The Significance of Jesus’ Healing the Blind Man in John 9

By Stephen S. Kim

[Stephen S. Kim is Professor of Bible, Multnomah Biblical Seminary, Portland, Oregon.]

John explicitly said in his “purpose statement” (John 20:30-31) that the aim of his Gospel is to present Jesus as the promised Messiah of the Old Testament Scriptures and the unique Son of God. And his primary means of revealing Jesus as the divine Messiah is the seven sign-miracles (σημεῖα) and their attendant contexts of teaching, all of which are recorded in the first twelve chapters of the Gospel, commonly called the “Book of Signs.”[1]

The first two sign-miracles are strategically placed in the beginning chapters of the Gospel, often characterized as the “Cana Cycle” (chaps. 2-4),[2] because both miracles were performed in Cana of Galilee and form a literary bracket around these chapters.[3]

The remaining sign-miracles of Jesus are also strategically placed throughout the following chapters of the section called the “Festival Cycle” (chaps. 5-12).[4] This section begins with an unnamed feast (5:1-47; see v. 1) and then runs through a year of festivals from Passover (6:1-71; see v. 4) through Tabernacles (7:1-10:21; see 7:2), Dedication or Hanukkah (10:22-42; see v. 22), and then back to Passover (12:1).[5]

The literary structure of the Fourth Gospel is skillfully woven together with its profound theology. Whereas the Cana Cycle reveals Jesus as the divine Messiah who grants life and emphasizes the importance of believing in Him to receive that life, the Festival Cycle develops the theme of increasing opposition by the Jewish leaders to this One who grants life.[6] As Songer explains, “Two related motifs are woven carefully together in John 5-12—the steady insistence that Jesus is God’s Son come to grant life and the steadily increasing hostility of the Jews toward Jesus.”[7] Tenney is thus perceptive in characterizing these chapters as periods of controversy (chaps. 5-6), conflict (chaps. 7-11), and crisis (chap. 12).[8] As Jesus performed His miracles and delivered His accompanying discourses in the context of the Jewish feasts, He was demonstrating that He is the One who fulfills the hopes and joys of the festivals. The messianic claims of Jesus were vehemently opposed by the religious establishment in these chapters, thus fulfilling the Evangelist’s words in the Prologue: “He came to that which was his own, but his own did not receive him” (1:11).[9] Borchert’s summary of these chapters is appropriate: “In the Cana Cycle the theme of believing seems to be center stage. In the Festival Cycle the themes of conflict and rejection seem to occupy that position.”[10]

The sign-miracle of Jesus’ healing the lame man at the Pool of Bethesda (5:1-15) was performed during an “unnamed feast.”[11] While the feast is not named, probably it was the weekly feast of the Sabbath, thus occasioning the controversy with the religious leaders. The fourth sign-miracle of Jesus’ feeding of the five thousand (6:1-14) and its companion miracle of Jesus’ walking on the Sea of Galilee (vv. 15-21) are both performed against the backdrop of the Passover Feast.[12] Both miracles were designed to evoke memories of God’s delivering the Israelite nation from its Egyptian bondage through the Exodus.

The Miracle in Jerusalem

Jesus’ healing the blind man took place in a time and setting different from His two immediately previous miracles. It occurred in Jerusalem, whereas the two Passover miracles in chapter 6 took place in Galilee. This miracle follows soon after Jesus’ discourse on His being “the Light of the world” at the Feast of Tabernacles and His resumed conflict with the Jewish religious authorities in Jerusalem. He claimed to be the Light of the world who defeats the darkness of sin and death, and He followed this claim with the astonishing promise, “Whoever follows me will never walk in darkness, but will have the light of life” (8:12). Jesus’ healing the blind man authenticates His claim to be the Light of the world. Therefore it is important to examine this miracle in the context of the Feast of Tabernacles in chapter 7.

