Show Bible Commentary For A Bible Verse

Click here to show/hide instructions.

Selected Verse: John 9:41 - King James

Verse	Translation	Text
Joh 9:41	King James	Jesus said unto them, If ye were blind, ye should have no sin: but now ye say, We see; therefore your sin remaineth.

Summary Of Commentaries Associated With The Selected Verse

Open All | Close All Open All | Close All

A Commentary, Critical, Practical, and Explanatory on the Old and New Testaments, by Robert Jamieson, A.R. Fausset and David Brown [1882]
If ye were blind--wanted light to discern My claims, and only waited to receive it. ye should have no sin--none of the guilt of shutting out the light. ye say, We see; therefore your sin remaineth--Your claim to possess light, while rejecting Me, is that which seals you up in the guilt of unbelief.

A Commentary, Critical, Practical, and Explanatory on the Old and New Testaments, by Robert Jamieson, A.R. Fausset and David Brown [1882]

If ye were blind--wanted light to discern My claims, and only waited to receive it.

ye should have no sin--none of the guilt of shutting out the light.

ye say, We see; therefore your sin remaineth--Your claim to possess light, while rejecting Me, is that which seals you up in the guilt of unbelief.

Notes on the Bible, by Albert Barnes, [1834]
If ye were blind - If you were really blind had had no opportunities of learning the truth. If you were truly ignorant, and were willing to confess it, and to come to me for instruction. No sin - You would not be guilty. Sin is measured by the capacities or ability of people, and by their opportunities of knowing the truth. If people had no ability to do the will of God, they could incur no blame. If they have all proper ability, and no disposition, God holds them to be guilty. This passage teaches conclusively: 1. that people are not condemned for what they cannot do. 2. that the reason why they are condemned is that they are not disposed to receive the truth. 3. that pride and self-confidence are the sources of condemnation. 4. that if people are condemned, they, and not God, will be to blame. We see - We have knowledge of the law of God. This they had pretended when they professed to understand the law respecting the Sabbath better than Jesus, and had condemned him for healing on that day. Your sin remaineth - You are guilty, and your sin is unpardoned. People's sins will always be unpardoned while they are proud, and self-sufficient, and confident of their own wisdom. If they will come with humble hearts and confess their ignorance, God will forgive, enlighten, and guide them in the path to heaven.

Notes on the Bible, by Albert Barnes, [1834]

If ye were blind - If you were really blind had had no opportunities of learning the truth. If you were truly ignorant, and were willing to confess it, and to come to me for instruction.

No sin - You would not be guilty. Sin is measured by the capacities or ability of people, and by their opportunities of knowing the truth. If people had no ability to do the will of God, they could incur no blame. If they have all proper ability, and no disposition, God holds them to be guilty. This passage teaches conclusively:

1. that people are not condemned for what they cannot do.

2. that the reason why they are condemned is that they are not disposed to receive the truth.

3. that pride and self-confidence are the sources of condemnation.

4. that if people are condemned, they, and not God, will be to blame.

We see - We have knowledge of the law of God. This they had pretended when they professed to understand the law respecting the Sabbath better than Jesus, and had condemned him for healing on that day.

Your sin remaineth - You are guilty, and your sin is unpardoned. People's sins will always be unpardoned while they are proud, and self-sufficient, and confident of their own wisdom. If they will come with humble hearts and confess their ignorance, God will forgive, enlighten, and guide them in the path to heaven.

The Scofield Bible Commentary, by Cyrus Ingerson Scofield, [1917]
sin Sin (See Scofield) - (Rom 3:23).

The Scofield Bible Commentary, by Cyrus Ingerson Scofield, [1917]

sin

Sin

(See Scofield) - (Rom 3:23).

Vincent's Word Studies, by Marvin R. Vincent [1886]
Ye should have no sin (οὐκ ἀν εἴχετε ἁμαρτίαν) Or, ye would have had. The phrase ἁμαρτίαν ἔχειν, to have sin, occurs only in John, in the Gospel and First Epistle.

Vincent's Word Studies, by Marvin R. Vincent [1886]

Ye should have no sin (οὐκ ἀν εἴχετε ἁμαρτίαν)

Or, ye would have had. The phrase ἁμαρτίαν ἔχειν, to have sin, occurs only in John, in the Gospel and First Epistle.

Explanatory Notes on the Whole Bible, by John Wesley [1754-65]
If ye had been blind - Invincibly ignorant; if ye had not had so many means of knowing: ye would have had no sin - Comparatively to what ye have now. But now ye say - Ye yourselves acknowledge, Ye see, therefore your sin remaineth - Without excuse, without remedy.

