv24, 25, 26, 27, 30, 31, 35, 36, 37, 38 Give God the praise; we know that this man…
Give God the praise; we know that this man is a sinner--not wishing him to own, even to the praise of God, that a miracle had been wrought upon him, but to show more regard to the honor of God than ascribe any such act to one who was a sinner.
Jamieson, Fausset & Brown — Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (1871) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.
Daniel D. Whedon 1874 · Public Domain On vv22, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 38 22. Had agreed already—Doubtless this agreement was published by…
22. Had agreed already—Doubtless this agreement was published by authority, or these parents could not have known it. To these Jews, therefore, there are chargeable two crimes against truth. They predetermined that no evidence of the divinity of Jesus should be admitted as valid, and thus they rejected truth by positive will. They decreed that all acknowledgments of his Messiahship, on whatever evidence, should be suppressed by force; and this was persecution. They ignored truth, and they persecuted what they feared to be truth.
He was Christ—They might have acknowledged Jesus to be a prophet, or a worker of miracles, without confessing him to be Christ or Messiah. But then, so varying was the notion in regard to Christ, that they might fear that any acknowledgment of his supernatural claims might incur the penalty. The tyranny that can pass a persecuting decree can stretch it to any shape that suits its own malice.
Daniel D. Whedon (gen. ed.), Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1874–1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges 1878 · Public Domain On vv22–38 22. had agreed] It does not appear when; but…
22. had agreed] It does not appear when; but we are probably to understand an informal agreement among themselves rather than a decree of the Sanhedrin. A formal decree would be easily obtained afterwards. The word for ‘agreed’ is used of the agreement with Judas (Luk_22:5, where it is translated ‘covenanted’), and of the agreement of the Jews to kill S. Paul (Act_23:20), and nowhere else. ‘Assented’ in Act_24:9 is a different compound of the same verb.
that if any man] Literally, in order that if any man: what they agreed upon is represented as the purpose of their agreement. See on Joh_9:2-3, and Joh_8:56.
Read full note →
put out of the synagogue] i.e. excommunicated. The Jews had three kinds of anathema. (1) Excommunication for thirty days, during which the excommunicated might not come within four cubits of any one. (2) Absolute exclusion from all intercourse and worship for an indefinite period. (3) Absolute exclusion for ever; an irrevocable sentence. This third form was very rarely if ever used. It is doubtful whether the second was in use at this time for Jews; but it would be the ban under which all Samaritans were placed. This passage and ‘separate’ in Luk_6:22 probably refer to the first and mildest kind of anathema. The principle of all anathema was found in the Divine sentence on Meroz (Jdg_5:23): Comp. Ezr_10:8. The word for ‘out of the synagogue’ is peculiar to S. John, occurring Joh_12:42, Joh_16:2, and nowhere else.
The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges (gen. ed. J. J. S. Perowne; Cambridge University Press, 1878–1918) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers 1878 · Public Domain On vv22–38 (22) For the Jews had agreed already.—This does not…
(22) For the Jews had agreed already.—This does not imply a formal decree of the Sanhedrin, but an agreement on the part of the leaders which they had made known to the people, and which they would have had little difficulty in carrying into effect. The word rendered “agreed” occurs again in the New Testament only twice. It expresses the covenant made with Judas, in Luk_22:5, and the agreement of the Jews to kill Paul, in Act_23:20.
He should be put out of the synagogue.—Comp. Joh_16:2, and Note on Luk_6:22. The Jews at a later date distinguished three kinds of excommunication. (1) The lightest continued for thirty days, and prescribed four cubits as a distance within which the person may not approach any one, not even wife or children; with this limitation, it did not make exclusion from the synagogue necessary. (2) The severer included absolute banishment from all religious meetings, and absolute giving up of intercourse with all persons, and was formally pronounced with curses. (3) The severest was a perpetual banishment from all meetings, and a practical exclusion from the fellowship of God’s people. It has been sometimes supposed that the words of Luk_6:22, (a) “separate you,” (b) “reproach you,” (c) “cast out your name,” refer to these gradations, but probably the only practice known in the time of our Lord was that which was later regarded as the intermediate form, falling short of perpetual banishment, but being, while the ban lasted, exclusion from all the cherished privileges of an Israelite.