The opening words of John 7, “After this,” or more literally, “After these things” (μετὰ ταῦτα), indicate a shift in the setting of the Gospel narrative as well as the obvious temporal change (v. 1). The Evangelist often used this phrase to note that a change was taking place in the story (2:12; 3:22; 4:43; 5:1; 6:1). He also noted that the Jewish Feast of Tabernacles [ἡ ἑορτὴ τῶν ᾿Ιουδαίων ἡ σκηνοπηγία] was near” (7:2). And there is no further mention of a feast until 10:22, where he wrote, “Then came the Feast of Dedication at Jerusalem.” It seems fitting then to recognize that 7:1-10:21 forms a literary unit.[13] As Moloney concludes, “John 7:1-10:21 is entirely dedicated to the presence of Jesus in Jerusalem for the celebration of Tabernacles.”[14] Borchert says that these chapters form the third stage of the Festival Cycle, and that they continue the background of the Exodus motif. The focus shifts in these chapters, however, from the Passover to the Festival of Tabernacles and the wilderness experience.[15] Keener also agrees that the miracle of Jesus’ healing the blind man in John 9 is connected with the Feast of Tabernacles of John 7-8: “This narrative demonstrates Jesus’ claims in the previous context and chronologically follows directly on Jesus’ departure from the temple on the last day of the festival (7:37; 8:59). It probably begins not far from the temple (cf. 9:7).”[16]

The Feast of Tabernacles was a fall harvest festival and one of the three feasts Jewish men were required to attend in Jerusalem (Deut. 16:16).[17] It commemorated the wilderness experience of Israel and God’s supernatural provision for the nation during that time. Tabernacles was regarded as the most popular of the three pilgrimage feasts, commonly referred to as “the Lord’s Feast” (Lev. 23:34, 39), or “the annual festival of the Lord” (Judg. 21:19), or simply as “the feast/festival” (חָג, 1 Kings 8:2, 65; 2 Chron. 7:8; Neh. 8:14; Isa. 30:29; Ezek. 45:23, 25). Laney explains the popularity of Tabernacles. “Most of the first-century Jews were farmers and their lives depended on their crops. Their work prevented many farmers from attending the spring festivals of Passover and Pentecost. But once the harvest was over and the crops were stored, they could stop laboring and enjoy themselves for a while. Thus Sukkoth became the most popular and well-attended feast.”[18]

This feast included a seven-day celebration beginning on the fifteenth day of the seventh month, Tishri (September–October), followed by an eighth day observed as a sabbath. The people constructed temporary huts (“tabernacles”) of leafy branches on their rooftops or along the roads and lived in them during the festival.[19] According to Yee, “The eighth day was set apart from the seven days of festivities and functioned as a conclusion for the feast to help people make the transition back to normal life.”[20] Moloney adds, “After the seven days of celebration in the booths, there was an additional day, an eighth day, recalling the protection of YHWH during the Exodus period. On this eighth day those celebrating the feast no longer dwelt in their booths, there was no procession, and the water ritual ceased. The eighth day was dedicated to Israel’s request for a superabundance of rain as a sign of YHWH’s special and continuing care for the people.”[21]

The Feast of Tabernacles involves both historical and prophetic aspects. It celebrated God’s care for Israel in the past but anticipated the day when God will establish Israel securely in the land under the leadership of the Messiah. “The celebration looks back to the wilderness wanderings when the people lived in temporary shelters (Lev 23:39, 42-43), and looks ahead prophetically to Israel’s kingdom joy when the nation is regathered in the land (Zech 14:16).”[22] As the two themes of light and rain dominate the eschatological passage of Zechariah 14, the two images of water and light became the focus of the feast.[23] Not surprisingly, then, during this feast Jesus claimed that He is both the source of living water (John 7:37-39) and the Light of the world (8:12). He was presenting Himself as the promised Messiah in whom all the eschatological promises will be realized.

