Lars Larson Live Stream

...to pay the price of sin. ... ...for

being Christian, and they were being tempted to go back into Judaism, forsake Christ and go back into Judaism.

And the writer argues that Jesus, when He died on the cross, He died outside the city gates of Jerusalem.

And so if you want to know Jesus, you've got to go outside of Judaism and go to Him. That's where He is.

There's no going back, is what the writer is saying. We must cling to Jesus Christ.

And so Jason will read for us Hebrews 13. Pay particular attention to the everlasting covenant, verses 20 and 21.

And then Jason will pray for us, please. Hebrews 13.

Let brotherly love continue. Do not neglect to show hospitality to strangers, for thereby some have entertained angels unawares.

Remember those who are in prison as though in prison with them, and those who are mistreated, since you also are in the body.

Let marriage be held in honor among all, and let the marriage bed be undefiled, for God will judge the sexually immoral and adulterous.

Keep your life free from the love of money, and be content with what you have, for He has said,

I will never leave you nor forsake you. So we can confidently say, the

Lord is my helper, I will not fear. What can man do to me? Remember your leaders, those who spoke to you the word of God.

Consider the outcome of their way of life, and imitate their faith. Jesus Christ is the same yesterday and today and forever.

Do not be led away by diverse and strange teachings. For it is good for the heart to be strengthened by grace, not by foods, which have not benefited those devoted to them.

We have an altar from which those who serve the tent have no right to eat. For the bodies of those animals whose blood is brought into the holy places by the high priest as a sacrifice for sins are burned outside the camp.

So Jesus also suffered outside the gate in order to sanctify the people through His own blood.

Therefore let us go to Him outside the camp and bear the reproach He endured. For here we have no lasting city, but we seek a city that is to come.

Through Him, then, let us continually offer up a sacrifice of praise, that is, the fruit of lips that acknowledge

His name. Do not neglect to do good and to share what you have, for such sacrifices are pleasing to God.

Obey your leaders and submit to them, for they are keeping watch over your souls as those who will have to give an account.

Let them do this with joy and not with groaning, for that would be of no advantage to you. Pray for us, for we are sure that we have a clear conscience, desiring to act honorably in all things.

I urge you the more earnestly to do this, in order that I may be restored to you the sooner. Now may the

God of peace who brought again from the dead our Lord Jesus, the great Shepherd of the sheep, by the blood of the eternal covenant, equip you with everlasting good, that you may do

His will, working in us that which is pleasing in His sight, through Jesus Christ, to whom be glory forever and ever.

Amen. I appeal to you, brothers, bear with my word of exhortation, that I have written to you briefly.

You should know that our brother Timothy has been released, with whom I shall see you, if he come soon.

Greet all your leaders and all the saints. Those who come from Italy send you greetings. Grace be with all of you.

Let's pray. Heavenly Father, You are the

God of peace. You are a God of grace. You are a God of mercy.

And Lord, we are so thankful that You have done such a great work through Jesus, the

Shepherd of the sheep, by the blood of the eternal covenant. Lord, we pray that we would understand these things.

We pray that You would give us an understanding of these things. We pray, Lord, that we would view everything in our lives through the lens of this act.

And Lord, we pray that as we go to the Word this morning, that You would teach us exactly what we need to hear, that we would understand

Your truth, that by the power of the Spirit we would apply it, and that You would be glorified. Thank You, Lord, in Jesus' name.

Amen. Well, let's turn in our

Bibles, please, to John chapter 9. And we'll continue our consideration of this passage.

A little bit longer passage for us, before us today. Last time we were together in the fourth

Gospel, two weeks ago, we considered the miracle that Jesus performed when

He gave sight to this man who had been born blind. Now, this miracle in John's Gospel is the sixth sign in which the glory of God in Jesus Christ is set forth, wonderfully displayed and proclaimed.

This man was blind not due to any sin he had committed or sin that his parents had committed.

The reason that he had been born blind was for the purpose of glorifying God when

Jesus Christ gave Him sight on this occasion. And this is what our

Lord stated when His disciples had inquired of Him the reason this man was born blind.

Jesus said, Neither this man nor his parents sinned, but that the works of God should be revealed in him.

God has purposes for us and difficulties in our lives, purposes that we perhaps have no clue regarding, but we are to trust our

God to live with Him and for Him regardless of what we are experiencing and trust

Him to glorify Himself through us. Now, the miracle that Jesus performed was one of the most amazing of His ministry.

A man born blind was enabled by Him to see. After I had completed my sermon yesterday,

I pulled down Charles Spurgeon and read a sermon that he gave on this passage, and I wanted to include this description of this event.

The disciples wanted to know how the man came to be blind, but the Master meant to deliver the man from his blindness.

We are very apt to be entering into speculative theories about the origin of sin or the cause of certain strange providences.

In other words, why is God doing this to me? But Christ is ever -forseeking, out not the cause but the remedy, not the reason of the disease, but the way by which the disease can be cured.

The blind man is brought to Him. Christ asks him no questions, but spitting upon the dust, he stoops down and works the dust into mortar, and when he has done this, taking it up in his hands, he applies it to what

Bishop Hall, he was a 19th century commentator, what Bishop Hall calls the eye holes of the man, for there were no eyes there, and plasters them up so that the spectators look on and see a man with clay upon his eyes.