A Bible Commentary for English Readers, edited by Charles John Ellicott (1878–1897) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Pulpit Commentary 1880 · Public Domain On vv22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38 The evangelist accounts for the reticence of the parents…
The evangelist accounts for the reticence of the parents by their fear of consequences. These things said his parents, because they feared the Jews. This passage provides strong evidence of the technical use of the term "the Jews." Doubtless these parents were Israelites, but they were not "Jews" in the Johannine sense. The "Jews" were the hierarchical and ecclesiastico-political authorities. For they had already come to the agreement; (Luk_22:5 Act_23:20 /RAPC 1Ma 9:70) had mutually determined it does not follow that the Sanhedrin had issued a public order, but that a formidable party of "Jews" had made a sunyhkh , had pledged each other and made it sufficiently known even to such persons as the poverty-stricken parents of the blind beggar, that it would be carried out by the adequate authority in such a matterthat if any man should confess that he was Christ ("he" (auton) is remarkable it shows how full the thoughts of the evangelist were of the Personality of Jesus), he should be put out of the synagogue; or, become unsynagoqued. The Talmud speaks of three kinds of excommunication, (of. Mat_5:22) of which the first two were disciplinary; the third answers to complete and final expulsion (in "Jeremiah Moed. K.," 81, d, lhqm ldby awh, Edersheim). The general designation was shammata, from dm to destroy. The first form of it was called nesephah, and did not amount to more than severe rebuke. It would exclude from religious privileges for seven or thirty days, according to the dignity of the authority by whom it was pronounced. (cf. 1Ti_5:1) The second form of shammata was called niddui, which lasted for thirty days at the least, and might be repeated at the end of them. If these admonitions failed to produce their right effect, it might lead to the third and final excommunication, called cherem, or ban, whose duration was indefinite. The second of these forms was accompanied by blast of trumpet and terrible curses, which deprived the sufferer of all kinds of social intercourse. He was avoided as a leper; if he died, he was buried without funeral or mourning. The cherem was even a more terrible anathema, and might last for life. The parents of the blind man might easily fear such a curse. The ban to which this blind man was eventually exposed did not prevent him from moving about the city. The ban pronounced on Jesus led doubtless to the condemnation, issuing in his ignominy and trial for a capital offence. It was probably the second of the three forms of anathema to which he was ultimately condemned. It was quite sufficient temptation for these poor parents to have preserved an obstinate reticence.
Excommunication.
Read full note →
Here is a weapon that attacks religion in the name of religion. Here are people whom the plainest facts would prompt into a confession of Jesus as the Christ, if only they were left to themselves. The truth as it is in Jesus is on one side; threatenings of dire consequences on the other; and truth suffers for the time from the ecclesiastical powers that be.
I SUPERSTITION AS OPPOSED TO JESUS. Here is a special foe, over and above the ordinary foes with whom Jesus has to deal. Whether any real confession of Jesus would have come from the parents of the blind man, if they had been left to themselves, cannot be conjectured. That which deters one does not deter another. There are people who would not be deterred from confessing Jesus by any amount of physical pain. They can rise above that; it is merely a thing of the body; something specific and measurable. But the same people, if a threat of excommunication came in, would at once begin to hesitate. We do well to study the difficulties the gospel has ever met with through superstition, just because they are difficulties foreign to most who are brought up in a Christian land. We are not likely either to be threatened into Christianity or threatened out of it. But undoubtedly there are many parts of the world where the fear of some dreadful spiritual consequence operates to keep many from even looking at the claims of Jesus. How different the spirit of the true religion is from the spirit of the false ones! The priests of superstition have to use every available means to keep their dupes under control.
II THE SUCCESS OF THESE SPIRITUAL THREATENINGS. While we have to deplore the hindrances to the gospel which come from these erroneous instructions and traditions, we must also rejoice at what good there is in evil. That is not utterly evil which proves the hold of the supernatural on mankind.
III THE FAILURE OF THESE SPIRITUAL THREATENINGS. In the case of the parents the threat was successful; in the case of the son it failed. There will always be a few, at all events, whom no possible inducement can keep back from faithfulness to truth. Fear of losing their place in the true great assembly is a mightier motive than that of keeping connection with any visible ecclesiastical system. Y.
The Pulpit Commentary (1880–1919), ed. H.D.M. Spence-Jones & Joseph S. Exell — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Biblical Illustrator 1887 · Public Domain On vv22, 24, 25, 31, 32, 35 If any man did confess that he was Christ
Joh_9:22
If any man did confess that he was Christ
Read full note →
Confession of Christ
1.
Confession, ὁμολογε͂ιν, is
(1) To say the same thing with others. To agree with.
