John Calvin Commentary Matthew 20:29

"And as they went out from Jericho, a great multitude followed him." — Matthew 20:29 (ASV)

And while they were departing from Jericho. Osiander has resolved to display his ingenuity by making four blind men out of one. But nothing can be more frivolous than this supposition. Having observed that the Evangelists differ in a few expressions, he imagined that one blind man received sight when they were entering into the city, and that the second, and other two, received sight when Christ was departing from it. But all the circumstances agree so completely, that no person of sound judgment will believe them to be different narratives. Not to mention other matters, when Christ’s followers had tried to put the first to silence, and saw him cured contrary to their expectation, would they immediately have made the same attempt with the other three? But it is unnecessary to go into particulars, from which anyone may easily infer that it is one and the same event which is related.

But there is a puzzling contradiction in this respect: Matthew and Mark say that the miracle was performed on one or on two blind men when Christ had already departed from the city; while Luke relates that it was done before he came to the city. Besides, Mark and Luke speak of not more than one blind man, while Matthew mentions two. But as we know that it frequently occurs in the Evangelists that in the same narrative one omits what is mentioned by the others, and, on the other hand, states more clearly what they have omitted, it ought not to be considered strange or unusual in the present passage.

My conjecture is that, while Christ was approaching the city, the blind man cried out, but, as he was not heard because of the noise, he placed himself in the way as they were departing from the city,⁶⁶⁹ and then was finally called by Christ. And so Luke, beginning with what was true, does not recount the entire narrative but omits Christ’s stay in the city, while the other Evangelists focus only on the time nearer to the miracle. There is probability in the conjecture that, as Christ frequently, when he wished to test the faith of people, delayed for a short time to relieve them, so he subjected this blind man to the same scrutiny.

The second difficulty may be quickly removed. For we have seen on a former occasion that Mark and Luke speak of one demoniac as having been cured, while Matthew, as in the present instance, mentions two (Matthew 8:28; Mark 5:2; Luke 8:27⁶⁷⁰).

And yet this involves no contradiction between them. It may rather be conjectured with probability that at first one blind man implored the favor of Christ, and then another was inspired by his example, so that in this way two persons received sight. Mark and Luke speak of one only, either because he was better known, or because in him the demonstration of Christ’s power was no less remarkable than it was in both.

It certainly appears to have been because he was widely known that he was selected by Mark, who gives both his own name and that of his father: Bartimeus, son of Timeus. By doing so, Mark does not claim for him either illustrious descent or wealth, for Bartimeus was a beggar of the lowest class. Hence it appears that the miracle was more remarkable in his case because his calamity had been generally known. This seems to me to be the reason why Mark and Luke mention him only and say nothing about the other, who was a sort of inferior appendage. But Matthew, who was an eyewitness,⁶⁷¹ did not choose to overlook even this other person, though less known.

⁶⁶⁹ “Mais pource qu’il ne peut estre ouy a cause du bruit du peuple, qu’il s’en alla, l’autre porte de la ville par laquelle Christ devoit sortir, pour l’attendre la au chemin;” — “but, because he could not be heard on account of the noise of the people, that he went away to the other gate by which Christ was to go out, to wait for him there on the road.”;” — “but, because he could not be heard on account of the noise of the people, that he went away to the other gate by which Christ was to go out, to wait for him there on the road.”

⁶⁷⁰ See Harmony, , vol. 1 p. 428..

⁶⁷¹ “Qui avoit este present au miracle;” — “who had been present at the miracle.”;” — “who had been present at the miracle.”