Go, said Christ, to the pool of Siloam and wash. Some kind friends led the man, who was only too glad to go, unlike Naaman, who made an objection to wash in Jordan and be clean.

The blind man was glad enough to avail himself of the divine remedy. He went, he washed the clay from his eyes, and he received his sight, a blessing he had never known before.

With what rapture he gazed upon the trees, with what delight he lifted up his face to the blue sky, and with what pleasure he beheld the costly, stately fabric of the temple, and methinks afterwards, with what interest and pleasure he would look into the face of Jesus, the man who had given him his sight.

Must have been quite remarkable. Well, the miracle, of course, caused a great stir in Jerusalem.

It would seem that most people knew this man as the baker. They saw him regularly in the environs of the temple.

In fact, the miracle was so startling that even those who knew this man quite well were not quite sure of his identity after he could see.

And so we read of them in verses 8 and following. Therefore the neighbors, those who previously had seen that he was blind, said,

Is not this he who sat and begged? Some said, This is he. Others said, He is like him.

And he said, I am he. Now the man himself did not have a great deal of knowledge about the one who had been so gracious to him, enabling him to see for the first time in his life.

He was blind. He'd never seen Jesus. When asked how it happened, he gave the briefest of details.

He said, A man called Jesus, he knew his name, made clay, anointed my eyes, and said to me, Go to the pool of Siloam and wash.

So I went and washed, and I received sight. And so he knew

Jesus by name. But that's about all he knew. But he knew that this man had done something for him that he never imagined could be done.

In fact, there was never a story, never a record that had ever been done before.

But he had received this untold blessing from this man, Jesus. And of course, he was forever changed, both physically and spiritually.

Well, we next read of the man being drawn before the Jewish leadership to inquire the details of this miracle that surprised and stirred the city.

And it's this extended portion of this passage that we want to address today. And the entire passage might be described as an investigation of the miracles.

Of course, the Jewish leaders wanted to either prove that a miracle did not take place or that it wasn't

Jesus that should be credited or glorified for it. And so we'll consider this now in John 9, 13 through verse 34.

A little longer passage than what normally we attempt to address. They brought him who formerly was blind to the

Pharisees. Now it was a Sabbath when Jesus made the clay and opened his eyes.

And then the Pharisees also asked him again how he'd received his sight. He said to them, he put clay on my eyes and I washed and I see.

Therefore, some of the Pharisees said, this man is not from God because he does not keep the Sabbath.

And others said, how can a man who is a sinner do such signs? And there was a division among them.

They said to the blind man again, what do you say about him because he opened your eyes?

He said, he's a prophet. But the Jews did not believe concerning him that he had been blind and received his sight until they called the parents of him who had received his sight.

And they asked them, saying, is this your son who you say was born blind?

How then does he now see? His parents answered them and said, we know that this is our son and that he was born blind, but by what means he now sees, we do not know.

Or who opened his eyes, we do not know. He is of age, ask him. He will speak for himself.

His parents said these things because they feared the Jews. For the Jews had agreed already that if anyone confessed that he was

Christ, he would be put out of the synagogue. And therefore, his parents said, he is of age, ask him.

So they again called the man who was blind and said to him, give God the glory. We know that this man is a sinner.

He answered and said, whether he's a sinner or not, I do not know. One thing I know, that though I was blind, now

I see. And then 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 did not listen.

Why do you want to hear it again? Do you also want to become his disciples? Then they reviled him and said, you are his disciple, but we are

Moses' disciples. We know that God spoke to Moses. As for this fellow, we do not know where he is from.

The man answered and said to them, why, this is a marvelous thing that you do not know where he is from, and yet he has opened my eyes.

Now we know that God does not hear sinners, but if anyone is a worshiper of God and does his will, he hears him.

Since the world began, it has been unheard of that anyone open the eyes of one who is born blind.

If this man were not from God, he could do nothing. They answered and said to him, you were completely born in sins, and are you teaching us?

And they cast him out. Incredible exchange. This nobody, nobody gave him any regard whatsoever, basically confutes the

Jewish leaders there in Jerusalem. Let's break this down first by considering the inquiry of the

Pharisees in verses 13 through 16a. John recorded in his gospel that some brought this man to whom

Jesus had given sight to the Pharisees. Now, John does not say who it was that brought him or why they brought him to the

Pharisees. We simply read in verse 13, they brought him who formerly was blind to the

Pharisees. But from the manner in which the Pharisees have been described and portrayed thus far in John's gospel, this man probably anticipated a difficult encounter when he was brought before them.

Perhaps those who brought the man did not have hostile intentions but thought that they had a responsibility to bring this man before the respected

Jewish leaders of Israel in order to obtain their assessment and perhaps gain their endorsement of the one who had healed this man.

They may have had good motives for bringing this man before the Jewish leaders, maybe not. We should recognize that sometimes spiritual leaders are presented with situations that call upon them to assess and pronounce a decision or take action on a spiritual matter and frankly it's not always easy.

Spiritual leaders have a great responsibility before the Lord to judge matters rightly and of course these leaders of Israel had great responsibility upon them.

And sometimes the best course is to really forestall judgment because insufficient information has been given or insufficient time has transpired to make wise decisions.

