John Calvin Commentary John 9:16

"Some therefore of the Pharisees said, This man is not from God, because he keepeth not the sabbath. But others said, How can a man that is a sinner do such signs? And there was division among them." — John 9:16 (ASV)

How can a man who is a sinner do these things? The word sinner is used here, as in many other passages, to denote a person of immoral conduct and a despiser of God.

Why doth your Master eat with publicans and sinners? (Mark 2:16)

That is, “Why does your Master eat with men of ungodly and wicked lives, whose baseness is stamped with universal infamy?” For from the violation of the Sabbath, the enemies of Christ inferred that He was a profane person and destitute of all religion. Those who stand neutral and judge more candidly, on the other hand, conclude that He is a good and religious man, because God has endowed Him with remarkable power to work miracles. And yet the argument does not appear to be quite conclusive; for God sometimes permits false prophets to perform some miracles, and we know that Satan, like an ape, counterfeits God’s works so as to deceive the incautious.

Suetonius relates that when Vespasian was in Alexandria, seated on his tribunal to dispense justice in open court, a blind man requested him to anoint his eyes with spittle. The man said that one Serapis had pointed out this cure to him in a dream.

Vespasian, unwilling to expose himself to contempt without good reason, was at first slow and reluctant to comply. However, when his friends strongly urged him, he granted the blind man what he asked, and in this way, his eyes were instantly opened.

Who would reckon Vespasian among the servants of God on that account, or adorn him with the applause of piety? I reply, among good men and those who fear God, miracles are undoubted pledges of the power of the Holy Spirit; but it happens by God’s just judgment that Satan deceives unbelievers by false miracles, as by enchantments.

What I have just quoted from Suetonius I do not consider to be fabulous; but I rather ascribe it to God’s righteous vengeance that the Jews, having despised so many and so illustrious miracles of Christ, were eventually—as they deserved to be—sent away to Satan.

For they ought to have profited from Christ’s miracles by advancing in the pure worship of God; they ought to have been confirmed by them in the doctrine of the Law, and to have risen to the Messiah Himself, who was the end of the Law. And undoubtedly Christ, by giving sight to the blind man, had clearly proved that He was the Messiah.

Those who refuse to acknowledge God in His works make this refusal not only through indifference but through malicious contempt; and do they not deserve that God should give them up to the delusions of Satan? Let us then remember that we ought to seek God with a sincere disposition of heart, so that He may reveal Himself to us by the power of His Spirit; and that we ought to listen submissively to His Word, so that He may clearly identify true prophets by miracles that are not delusive. Thus we shall profit, as we ought to do, from miracles, and not be exposed to the frauds of Satan.

As for the men themselves, though they act commendably in this respect—that they speak with reverence about the miracles in which God’s power is displayed—they still do not bring forward a sufficiently strong argument to prove that Christ ought to be reckoned a Prophet of God.

Even the Evangelist did not intend their answer to be regarded as an oracle. He only exhibits the wicked obstinacy of Christ’s enemies, who maliciously pick a quarrel with what they cannot help but acknowledge to be God’s works and, when warned, do not even pay attention to them for a short time.

And there was a division among them. A schism is a highly pernicious and destructive evil in the Church of God. How is it then that Christ sows the occasion of discord among the very teachers of the Church?

The answer is easy. Christ had no other object in view than to bring all people to God the Father, by stretching out His hand to them. The division arose from the obstinate malice of those who had no disposition to go to God.

All who do not yield obedience to God’s truth, therefore, rend the Church by schism. Yet it is better that people should differ among themselves than that they should all, with one consent, revolt from the true religion. Therefore, whenever differences arise, we ought always to consider their source.