Explanatory Notes on the Whole Bible, by John Wesley [1754-65]

If ye had been blind - Invincibly ignorant; if ye had not had so many means of knowing: ye would have had no sin - Comparatively to what ye have now. But now ye say - Ye yourselves acknowledge, Ye see, therefore your sin remaineth - Without excuse, without remedy.

Adam Clarke Commentary on the Whole Bible - Published 1810-1826
If ye were blind - If ye had not had sufficient opportunities to have acquainted yourselves with my Divine nature, by the unparalleled miracles which I have wrought before you? and the holy doctrine which I have preached, then your rejecting me could not be imputed to you as sin; but because ye say, we see - we are perfectly capable of judging between a true and false prophet, and can from the Scriptures point out the Messiah by his works - on this account you are guilty, and your sin is of no common nature, it remaineth, i.e. it shall not be expiated: as ye have rejected the Lord from being your deliverer, so the Lord has rejected you from being his people. When the Scripture speaks of sin remaining, it is always put in opposition to pardon; for pardon is termed the taking away of sin, Joh 1:29; Psa 32:5. And this is the proper import of the phrase, αφεσις των ἁμαρτιων, which occurs so frequently in the sacred writings. 1. The history of the man who was born blind and cured by our Lord is, in every point of view, instructive. His simplicity, his courage, his constancy, and his gratitude are all so many subjects worthy of attention and emulation. He certainly confessed the truth at the most imminent risk of his life; and therefore, as Stephen was the first martyr for Christianity, this man was the first confessor. The power and influence of Truth, in supporting its friends and confounding its adversaries, are well exemplified in him; and not less so, that providence of God by which he was preserved from the malice of these bad men. The whole story is related with inimitable simplicity, and cannot be read by the most cold-hearted without extorting the exclamation, How forcible are right words? 2. It has already been remarked that, since the world began, there is no evidence that any man born blind was ever restored to sight by surgical means, till the days of Mr. Cheselden, who was a celebrated surgeon at St. Thomas's Hospital, London. For though, even before the Christian era, there is reason to believe that both the Greek and Roman physicians performed operations to remove blindness occasioned by the cataract, yet we know of none of these ever attempted on the eyes of those who had been born blind, much less of any such persons being restored to sight. The cure before us must have been wholly miraculous - no appropriate means were used to effect it. What was done had rather a tendency to prevent and destroy sight than to help or restore it. The blindness in question was probably occasioned by a morbid structure of the organs of sight; and our Lord, by his sovereign power, instantaneously restored them to perfect soundness, without the intervention of any healing process. In this case there could be neither deception nor collusion.

Adam Clarke Commentary on the Whole Bible - Published 1810-1826

If ye were blind - If ye had not had sufficient opportunities to have acquainted yourselves with my Divine nature, by the unparalleled miracles which I have wrought before you? and the holy doctrine which I have preached, then your rejecting me could not be imputed to you as sin; but because ye say, we see - we are perfectly capable of judging between a true and false prophet, and can from the Scriptures point out the Messiah by his works - on this account you are guilty, and your sin is of no common nature, it remaineth, i.e. it shall not be expiated: as ye have rejected the Lord from being your deliverer, so the Lord has rejected you from being his people. When the Scripture speaks of sin remaining, it is always put in opposition to pardon; for pardon is termed the taking away of sin, Joh 1:29; Psa 32:5. And this is the proper import of the phrase, αφεσις των ἁμαρτιων, which occurs so frequently in the sacred writings.

1. The history of the man who was born blind and cured by our Lord is, in every point of view, instructive. His simplicity, his courage, his constancy, and his gratitude are all so many subjects worthy of attention and emulation. He certainly confessed the truth at the most imminent risk of his life; and therefore, as Stephen was the first martyr for Christianity, this man was the first confessor. The power and influence of Truth, in supporting its friends and confounding its adversaries, are well exemplified in him; and not less so, that providence of God by which he was preserved from the malice of these bad men. The whole story is related with inimitable simplicity, and cannot be read by the most cold-hearted without extorting the exclamation, How forcible are right words?

2. It has already been remarked that, since the world began, there is no evidence that any man born blind was ever restored to sight by surgical means, till the days of Mr. Cheselden, who was a celebrated surgeon at St. Thomas's Hospital, London. For though, even before the Christian era, there is reason to believe that both the Greek and Roman physicians performed operations to remove blindness occasioned by the cataract, yet we know of none of these ever attempted on the eyes of those who had been born blind, much less of any such persons being restored to sight. The cure before us must have been wholly miraculous - no appropriate means were used to effect it. What was done had rather a tendency to prevent and destroy sight than to help or restore it. The blindness in question was probably occasioned by a morbid structure of the organs of sight; and our Lord, by his sovereign power, instantaneously restored them to perfect soundness, without the intervention of any healing process. In this case there could be neither deception nor collusion.

Top