But the responsibility of spiritual leaders is very important. They're accountable to the Lord. If you're a husband, father in the home, you're a spiritual leader.

Certainly an elder in the church, a pastor is a spiritual leader. If you're single, you're the spiritual leader of your heart and life.

But sadly, spiritual leaders are not always right in the manner in which they address spiritual matters.

Clearly these Pharisees were not. In fact, just in the last couple months

I know of two different churches in which their leaders made decisions, took actions, which

I think were unbiblical in the manner in which they did so. And both these sets of leaders,

I believe, to be sincere and were certainly convinced their actions were right before the Lord, but sadly they were not,

I would argue. In fact, they were terribly wrong. They may have been right in some details, but their responses were not in accordance with the word of God.

And as a result, their actions brought unwarranted hurt and pain and will probably result in ongoing difficulties that could have been avoided had they just responded in the right biblical manner when first approached.

And I suspect these Pharisees were quite convinced they conducted this interview and reacted and responded in a way that pleased

God how wrong they were. Can you imagine what these

Jewish leaders are going to think and feel when they are summoned before King Jesus on the Day of Judgment and they're called to give an account of their actions on this occasion?

May the Lord have mercy on us. Recognize the great responsibility that spiritual leaders have.

And if that's you, recognize that for yourself. Certainly pray for those that are in these positions of responsibility because there's accountability also.

Now, the Apostle John related this account suggesting at the outset of this interview how it would proceed.

Again, these are John's words. Verse 14, Now it was a Sabbath when Jesus made the clay and opened his eyes.

And so the reader of the Gospel might already suspect from this statement of the evangelist that these

Pharisees are going to falsely charge Jesus of transgressing the day by performing work.

Why he made clay. And he anointed the eyes of this blind man.

Sabbath observance, of course, is one of the primary causes of conflict between the Lord Jesus and the

Jewish leaders, the established religious leadership. We don't have time, but we could cite numbers of instances in the

Gospels where the Sabbath issue was the point of contention. The Jews had long before adopted as the authoritative interpretation of Holy Scripture what is known as the tradition of the elders.

After a remnant of Jews had returned from their Babylonian exile in the latter six in the early fifth century

B .C., they developed what came to be known as the Great Synagogue. Upon the

Jews' initial return to their land, God raised up three writing prophets, the last prophets of the

Old Testament, Haggai, Zechariah, and Malachi. And then according to Jewish tradition, at the end of the ministry of these three prophets, they passed on the

Scriptures and their teaching about the Scriptures to a collection of prominent Jewish rabbis, although the

Jews do not have a record of the names of these Jewish rabbis.

Nevertheless, they were highly regarded and they came to be known, the rabbis and their teaching, as the

Great Synagogue. The Great Synagogue, in turn, passed on their teaching, largely oral tradition, to various rabbis whose names are notably known in Jewish history.

And they're often cited. And these rabbis put into writing much of the oral tradition that had been handed to them.

And this oral tradition, once written down and passed from generation to generation, had become the accepted and authoritative interpretation of the

Hebrew Scriptures, certainly by the first century. In fact, the tradition of the elders became viewed as authoritative as the written

Hebrew Scriptures, actually more authoritative than the Scriptures by some.

The tradition was viewed as a fence about the law. They viewed the law of God as so important, so rigid, they built a wider fence of restrictions by their oral tradition.

If you kept their oral tradition, they assured you you would not be breaking God's law.

This was their intention at any rate. And so the tradition of the elders required far more than what the law of God, the law of Moses, actually required.

And again, the tradition came to be viewed as more important and authoritative than the Scriptures themselves.

In fact, there's a passage in the Talmud, Jewish Talmud, which reads, to be against the words of the scribes is more punishable than to be against the word of the

Bible. I didn't put it in my notes, but we could interject this.

That's the same era of Roman Catholicism, by the way. They viewed tradition as authoritative as the

Holy Bible. But in actuality, tradition of the last 2 ,000 years is greater than the

Bible because they set aside the Scripture in order to keep their tradition. This is what the Jewish rabbis did.

And this is what the Jews did in the first century. The tradition of the

Jews had very many detailed regulations governing Sabbath Day observance. And being accused of breaking their

Sabbath Day laws was no trifle charge because the penalty of an infraction was either public flogging or, in severe cases, public execution.

And so the Pharisees may not object to the activity itself, but if it was done on Saturday, the

Sabbath Day, a day of rest on which no work whatsoever was to be performed, then their wrath would come down upon that person.

And this, of course, was their charge against Jesus. And so here we see the excessive legalism of this religious group being displayed.

The Pharisees were extreme in this regard. They would not live by principle that the

Sabbath was a day in which work generally was set aside for the purpose of rest. They defined and stipulated precisely what constituted work and imposed their aside for the purpose of rest.

And so, over the course of years, the legalistic element,

Judaism, established 39 categories of what they regarded as work. This had to do with how you lived, in obedience to God, on the

Sabbath Day. And each of these 39 categories had six minor categories, and each minor category had a list of specific laws prohibiting specific activities.

234 violations in all. It took a scribe, you know, a lawyer, somebody who knew the law, to know these.

And then they would enforce them. Of course, legalists always make allowances for themselves.