The Setting

As mentioned above, the words μετὰ ταῦτα (7:1) point to a new setting. The entire section revolving around the Feast of Tabernacles took place in Jerusalem. For John, Jerusalem was the center of opposition to Jesus and unbelief in Him. The people’s opposition and unbelief are represented and epitomized by the religious leaders in Jerusalem. John began this section by stating that “the Jews” (religious authorities)[24] in Jerusalem “were waiting to take his life” (7:1). The leaders who vehemently opposed Jesus’ healing the paralytic on the Sabbath in John 5 resumed their opposition to Jesus here. In these chapters, however, the opposition to Jesus increased from hostility to hatred, and even intent to murder. In fact in chapters 7-8 alone, John recorded four times that the Jewish officials sought to “seize” or arrest Jesus (7:30, 32, 44; 8:20). And four other times mention is made that they sought to kill Him (7:1, 19, 25; 8:37). It becomes evident, then, that the theme of growing conflict between Jesus and the religious leaders in chapters 7-8 provides the setting for healing the blind man in chapter 9.

John also noted the change in time by indicating that “the Jewish Feast of Tabernacles was near” (7:2). If the Passover events in chapter 6 took place in the spring of A.D. 32, then this Feast of Tabernacles occurred in the fall of A.D. 32, about six months before Jesus’ crucifixion.[25] As the Feast of Tabernacles drew near, Jesus’ brothers (actually half-brothers) came to Him and “challenged” Him to go to Jerusalem at the feast and promote His messiahship (vv. 3-4). The Evangelist parenthetically noted that the brothers said this cynically out of their unbelief (v. 5). Jesus responded by saying, however, that His time had not yet come (vv. 6-8).[26] Jesus always lived in submission to the Father’s divine timetable, and He was cognizant of “the hour” (ὁ καιρός) of His approaching death, which would take place at the next Passover.[27]

The setting of the Feast of Tabernacles in chapters 7-8 emphasizes two significant claims of Jesus that foreshadowed His miracle of healing the blind man in chapter 9. On the last day of the feast Jesus proclaimed that He is the Giver of living water (7:37) and that He is the Light of the world (8:12). As mentioned previously, two important elements connected with the Feast of Tabernacles were water and light. Smith explains succinctly the significance of Jesus’ claims in the context of the festival.

Water and light were used in two ceremonies observed at the feast. One of these was the rite of water libation. Each day during a festival the priests went to the pool of Siloam and filled a golden jar with water. This jar, containing about a gallon of water, was brought to the Temple and poured into a silver bowl on the altar as a symbol of the prayers for rain. At one time this rite of water libation had some historical association with the giving of water to the Israelites in the desert, but from the time of Zechariah it was in some way connected with the prayers of the people for rain in the next agricultural year. Another significant rite of the feast of Tabernacles was the lighting of the candelabra in the court of women. This rite was probably originally observed in connection with the coming of the radiance of God on the day of fall equinox as the Mishnah suggests (Sukkah 5:4). It is apparent that when Jesus said, “If any man thirst, he is to come to me and drink” (7:37) and “I am the light of the world” (8:12) he meant to manifest himself in the context of the festival rituals. He directed attention to himself as the water of life and the light of the world.[28]

The miracle of Jesus’ healing a man who was blind from birth was the perfect case study to demonstrate that as the divine Messiah He is the source of life and light (cf. 1:4). Both the “living water” and the “light” symbolize eternal life (cf. 1:4-9; 4:10-14).

The Sign

The record of the miracle of Jesus healing the blind man in chapter 9 begins without a noticable literary break from the previous chapter, thereby indicating its connection with the previous setting. The opening words of the chapter, “As He went along” (Καὶ παράγων), seem to indicate that Jesus was not far removed from the events of the feast, either temporally or literarily. Borchert is thus correct in observing that “the Tabernacles motif in John is brought to a conclusion in a powerful way through the story of the healing of the blind man.”[29] Culpepper also links this miracle with the previous chapter. “Having revealed himself as ‘the light of the world,’ Jesus now gives sight to a blind man.”[30] In fact the opening verse of this chapter reads, “As he went along, he saw a man blind from birth” (9:1). Furthermore, immediately before His divine touch on the man born blind Jesus said to His disciples, “While I am in the world, I am the light of the world” (v. 5). This made sure that they connected His claim and His deed. Like the previous miracles, healing the blind man revealed Jesus’ identity.