(2) To promise.
(3) To acknowledge, to declare a person or thing to be what he or it really is.
2. To confess Christ is therefore to acknowledge Him to be what He really is and declares Himself to be.
(1) The Son of God;
(2) God manifest in the flesh;
(3) The Saviour of the world;
(4) The Lord.
I. The NATURE of this confession.
1. It is not enough that we cherish the conviction in our hearts, or confess it to ourselves, to God, or to friends who agree with us.
2. It must be done publicly, or before men, friends and foes: amid good and evil report; when it brings reproach and danger as well as when it incurs no risk.
3. It must be with the mouth. It is not enough that men may infer from our conduct that we are Christians. We must audibly declare it.
4. This must be done
(1) In our ordinary intercourse.
(2) In the way of Gods appointment, i.e., by Baptism and the
Lords Supper.
5. It must be sincere. Not everyone that saith Lord, Lord, etc. It is only when the outward act is a revelation of the heart that it has any value.
II. ITS ADVANTAGES.
1. It strengthens faith.
2. It is a proof of regeneration, because it supposes the apprehension of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ.
3. It is an indispensable condition of salvation. Because
(1) God requires it.
(2) Not to confess is to deny.
(3) Denial implies want of faith or devotion.
4. Christ will acknowledge them who acknowledge Him--publicly, before the angels, and to our eternal salvation.
III. ITS DUTY.
1. It is not merely a commandment.
2. It is the highest moral duty to acknowledge the truth, and especially to acknowledge God to be God.
3. It is the most direct means we can take to honour Christ, and to bring others to acknowledge Him (see Mat_10:32; Luk_12:8; Mar_8:38; Rom_10:9-10; 2Ti_2:12; 1Jn_4:2; 1Jn_4:15). (C. Hodge, D. D.)
He should be put out of the synagogue
Excommunication
(cf. Joh_16:2; Luk_6:22)
1. The lightest kind of excommunication continued for thirty days and prescribed four cubits as a distance within which the person may not approach anyone, not even wife and children; with this limitation it did not make exclusion from the synagogue necessary.
2. The severer included absolute banishment from all religious meetings, and absolute giving up of intercourse with all persons, and was formally pronounced with curses.
3. The severest was a perpetual banishment from all meetings and a practical exclusion from the fellowship of Gods people. It has been sometimes supposed that the words of Luk_6:22
(1) Separate you;
(2) reproach you;
(3) cast out your name refer to these gradations, but probably the only practice known in the time of our Lord was that which was later regarded as the intermediate form, falling short of perpetual banishment, but being, while the ban lasted, exclusion from all the cherished privileges of an Israelite.
(Archdeacon Watkins.)
The Biblical Illustrator, edited by Joseph S. Exell (c. 1880s–1900s) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
B. W. Johnson 1891 · Public Domain On vv22, 24, 30, 34, 35 22. Because they feared the Jews. The rulers. They…
22. Because they feared the Jews. The rulers. They knew that it was agreed to excommunicate any one who confessed Christ. Hence they said, He was born blind, he now sees, you must ask him how he was cured. He is of age. To be cast out of the synagogue was an awful punishment to a Jew. It put him on a level with the heathen.
B. W. Johnson's The People's New Testament with Notes (1889–1891) — public domain. Electronic text from the Christian Classics Ethereal Library (CCEL) ThML edition.
William B. Godbey 1900 · Public Domain On vv22–23 Joh 9:22-34. “His parents said this because they feared…
EXCOMMUNICATION
Joh 9:22-34. “His parents said this because they feared the Jews; for already the Jews had entered into a covenant that if any one may confess Christ, he must be put out of the synagogue.” It is said that at that time there were four hundred and fifty synagogues in Jerusalem, where all the people gathered on the Sabbath, that they might hear the Scriptures read and expounded by their pastors and theologians. Jesus was the Leader of the holiness movement at that time in the Jewish Church. You see how they resorted to this diabolical stratagem to intimidate people from confessing Him, the authorities passing a resolution that all such should be turned out of the Church. Much of the same thing has been done in this country in the last twenty years, and is still going on. Ecclesiastical ostracism has accompanied the bloody persecutions in all ages, the civil law in this country, happily for us, preventing the latter.
William B. Godbey, Commentary on the New Testament (1896–1900) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
C. I. Scofield 1917 · Public Domain On vv24, 31 Sin. (See Scofield "Rom 3:23").
sinner
Sin. (See Scofield "Rom 3:23").