And so, of course, harvesting was forbidden. That was work on the Sabbath Day.

But, you know, a storm's coming. They've got to harvest. What do they do? Well, they would take an eating implement, like a fork, and go out into the field and put the fork under the sheave and then carry the sheave back to the barn.

And so it was like they were eating rather than harvesting. Legalism is always inconsistent and hypocritical.

Ultimately, if you press it. Now, when John wrote in verse 14, now it was a

Sabbath when Jesus made the clay and opened his eyes, it was suggested that his action would be regarded as work and a violation of the law of God respecting

Sabbath Day observance. And this was no doubt their assessment when we read in verse 15.

Then the Pharisees also asked him, that is the blind man who could now see, how he'd received his sight.

He said to them, I put clay on my eyes and I washed and I see. And so the conclusion was immediate, certain, at least by some.

And so in verse 16 we read, therefore some of the Pharisees said this man is not from God because he does not keep the

Sabbath. Now, we considered earlier when we addressed verses 1 through 12 that when

Jesus gave sight to this man born blind, he regarded it actually as a work of God.

After our Lord had declared the reason for this man being born blind, he implied it was the work of the Father for him to heal him.

And so in verses 3 and 4 of John 9, we read, Jesus answered, neither this man nor his parents sin, but that the works of God should be revealed in him.

I must work the works of him who sent me while it is day. For the night is coming when no one can work.

And so really what these Pharisees were actually stating in their accusation that God himself was breaking the

Sabbath. It was a work of God. As one wrote, in like manner, the

Pharisees brought against Christ a plausible maxim that he who does not keep Sabbath is not from God, but they unjustly and falsely asserted that the work of God is a violation of the

Sabbath. In reality, they had set themselves up as the final arbiter and authority in the matter.

Now, although some make the laws of Scripture to appear more lenient than what God intended, that would be antinomianism, others make

God's law more restrictive, more binding upon the consciences of Christians than they should, and that would be legalism.

And we should be careful not to make more rigid God's laws than what is prescribed in Scripture. And there is a tendency of some to do that.

Matthew Henry wrote of this, the application of it to our

Savior is very unjust, for he did religiously observe the Sabbath day and never in any instance violated it, never did otherwise than well on the

Sabbath day. He did not keep the Sabbath according to the tradition of the elders and the superstitious observances of the

Pharisees, but he kept it according to the command of God, and therefore, no doubt, he was of God, and his miracles proved him to be the

Lord also of the Sabbath day. Note, much unrighteous and uncharitable judging is occasioned by men's making the rules of religion stricter than God has made them, and adding their own fancies to God's appointments as the

Jews here in the case of Sabbath sanctification. Now, we ourselves may forbear such and such things on the

Sabbath day, as we find it subtraction to us, and we do well, but we must not therefore tie up others to the same strictness.

Everything that we take for a rule of practice must not presently be made a rule of judgment.

I thought that was a very wise and good statement. However, interestingly, not all of the

Pharisees apparently concurred with this pronouncement, this assessment that Jesus had violated the

Sabbath, for we read next that there was division among the Pharisees. In verse 16b, others said,

How can a man who's a sinner do such things? And there was a division among them.

Now, John does not specify who these other Pharisees were, but it's not out of possibility.

In fact, I would say even probability that Nicodemus was among them. He had declared earlier to Jesus in John 3, verse 2,

Rabbi, we know that you're a teacher from God, for no one can do these signs that you do unless God is with him.

Now, Nicodemus included himself with others. We know Nicodemus was perhaps one of other

Pharisees who knew Jesus was from God because the signs, the miracles he did, you had to conclude he was from God.

And then here in John 9, 16b, those who differed from the conclusion, what do they say?

How can a man who is a sinner do such signs? That's the same reasoning, the same statement that Nicodemus made back in John 3, verse 2.

These others were convinced that Jesus was a man of God due to the signs that he had displayed before them.

And so there was division, sharp division. Now, often the

Lord Jesus is presented as though he were the great unifier of people, that he's a bringer of peace, and thankfully he is to those who repent of sin and believe on him as Lord and Savior.

But there are those who appeal to Jesus in order to lead everyone to get along with one another, but actually the

Lord Jesus often brought division between people, and he did so here, didn't he? In fact, we could call

Jesus the great divider. We again might cite Matthew Henry who saw this event as an emblem of the manner in which the

Lord Jesus defeats his enemies. Thus there was a division among them, a schism.

So the word is, they clashed in their opinion, a warm debate arose, and the house divided upon it.

And thus God defeats the counsels of his enemies by dividing them. And by such testimonies as these given against the malice of persecutors and the rubs they meet with, their designs against the church are sometimes rendered ineffectual and always inexcusable.

In fact, if you read the scriptures, particularly the New Testament, you'll find that division takes place all the time due to the

Lord Jesus and those that believe on him and promote him. Well, they then turn to the witness of the beggar himself in verse 17.

We read, They said to the blind man again, What do you say about him, because he opened your eyes?

He said, He's a prophet. So here we see one benefit of there having been a division of these men.

It resulted in them having to inquire more clearly and fully the facts of the incident. It would seem their division between them led to this second inquiry of this man.

And so they said to the blind man again. It's not clear who and why they queried this man again.