Having applied some mud to the man’s eyes, Jesus commanded him to go wash in the Pool of Siloam (vv. 6-7).[31] The Evangelist noted that the man went and washed, and came home seeing. He did precisely what Jesus commanded him to do. In obeying Jesus’ command, he demonstrated the presence of his genuine faith. Being congenitally blind, the man overcame great obstacles to believe and obey Jesus. The man and his faith stand in stark contrast to those without those obstacles who witnessed the miracle. His neighbors (vv. 8-12) and the Pharisees (vv. 13-34) expressed skepticism and unbelief. The closing verses of this chapter (vv. 35-39) reveal that the man’s initial faith that resulted in his physical sight resulted also in his spiritual sight as Jesus disclosed His identity to the man. The man’s expression of his faith indicates a proper belief: “ ‘Lord, I believe,’ and he worshiped him” (v. 38).[32]

The Significance

The closing verses of this chapter (vv. 35-41) reveal not only the genuine faith of the blind man, but they also reveal the significance of Jesus’ miracle. In healing the blind man Jesus was illustrating the spiritual blindness of everyone, all of whom are born in sin and are without hope (Eph. 2:1-3). Just as the man with congenital blindness could be healed only by Jesus’ divine touch, only the divine Messiah, the Light of the world, can grant eternal life to those who believe in Him.[33] Pentecost’s summary of the relationship between this miracle and Jesus’ “I am the Light of the world” discourse is insightful.

This incident of the healing of the blind man was an authentication of all that Christ claimed for Himself in the public teaching at the Feast of Tabernacles. There He claimed to be the Light of the World (John 8:12), and here He brought light to one born blind. There He claimed to liberate men from sin, Satan, and death (John 8:36), and here He liberated a man from darkness. There He claimed to be the sinless One (John 8:46), and here He defended His sinlessness and offered to forgive the sins of those who would trust in Him. There He claimed to be the preexistent God (John 8:58), and here He was worshiped as God.[34]

Therefore this miracle demonstrates the spiritual blindness of everyone desperately in need of life from One who is both the Giver of eternal life and the Light of the world.

This miracle also reveals much about the identity of the Healer. In the Old Testament God Himself is associated with the giving of sight to the blind (cf. Ps. 146:8).[35] For instance when God disclosed His divine name to Moses as the “I Am” (Exod. 3:14), He also revealed His divine attributes by saying, “Who gave man his mouth? Who makes him deaf or mute? Who gives him sight or makes him blind? Is it not I, the Lord?” (4:11). In healing the blind man, then, Jesus was revealing His deity. This miracle also has deep messianic implications. The Old Testament reveals that giving sight to the blind would be a sign of messianic activity. Isaiah predicted, for instance, that the Messiah would be “a light for the Gentiles” and would “open eyes that are blind” (Isa. 42:6-7). Furthermore this healing of a blind man from birth illustrates one of the characteristics of the messianic kingdom when “the eyes of the blind [will] be opened” (35:5). In fulfillment of these messianic prophecies Jesus gave sight to the blind (cf. Matt. 9:27-31; 12:22-23; 15:30; 20:29-34; 21:14). The miracle then provides a foretaste of the messianic blessings to be realized in the kingdom when “the eyes of the blind will see” (Isa. 29:18). As the promised Messiah of the Old Testament, Jesus will give sight to the blind in His coming kingdom. But the future work of the Messiah has implications in the present as the Messiah grants spiritual sight (eternal life) to those who believe in Him, here and now.