The Scofield Reference Bible (1917 edition), notes by C. I. Scofield — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Paul E. Kretzmann 1924 · Public Domain On vv24, 30, 34 A second interview with the former blind man:
A second interview with the former blind man:
v. 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.
Read full note →
v. 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.
v. 26. Then said they to him again, What did He do to thee? How opened He thine eyes?
v. 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?
v. 28. Then they Revelation led him and said, Thou art His disciple; but we are Moses’ disciples.
v. 29. We know that God spake unto Moses; as for this fellow, we know not from whence He is.
The Pharisees were in a quandary. If the facts concerning this miracle were spread abroad, the fame of Christ would grow and be carried out in all directions, and their prestige would receive a severe jolt. Therefore they made another attempt to shake the testimony of the man, but this time in such a way as to make him deny that a miracle had been performed. With a sanctimonious air they admonish him to give glory to God alone by telling the actual truth, and not a piece of fiction invented for the benefit of Jesus. There is almost a bit of threatening in the words: We know that this Man is a sinner. The deduction was that it must have been impossible to perform what the man claimed had been done. But the man doggedly stuck to the truth; he was not concerned about the sinfulness or sinlessness of his benefactor. One thing he knew: Having been blind, he could now see. This same simple faith and dogged perseverance should characterize a Christian’s confession of Jesus. If unbelievers try to shake the testimony concerning Conversion or regeneration, the simple adhering to that one truth: I know the experience of my own heart and mind; it is not an illusion, but it is the firmest conviction in the world, will often repulse the enemies. In the effort to shake the firmness of this witness, the Jews again asked him about the manner in which his eyes had been opened. It is hardly to be wondered at that the matter was getting on the man’s nerves and that he answered them rather tartly. He had told them once, and they had evidently not listened very well; why should he repeat the same testimony over and over again? Their silly effort to inveigle him into some inconsistent statement was a despicable piece of strategy. But the man’s taunt as to their wishing to become disciples of Jesus struck them in a tender place. Angrily they Revelation led him, charging him with being a disciple of that Man. They placed Jesus in the class of outcasts with whom they wanted nothing to do. But so far as they were concerned, they were the disciples of Moses, they piously assert. They were sure, in the case of Moses, that God had spoken with him; but in the case of this Man they have nothing definite to base their opinion on, they do not even know His origin. That was partly willful ignorance, partly blasphemous malice. They had had plenty of opportunity to get the information they desired, if they had only been willing to follow the directions of Jesus, chap. 7:17. Note: Unbelievers that attempt to be clever and sarcastic at the same time, throw aspersions upon the virgin birth of Christ, thus also questioning His origin, whereas a simple reading of Scripture would convince them, if they would not consistently resist the Holy Ghost.
Paul E. Kretzmann, Popular Commentary of the Bible (1921–1924) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
unfoldingWord translationNotes 2017 · CC BY-SA 4.0 On vv22, 24, 26, 28, 30, 32, 35 General Information:
General Information:
In verse 22 there is a break from the main story line as John provides background information about the man's parents being afraid of the Jews. (See: Background Information)
Read full note →
they were afraid of the Jews
Here "Jews" is a synecdoche for the "Jewish leaders" who opposed Jesus. AT: "they were afraid of what the Jewish leaders might do to them" (See: Synecdoche)
afraid
This refers to the unpleasant feeling a person has when there is a threat of harm to oneself or others.
would confess him to be the Christ
"would say that Jesus is the Christ"
he would be thrown out of the synagogue
Here "be thrown out of the synagogue" is a metaphor for no longer being allowed to go into the synagogue and no longer belonging to the group of people who attend services at the synagogue. AT: "he would not be allowed to go into the synagogue" or "he would no longer belong to the synagogue" (See: Metaphor)
He is an adult
"he is a man" or "he is no longer a child." See how you translated this in John 09:21.
translationWords
fear
confess
Christ
synagogue
unfoldingWord translationNotes — © Distant Shores Media and the Door43 World Missions Community, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Source: git.door43.org/Door43/en_tn.
Tyndale Open Study Notes 2022 · CC BY-SA 4.0 On vv24, 28, 30, 32, 34, 35 9:24 God should get the glory for this: Greek…
9:24 God should get the glory for this: Greek reads Give glory to God. Cp. Josh 7:19.
Tyndale Open Study Notes — © Tyndale Open Resources, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Text via the HelloAO Bible API.