Were they attempting to get this man to discredit Jesus, who had healed him? Or was it those who were sympathetic toward Jesus who asked this question in order to pull a more firm confession from this man about the identity of Jesus?

It's really not quite clear which was the case. But from the answer of this man, we say that he knew little of the identity and nature of the one who enabled him to say.

But he knew he must be of God. The man was certain he was a prophet. It's in a sense a statement of faith on the part of this man.

He's a prophet. No hesitation. He's a prophet. He didn't know much, but he was willing to speak up in this hostile group a word in defense of his benefactor.

As J .C. Ryle wrote, this expression was the beginning of faith in the healed man. It was a declaration of his own belief the person who had wrought such a great cure must be a person specially raised by God to do great works like Elijah or Elisha.

Now, some might consider what this man said and not think it's a very high estimation of Jesus.

He's a prophet. Well, yeah, he's much more than a prophet. But really, on the contrary, it may have been the highest position that this man could have rendered to Jesus from his perspective, from his point of view.

And so let's just briefly consider the growth of understanding of this man as to the identity of Jesus and the response of this man as the passage unfolds.

But at the same time as we see this man progressing, let's see how the Pharisees digress in their estimation of Jesus through this passage.

Leon Morris set this forth. I found it quite good. The man is definite.

He's a prophet. If this seems to us inadequate, we must remember that the man had no way of knowing that Jesus was more.

His contact with the Lord had been very brief. And for him, prophet was probably the highest place he could assign to a man of God.

His answer puts Jesus in the highest place he knew. It is interesting to notice his progressive apprehension of the significance of Jesus.

He passes from thinking of him as a man, verse 11, to seeing him as a prophet, here in this verse, and then he advances to the thought of one to whom allegiance may be fitly given, verses 27 and 28, and then to one from God, verse 33, and finally he comes to believe in the

Son of Man to whom worship should be given. We'll address that next week. By contrast, the

Pharisees, starting with the view that Jesus is not from God, verse 16, question the miracle, verse 18, speak of Jesus as a sinner, verse 24, and are shown to be ignorant, verse 29, and finally are pronounced to be blind and sinners, verse 41, which again we'll see next week.

And so even as the man is growing and advancing in his estimation of Jesus, the Pharisees are going in the other direction.

Well, now we read of the appeal of the Pharisees to the beggar's parents. This is interesting.

The Pharisees refused to believe this man, that he had been born blind, and that Jesus had bestowed sight on him.

They were trying to somehow prove this not to have been the case.

And so beginning with verse 18, we read of the interaction of the Pharisees with the man's parents.

But the Jews did not believe concerning him that he had been blind, received his sight, until they called the parents of him, see that convinced them, who had received his sight, and they asked them, saying,

Is this your son who you say was born blind? How then does he now see? And his parents answered them and said,

We know this is our son. He was born blind, but by what means he now sees, we do not know.

Or who opened his eyes, we do not know. He is of age, ask him. He'll speak for himself.

And his parents and these things, because they feared the Jews, his parents said these things because they feared the Jews. For the

Jews had agreed already that if anyone confessed that he was Christ, he would be put out of the synagogue, and therefore his parents said,

He is of age, ask him. The Jews would have evidence that this man had not been the recipient of a miracle performed by Jesus.

They would prefer to prove this man had not been given sight than to acknowledge that a great miracle had been performed by Jesus.

And so they called his parents to testify regarding their son. We read here that the parents forfeited an opportunity.

There really has been afforded to relatively few people in history. They could have been born witness to the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ, but out of fear, they failed to do so.

And I was reading one commentator how he really extended this greatly, and how many times we forfeit the opportunity to bring glory to Jesus Christ because we're afraid of what people will think about us, and so we remain silent, and we fail to speak up on behalf of the

Lord. I thought it was a good application. These parents could have been born witness to the glory of God for having performed this miracle, but the fear of man paralyzed them.

They would not claim any knowledge but that which was presently obvious.

Yes, the man was their son. Yes, he'd been born blind. And they restricted themselves to this testimony because they feared the

Jews. The leaders of the Jews had already attempted to squelch any voice that would promote the name and cause of Jesus.

As we read in verse 22, for the Jews had agreed already. And as we've read this verse a couple times now,

I've given a little bit of emphasis to that word already, and we'll explain why.

For the Jews had already, agreed already, that if anyone confessed that he was

Christ, he would be put out of the synagogue. The word already suggests an interesting issue.

John the Apostle wrote this gospel in the 90s A .D., about 60 years after the event.

After the fall of Jerusalem in A .D. 70, the non -Christian Jews held a great council called the

Council of Jamnia, which took place in A .D. 90. And there, by the way, they declared the closed

Jewish canon as the law of the prophets and the writings. That was one of the important findings of that council.

But at this council, the Sanhedrin of the Jews changed the liturgy observed by all synagogues throughout the

Roman world. And they did so in order to identify and exclude

Christian Jews from their gatherings. Here is a description of that action.

The 12th benediction, rewritten by Samuel the Small, for the Sanhedrin, reconstituted after the devastating fall of Jerusalem in A .D.

70, all pious Jews would recite the liturgical 18 benedictions three times a day.