This miracle is also significant in that it demonstrates Jesus’ authority not only to grant life to those who believe but also to judge those who reject Him (cf. John 5:22).[36] Jesus Himself declared, “For judgment I have come into this world, so that the blind will see and those who see will become blind” (9:39). The Pharisees were a perfect case in point. When they asked Jesus if He was condemning them (v. 40), He responded, “If you were blind, you would not be guilty of sin; but now that you claim you can see, your guilt remains” (v. 41). The spiritually blind Pharisees were too proud to admit their blindness, whereas the blind man received sight from the One who is the true Light who gives light to everyone who puts trust in Him (cf. 1:9).

Brown’s summary of this miracle in its context is both perceptive and eloquent. “This is a story of how a man who sat in darkness was brought to see the light, not only physically but spiritually. On the other hand, it is also a tale of how those who thought they saw (the Pharisees) were blind themselves to the light and plunging into darkness. The story starts in vs. 1 with a blind man who will gain his sight; it ends in vs. 41 with the Pharisees who have become spiritually blind.”[37]

God’s judgment of the Pharisees is the subject of the following chapter in Jesus’ “I Am the Good Shepherd” discourse (10:1-21).[38] This discourse presents Jesus as the Good Shepherd who cares for His flock. In contrast to the Pharisees who, like a thief, came in to steal, kill, and destroy the sheep, Jesus is He who laid down His life for the sheep. As the Messiah, Jesus is the Gate or Door for the sheep (v. 7). In contrast to the Pharisees who were illegitimate and false teachers and who thus had no divine authority (cf. Matt. 7:29), Jesus is the promised Messiah of the Scriptures who has come to care for the sheep. In the Old Testament God Himself is the faithful Shepherd of His people (Gen. 49:24; Pss. 23:1; 80:1; Isa. 40:10-11; Zech. 10:3).[39] The imagery of the good shepherd also presents Jesus as the promised Messiah. The prophet Ezekiel, for instance, anticipated the day when the Messiah will care for His sheep as the Good Shepherd: “I will place over them one shepherd, my servant David, and he will tend them; he will tend them and be their shepherd. I the Lord will be their God, and my servant David will be prince among them. I the Lord have spoken” (Ezek. 34:23-24; cf. Isa. 55:3-4; Jer. 23:5-6).

To summarize, the miracle of healing the man born blind reveals Jesus as the divine Messiah who, as the Light of the world, delivers people from the darkness of sin and death by granting eternal life to those who believe in Him. And as the Messiah, Jesus is the Good Shepherd who lays down His life for the sheep.

Conclusion

The literary structure of the Fourth Gospel is skillfully woven together with its profound theology. Whereas the Cana Cycle (John 2-4) presents Jesus as the divine Messiah, who grants life to those who believe in Him, the Festival Cycle (John 5-10) develops the theme of increasing opposition by the Jewish leaders to the One who grants that life. The sign-miracles recorded in these chapters reveal Jesus’ person in the context of Jewish festivals, demonstrating that as the Messiah, He is the One who fulfills the joys and hopes of the festivals. These messianic claims of Jesus were vehemently opposed by the religious leaders, thereby fulfilling the Evangelist’s words at the outset of the Gospel: “He came to that which was his own, but his own did not receive him” (1:11). However, as the Bread of life and the Light of the world, the Son offers life to those who believe in Him while at the same time rendering judgment on those who reject that offer. Furthermore as the Good Shepherd and the Door of the sheep, the Messiah protects those who belong to Him, even laying down His life for them. As the Passover of “the hour” drew near, that prediction soon became a reality.

Notes

1. Although “Book of Signs” as a term for John 1-12 is now widely accepted by most Johannine scholars, it is usually attributed to C. H. Dodd (The Interpretation of the Fourth Gospel [Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1953], x), and Raymond E. Brown (The Gospel according to John (I–XII), Anchor Bible [Garden City, NY: Doubleday, 1966], cxxxviii). John 1-12 record the public ministry of Jesus, chapters 13-17 record the private Farewell Discourse of Jesus with His disciples, and chapters 18-20 present the Passion narrative. Dodd calls John 13-20 the “Book of Passion,” whereas Brown calls it the “Book of Glory.”
2. Gerald L. Borchert, John 1-11, New American Commentary (Nashville: Broadman & Holman, 1996), 151-222.
3. These three chapters (chaps. 2-4) form a literary unit because they are bound geographically by the Cana miracles and bound thematically by presenting Jesus as the life-giving Messiah who grants eternal life to those who believe in Him. See also F. J. Moloney’s important work, “From Cana to Cana (John 2:1-4:54) and the Fourth Evangelist’s Concept of Correct Faith,” in Studia Biblica 1978 II: Papers on the Gospels: Sixth International Congress on Biblical Studies, Oxford 3-7 April 1978, ed. E. A. Livingston, Journal for the Study of the New Testament Supplement (Sheffield: JSOT, 1980), 2:185-213.
4. See Francis J. Moloney, Signs and Shadows: Reading John 5-12 (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1996).
5. Gerald L. Borchert, “The Passover and the Narrative Cycles in John,” in Perspectives on John: Method and Interpretation in the Fourth Gospel, ed. Robert B. Sloan and Mikeal C. Parsons (Lewiston, NY: Edwin Mellen, 1993), 308-9. It is important to note, however, that the commentators who designate this section as the “Festival Cycle” outline the chapters differently. While some include all of chapters 5-12, some prefer to include only chapters 5-10. Those who do the latter see chapters 11-12 as developing the theme of Jesus moving toward His death and glory, setting the stage for His sacrifice as the Passover Lamb. Brown thus entitles chapters 11-12 “Jesus Moves toward the Hour of Death and Glory” (The Gospel according to John (I–XII), 419-98). Gary M. Burge similarly calls John 11-12 “Foreshadowings of Jesus’ Death and Resurrection” (Interpreting the Gospel of John [Grand Rapids: Baker, 1992], 76-77). The present writer also prefers to separate John 11-12 from 5-10, although the separation of these chapters is technically minor.
6. The “Festival Cycle” begins with Jesus’ healing the lame man at the Pool of Bethesda on the Sabbath. The opposition and increasing hostility of the Jewish religious leaders toward Jesus is introduced by the statement in 5:16. Verse 18 also states, “For this reason the Jews tried all the harder to kill him; not only was he breaking the Sabbath, but he was even calling God his own Father, making himself equal with God.” These two verses introduce and foreshadow the role of the Jewish leaders in the rest of the Gospel. Following Jesus’ raising of Lazarus from the dead (chap. 11), the Festival Cycle closes with the Jewish authorities plotting to kill Jesus (chap. 12). Thus these chapters are distinctly marked with opposition and hostility by the Jewish leaders to the One who claimed to be the promised Messiah.
7. Harold S. Songer, “John 5-12: Opposition to the Giving of True Life,” Review & Expositor 85 (summer 1988): 459-71.
8. Merrill C. Tenney, John: The Gospel of Belief (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1948). Tenney correctly conveys the idea of increasing hostility of the Jewish religious leaders toward Jesus, finally climaxing with their decision to kill Him.
9. Unless noted otherwise, all Scripture quotations are from the New International Version.
10. Borchert, John 1-11, 227.