The 12th, rewritten, it's thought, to exclude Christian Jews from the synagogue by including the liturgy, a snippet that no

Christian could utter, ran something like the following. For the renegades let there be no hope, and may the arrogant kingdom soon be rooted out in our days, and the

Nazarenes, in other words, Christians, and the ninim, in other words, heretics, parish, as in a moment, and be rooted out of the book of life, and with the righteous may they not be inscribed,

Blessed art thou, O Lord, who humblest the arrogant. And this is often, ironically, called the benediction of the heretics.

Now, when John was writing this gospel, this had already been enacted at the

Council of Jamia, maybe a handful of years before. And so when he was telling of the fear of the man's parents, he indicated that the

Jews had agreed already that if anyone confessed that he was Christ, he'd be put out of the synagogue.

And so way back then, even during our Lord's earthly ministry, if any Jewish person professed support for Jesus, the

Jews would have him excluded from the synagogue. In other words, being put out of the synagogue just didn't originate in 1890, but already the

Jews, even during Jesus' ministry, at least in Jerusalem, were threatening to put them out of the synagogue if they stood up for Jesus.

This action of the Jews would be the equivalent, of course, of excommunication from the local church, the result of the disciplinary process of a church member who's no longer living or believing as a

Christian, who's been confronted but refused to humble himself and repent for his sin. The church has commanded to remove him from church membership,

Corinthians 5. The Jews did so, however, to any Jewish man or woman who claimed to be a supporter or believer of Jesus.

And this is what silenced the parents. However, we should not think that this early action of the

Jewish leaders in Jerusalem was a widespread policy among all the synagogues of the

Roman world. This is just my opinion. I think it was probably true of the synagogues in Jerusalem.

For we read in the book of Acts that the early Jewish Christians were commonly associated and involved in Jewish synagogues.

But here in Jerusalem, the Jewish leaders had taken a strong stand to threaten people like the parents of this man, so that they would not publicly endorse

Jesus as one to be believed and followed. And by the way, we read something similarly later on in John 12.

There we read, nevertheless many even of the authorities believed in him, but for fear of the

Pharisees, they did not confess it, so that they would not be put out of the synagogue. For they loved the glory that comes from man more than the glory that comes from God.

And these parents, the accusation could be leveled because of the fear of man.

They had more fear of man than they had for fear of God. And as a result, it silenced them.

And this is an issue and a problem that every one of us has to deal with in our own witness for Christ, isn't it?

The fear of man often paralyzes us. And as we were talking to our men yesterday morning, the men's group, in my experience, the only thing that can counter the fear of man is a greater fear of God.

I'm more concerned about what God thinks about me than this guy that I'm going to talk to about Jesus.

And when I put it in those terms, all of a sudden, that gives me the go -ahead. The Lord's always helped me in that way.

Well, the parents brought an end to their interrogation when they said in verse 24, He's of age, ask him.

Now, this would mean that this man is of at least 13 years of age. A Jewish young man of 13 would then be regarded as being able to be a legitimate witness within a court.

He's a young man. He's of age, ask him. And we commented when we were addressing verses 1 through 12, he probably was a young man.

And we gave reasons for it. I don't recall what they are now. But here is another evidence that he was probably a younger man, maybe a teenager at the time.

Well, interestingly, after they spoke to the parents, we have another appeal to the blind baker. We read the

Jewish authorities once again interrogated the man regarding the miracle that had occurred.

And so in verse 24, So they again called the man who was blind and said to him, Give God the glory.

We know that this man is a sinner. It would seem the Jewish leaders had to concede the miracle took place.

The parents testified to it. Yes, he was born blind. He sees now. They could no longer deny a miracle took place.

What were they to do? Well, the Jews would do all they could do to take away any credit or any glory given to Jesus.

And so they urged the man to give glory to God alone for having given him sight. They said to him,

We know this man is a sinner. Or, to put it in other words, We know this man could not have been the cause of your sin for he's a sinner.

And sinners cannot enable blind people to see, especially one who is born blind. Give glory to God for having done this.

Don't give glory to Jesus. I think that's what they were attempting to do.

By the way, we see this played out quite regularly in our own culture. Although most people do not like it when someone gives glory to God for something remarkable that takes place, there is a common revulsion when glory is given specifically to Jesus Christ.

You know that's true, don't you? And so sometimes you'll hear Christians, they'll talk generically about God.

And I wonder if that's not a compromise at times. God would have us give glory to His Son because in glorifying

His Son, we give glory to God the Father. He who does not honor the Son does not honor the

Father. And so it seems that professing

Christians pull back their praise in a measure by speaking in more general terms, speaking of God, for they know that declaring the name of Jesus accentuates their speech and claim.

But let us readily acknowledge that God, both the Father and the Holy Spirit, have the utmost desire,

God has the utmost desired delight in the exaltation of the name of Jesus. Jesus Himself declared, the

Father judges, no one is committed all judgment to the Son, that all should honor the Son just as they honor the

Father. He who does not honor the Son does not honor the

Father who sent Him. When God does something gracious on your behalf, when

He displays some mercy, some act of grace, give glory to Jesus Christ, even though you might know it's not going to be received.

Do it. Because that's what we should do. This will delight God the Father and it may anger some.

So be it. Give glory to Jesus Christ to whom it's warranted.