11. For an analysis of Jesus’ miracle of healing the lame man at the Pool of Bethesda in John 5, see Stephen S. Kim, “The Christological and Eschatological Significance of Jesus’ Miracle in John 5,” Bibliotheca Sacra 165 (October–December 2008): 413-24. For more comprehensive analyses of Jesus’ seven sign-miracles in the Gospel of John, see Stephen S. Kim, “The Relationship of the Seven Sign-Miracles of Jesus in the Fourth Gospel to the Old Testament” (Ph.D. diss., Dallas Theological Seminary, 2001).
12. For analyses of Jesus’ miracle of feeding the five thousand and His subsequent sign of walking on the Sea of Galilee in John 6, see Stephen S. Kim, “The Christological and Eschatological Significance of Jesus’ Passover Signs in John 6,” Bibliotheca Sacra 164 (July–September 2007): 307-21.
13. Francis J. Moloney, The Gospel of John, Sacra Pagina (Collegeville, MN: Liturgical, 1998), 232-33. Not all scholars see these chapters as a literary unit, however. George R. Beasley-Murray argues that chapters 7-8 are a unit, but that chapter 9 records a sign-miracle that introduces chapter 10 (John, Word Biblical Commentary [Waco, TX: Word, 1987], 148-49). D. A. Carson also agrees that chapters 7-8 are a unit, but he questions whether chapters 9-10 are a unit because of the Feast of Dedication (The Gospel according to John [Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1991], 359). Brown stands somewhere in the middle of these two views, in that he designates chapter 9 as “Aftermath of Tabernacles” (The Gospel according to John [I–XII], 359).
14. Moloney, The Gospel of John, 232. Moloney lists a number of indications from 7:1-10:21 that point to a succession of events that took place during the feast: 1. The expression (μετὰ ταῦτα) appears in 7:1, but not again in chapters 7-10. 2. The Jewish Feast of Tabernacles was at hand (v. 2). 3. The brothers and Jesus go up to Jerusalem for the feast (v. 10). 4. Encounters take place “about the middle of the feast” (v. 14). 5. Further encounters take place “on the last day of the feast” (v. 37). 6. In 8:12 Jesus speaks “again” (πάλιν), indicating that the feast is still being celebrated. 7. The same expression reappears in 8:21. 8. Although there is a continuation of time, a change of place occurs in 8:59. 9. Jesus’ exit from the temple leads directly into 9:1. “Passing by,” he sees the man born blind (9:1). 10. The temporal unity in these chapters is not broken until the narrator announces the feast of Dedication.
15. Borchert, John 1-11, 277.
16. Craig S. Keener, The Gospel of John: A Commentary (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 2003), 1:775. “This section opens with the healing of a blind man (9:1-7) and closes with the recognition that this miracle was not what one expected from a demon (10:21). The narrative between includes Pharisaic charges that Jesus’ healing cannot be from God (9:16, 22, 24), a response from the formerly blind man that challenges the logic of their paradigm (9:25, 27, 31-33), and a response from Jesus, who reverses the charge and shows that it is his opponents who are not from God (9:40-10:18). Jesus’ claim in this section to be the good shepherd (10:11) implicitly advances his previous claim to deity (8:58)” (ibid.).
17. Instructions for observing the Feast of Tabernacles are found in Leviticus 23:33-43 and Deuteronomy 16:13-15.
18. J. Carl Laney, John, Moody Gospel Commentary (Chicago: Moody, 1992), 138.
19. Homer A. Kent Jr., Light in the Darkness: Studies in the Gospel of John (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1974), 113.
20. Gale A. Yee, Jewish Feasts and the Gospel of John, Zaccaeus Studies: New Testament (Willmington, DE: Michael Glazier, 1989), 72.
21. Moloney, Signs and Shadows, 67.
22. Laney, John, 138.
23. Yee, Jewish Feasts and the Gospel of John, 73-74. Moloney discusses the three major elements of ritual during the feast: the water libation ceremony (Sukkah 4:9-10); the ceremony of light (Sukkah 5:1-4); the rite of facing the temple (Sukkah 5:4) (Signs and Shadows, 67-70).
24. The term “the Jews” (οἱ ᾿Ιουδαίοι) in the New Testament has four meanings: (1) the entire Jewish people (John 2:6, 13; 3:1, 25; 4:9, 22; 5:1; 6:4; 7:2; 8:31; 11:55; 18:12, 35; 19:21, 40, 42); (2) the residents of Jerusalem and surrounding territory (11:8, 19, 31, 33, 36, 45, 54; 12:9, 11; 19:20); (3) the people hostile to Jesus (6:41, 52; 8:48, 52, 57; 10:19, 24, 31, 33; 18:20, 38; 19:7, 12, 14); (4) the religious authorities in Jerusalem (1:19; 2:18, 20; 5:10, 15-16, 18; 7:1, 11, 13, 15; 8:22; 9:18, 22; 13:33; 18:14, 31, 36; 19:31, 38; 20:19). See Robert G. Bratcher, “ ‘The Jews’ in the Gospel of John,” Bible Translator 26 (October 1975): 401-9. In 7:1 the term the “Jews” refers to the religious leaders in Jerusalem.
25. See Harold W. Hoehner, Chronological Aspects of the Life of Christ (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1977), 143.
26. By using the term ὁ καιρόß Jesus was referring to the divine time that the Father set for Him to go to Jerusalem (Carson, The Gospel according to John, 307-8).
27. When Jesus told His brothers that He was not going up (ἀναβαίνω) to Jerusalem (7:8) because His time (ὁ καιρόß) had not yet come, John was indicating by a wordplay that it was not yet the time to go up to the Father and be glorified (See Brown, The Gospel according to John (I–XII), 308).
28. T. C. Smith, “The Book of Signs: John 2-12,” Review & Expositor 62 (fall 1965): 454.
29. Borchert, John 1-11, 310.
30. Culpepper, The Gospel and Letters of John, 174.
31. Craig R. Koester suggests that the name of the pool indicates a messianic interpretation of the sign. “The word Siloam, or Shiloah as it was sometimes written (Isa. 8:6; cf. Neh. 3:15), was similar to the word Shiloh, which many Jews understood to be a name for the Messiah. One of the most important messianic passages in the Old Testament literally said, ‘The scepter shall not depart from Judah, nor the ruler’s staff from between his feet, until Shiloh comes, and to him shall be the obedience of the peoples’ (Gen 49:10). By the first century, Jewish interpretation took Shiloh as a reference to the Messiah, and this view is widely attested in later sources. By explaining that Siloam was the pool of the ‘one who has been sent,’ the fourth evangelist apparently alludes to this common Jewish tradition, suggesting that Siloam was in fact the pool of the Messiah whom God has sent” (Symbolism in the Fourth Gospel [Minneapolis: Fortress, 1995], 103).
32. Keener rightly observes that the blind man himself is a paradigm of growing discipleship as seen in the Gospel of John. “When he confesses Jesus openly, he moves from recognizing him as a ‘man’ (9:11) to a ‘prophet’ (9:17) and a man from God (9:33), and with Jesus’ revelation [he] recognizes him as ‘Son of Man’ (9:17) and ‘Lord’ (9:35-37)” (The Gospel of John, 1:775-76).
33. For a detailed description of the many divergent views in the Jewish and Greco-Roman cultures on the cause of blindness see Keener, The Gospel of John, 1:777-78.
34. J. Dwight Pentecost, The Words and Works of Jesus Christ: A Study of the Life of Christ (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1981), 292.
35. W. Hall Harris, “A Theology of John’s Writings,” in A Biblical Theology of the New Testament, ed. Roy B. Zuck (Chicago: Moody, 1994), 177-78.
36. Keener, The Gospel of John, 1:794.
37. Brown, The Gospel according to John (I–XII), 377.
38. The “I Am the Good Shepherd” discourse of Jesus in chapter 10 continues in the context of the Tabernacles story begun in 7:1. “The internal construction of the story shows consummate artistry; no other story in the Gospel is so closely knit. We have here Johannine dramatic skill at its best” (ibid., 376). See also Keener, The Gospel of John, 1:797-99.
39. Laney, John, 185. For a detailed discussion of the general background of the sheep and shepherd image see Keener, The Gospel of John, 1:799-801.