Now this man refused to go where these Jewish leaders would take him and so he boldly said to them in verse 25, he answered and said, whether he's a sinner or not

I do not know. One thing I know, though I was blind, now I see.

And as one rightly wrote, all who have felt Christ's spiritual power will adopt this language. And of course,

John Newton did an amazing grace. Whatever they know, not, this they know, that whereas they were blind, they now see.

And Spurgeon's sermon I read last night, that was the essence of it.

That this is the greatest witness we have. I may not know much, but I know this.

I was this way, now I'm this way. I was blind, but now I see. And Spurgeon went on to talk about people in this congregation.

I could point to so -and -so. Three months ago, had you said he'd be sitting here reading his

Bible, eagerly learning, he would have cussed at you. But now, he's a worshiper of Jesus.

And that's a powerful testimony. The world can't answer it. Just as these Jewish leaders could not answer this man.

See, the world cannot explain, apart from a work of God's grace, when a sinner is transformed into a saint.

It's as though the man said to them, Jesus did it, and that I cannot and will not deny. It matters not what you or I say he is.

I was blind until the time he came to me, spit in the dirt, anointed my eyes with the mud, commanded me to go and wash, and now

I see. This man didn't know much about Jesus, but he knew he must be a prophet, he must be

God. As one wrote, the man has a sturdy independence, as his answer shows.

He does not go into the theoretical question of whether or not Jesus was a sinner or not.

He sticks to the facts of which he has certain knowledge, and thus produces an answer which is a classic.

No fine -spawned web of airy theory can budge a man who is able to say with conviction, one thing

I know. That man had sight, no mere words could alter that.

People are emboldened when they perceive that they are the recipients of the mercy and grace of God and Jesus Christ.

See, the boldness of this formerly blind man who had begged for the smallest of mercies from those who passed by, but who has now received great mercy and great grace from Jesus Christ, is this not the kind of witness that the world, even those of the world who are belligerent toward the

Lord, cannot repress or refute? Consider the Apostle Paul.

He had been blind for a couple of days, and then his sight restored, and immediately he was in the synagogues preaching that Jesus was the

Christ. Again, Matthew Henry wrote of this former blind man testifying before the

Pharisees, as it is an encouragement to those who are concerned for the cause of Christ to hope that it shall never be lost for lack of witness when they find a poor, blind beggar picked up from the wayside and made a witness for Christ to the faces of his most impudent enemies.

So it is an encouragement to those who are called out to witness for Christ to find with what prudence and courage this man managed his defense.

According to the promise, it shall be given you in that hour what you shall speak. And though he had never seen

Jesus, he had felt his grace. I remember as a brand new

Christian, I was a grocery clerk, 19, working in the store. First time I ever confessed Christ openly.

I was putting up groceries on the shelf. Fellow worker was doing so with me. And some hippy came tripping in.

And this guy was flaky. And he came tripping into the store and came up to the cash register.

And so my friend had to go up and deal with him. And this hippy started preaching

Christ to this worker. And the worker was enraged. And he came back afterwards to the aisle and started cussing out this

Jesus freak. And the first time I confessed, I'm one of those Jesus freaks. And it just blew him away.

He just apologized. He couldn't deal with it. But I could not believe myself standing up and defending this guy who came in the store, other than the fact that he was a

Christian and confessed Christ. And so I would own him and did. And it was a very significant event,

I recall, in my own early Christian life, standing forward and confessing

Christ. Well, it would seem, and now I'm just going directly onto page 9, passing that longer quote.

It would seem these Pharisees were becoming exasperated and they were getting nowhere with this man. He was insisting on giving glory to Jesus for what had happened to him.

But they'd have none of that. And so we read one more attempt to reproach him and attempt to find some flaw or weakness in his claim.

Verse 26, And they said to him again, What did he do to you? How did he open your eyes?

But this man, who had become increasingly bold and forthright in his dealings with these religious ones, answered them in a way that confronted them with their obstinacy.

And verse 27, This bold man became more direct. He answered them, I told you already you did not listen.

Why do you want to hear it again? Do you also want to become his disciples? And by this rather ironic challenge of the man, he seems to betray the fact that himself had become a disciple, at least to the degree he understood.

This is what they were essentially accusing him of being, a disciple of Jesus. Calvin's comments,

I appreciate it. He spoke of how we should not back down from those who would shame us or threaten us when we can testify of Jesus Christ before them.

When we see wicked men so delighted in performing their own base actions, we ought to be ashamed of our slothfulness in acting with such coolness about the affairs of Christ.

Though they search on all sides to obtain grounds of slander, the Lord defeats their attempts in a remarkable manner by the unshaken firmness of the blind man.

For not only does he persist in his opinion, but he freely and severely reproaches them that after having abundantly ascertained and known the truth, they endeavor to bury it by their continual inquiries.

He charges them also with wicked hatred of Christ when he says, Do you also wish to become his disciples?

In other words, that's an ironic question. Of course they didn't. For he means that though they were a hundred times convinced, they are so strongly prejudiced by wicked and hostile dispositions that they will never yield.

It's an astonishing display of freedom when a man of simple and low condition and especially liable to be reproached on account of his poverty fearlessly provokes the rage of all the priests against himself.

If that which was nothing more than a small preparation for faith gave him so much boldness when he came to this struggle, what excuse can be pleaded by great preachers of the gospel who though they are beyond the reach of darts are silent as soon as danger is threatened?

That was a repudiation of other Reformed preachers who weren't standing up against Rome as Calvin was.

And he talks about this blind man and how much courage he had. And then we have the reactions and responses of the

Pharisees. They reviled him and said, you're his disciple, we're

Moses' disciple. We know that God spoke to Moses for this fellow we do not know where he's from.

And then the man sarcastically responds, why this is a marvelous thing. You do not know where he's from yet he's opened my eyes.

And now we know that God does not hear sinners but if anyone's a worshiper of God and does his will he hears him.

Since the world began it's not, it has been unheard of that anyone opened the eyes of one who's born blind.

If this man were not from God he could do nothing. And then they answered and said to him, you were completely born in sins and are you teaching us?

And they cast him out. They were

Moses' disciples. They wouldn't give any regard to this Jesus. But the man responded with clarity and confidence and he really reasoned with them in a manner that they could not justly refute him.

This simple young man who had lived an obscure and insignificant life came forward and bested the religious leaders of his people.

He had more spiritual sense than all who confronted and challenged him.

You're completely born in sins. You teach us and they cast him out. They excommunicated him. They didn't just cast him out from their presence.

They kicked him out of the synagogue. He was left with nothing. And you can imagine how he must have been quite bewildered when this happened.

And of course we'll consider next week how the Lord Jesus sought him and revealed himself savingly to this man who embraced the

Lord Jesus wholly in faith. Let's just draw two conclusions and we'll close.

We've been at it an hour, I know, but let's just want to draw these two conclusions and we'll close.

First, let us think upon the great tragedy of these Jewish men, these Pharisees who were so sure of themselves and so sure that this man had nothing to tell them or teach them.

The Lord often will bring us lessons through ones that we have perhaps first dismissed quite readily. Again, words of John Calvin about you and I as Christians need to be open to the

Lord teaching us maybe through some rather insignificant or unlearned persons. This undeserved censure ought to instruct us to be exceedingly cautious, not always to estimate the sins of any person by the chastisements of God.

For as we've already seen, God has various ends to accomplish by inflicting calamities on men. But not only do those hypocrites insult the wretched man, they likewise reject disdainfully his warnings, though they are holy and good, as indeed it very frequently happens that one cannot endure to be taught by him whom he despises.

Since we ought always to hear God, by whomsoever he may talk to us, let us learn not to despise any man, that God may find us always mild and submissive, even though he employ a person altogether mean and that is simple and despicable to instruct us.

For there is not a more dangerous plague than when pride stops our ears so that we do not deign to hear those who warn us for our profit and it frequently happens that God purposely selects vile and worthless persons to instruct and warn us in order to subdue our pride.

It's important to have a teachable spirit. And then lastly, let's see how like this man born blind we all were before the

Lord Jesus came and gave us the ability to see. Spurgeon, man is blind.

Father Adam put out our eyes. We cannot see spiritual things. We have not the spiritual optic that has gone, gone forever.

We are born without it, born blind. Christ comes into this world and his gospel is despicable in men's esteem even its spittle.

The thought of it disgusts most men. Gentility turns on its heel and saith it will have nothing to do with it and Palm and Glory all say that it is a contemptible and base thing.

Christ puts the gospel on the blind eye. A gospel which like clay seems as if it would make men more blind than before but it's through the foolishness of preaching that Christ says it saves them that believe.

And the Holy Spirit is like Salome's pool. A little allegorizing here. We go to him or rather he comes to us.

The convictions of sin produced by the gospel are washed away by the cleansing influences of the Divine Comforter and behold we who were once so blind we could see no beauty in divine things and no excellence in the crown jewels of God begin to see things in a clear and heavenly light and rejoice exceedingly before the

Lord. And so this miracle that happened physically of course happens spiritually when a person is brought to salvation in Jesus Christ.

And so, do you see the beauty and wonder of the Lord Jesus who has enabled us to see these glorious truths, these realities of the gospel whereby we are saved?

May that be so for every one of us and may we pray to this end.

I hope none of us can look upon the things of Christ with a dry eye or a cold heart.

That betrays something about our condition that maybe we are still spiritually blind and the

Lord hasn't given us sight yet. Because when he gives sight, spiritual sight, the things are not only seen as they are as truth, they are seen to be beautiful, wondrous, lovely, attractive, and desirable.

And may that be true with each of us. Let's pray. Thank you Father for your word. Thank you for this wonderful story we have of the grace of Jesus Christ bestowing sight upon this man and we pray for ourselves, our

God. Don't let us, our God, go through our days blind to the spiritual truth that's in Jesus Christ.

Give us sight, our God. Give us an apprehension of the truth, the gospel in Jesus Christ and with that understanding, our

God, give us a sense of valuation, appreciation for it. Help us to love the

Lord Jesus and seek to give glory to him in every way that's afforded us. Give us courage, our

God, opportunity and boldness to speak of Jesus Christ to others and we pray that you would just cause a great in -gathering into the fold of Christ through bringing people to salvation.

we pray these things, Father, in Jesus' name. Amen. Amen.