John Chapter 9 - From the horses mouth (Greg Thornberg)

Hi Justin,

I researched John 9 and remembered that an excellent commentator on New Testament times is William Barclay. I don't always agree with all of Barclay's theological conclusions, but I trust absolutely his historical insights into how people lived and thought during the time of Jesus. In his commentary on John 9 he does indeed state that many Jews believed in the preexistence of spirits and gives this as one of the possible reasons for the disciples' question about "who sinned this man or his parents that he was born blind." I felt it was important to submit the two pages of commentary here first because it would only be honest of me to do so and secondly because you don't own the Barclay commentary yourself. Below is what Barclay writes concerning John 9:1-5

"This is the only miracle in the gospels in which the sufferer is said to have been afflicted from his birth. In Acts we twice hear of people who had been helpless from their birth (the lame man and the Beautiful Gate of the Temple in Acts 3:2, and the cripple at Lystra in Acts 14:8), but this is the only man in the gospel story who had been so afflicted. He must have been a well-known character, for the disciples knew all about him.

"When they say him, they used the opportunity to put to Jesus a problem with which Jewish thought had always been deeply concerned, and which is still a problem. The Jews connected suffering and sin. They worked on the assumption that wherever there was suffering, somewhere there was sin. So they asked Jesus their question. 'This man,' they said, 'is blind. Is his blindness due to his own sin, or to the sin of his parents?'

"How could the blindness possible be due to his own sin, when he had been blind from his birth? [italics original] To that question the Jewish theologians gave two answers.

"(i) Some of them had the strange notion of prenatal sin. They actually believed that a man could begin to sin while still in his mother's womb. In the imaginary conversations between Antoninus and Rabbi Judah the Patriarch, Antoninus asks: 'From what time does the evil influence bear sway over a man, from the formation of the embryo in the womb or from the moment of birth?' The Rabbie first answered: 'From the formation of the embryo.' Antoninus disagreed and convinced Judah by his arguments, for Judah admitted that, if the evil impulse began with the formation of the embryo, then the child would kick in the womb and break its way out. Judah found a text to support this view. He took the saying in Genesis 4:7: 'Sin is couching at the door.' And he put the meaning into it that sin awaited man at the door of the womb, as soon as he was born. But the argument does show us that the idea of pre-natal sin was known.

"(ii) In the time of Jesus the Jews believed in the pre-existence of the soul. They really got that idea from Plato and the Greeks. They believed that all souls existed before the creation of the work in the garden of Eden, or that they were in the seventh heaven, or in a certain chamber, waiting to enter into a body. The Greeks had believed that such souls were good, and that it was the entry into the body which contaminated them; but there were certain Jews who believed that these souls were already good and bad. The writer of The Book of Wisdom says [most likely Philo, but Barclay doesn't ellaborate]: 'Now I was a child good by nature, and a good soul fell to my lot' (Wisdom 8:19).
"In the time of Jesus certain Jews did believe that a man's afllication, even if it be from birth, might come from sin that he had committed before he was born. It is a strange idea, and it may seem to us almost fantastic; but at its heart lies the idea of a sin-infected universe.

"The alternative was that the man's afflication was due to the sin of his parents. The idea that children inherit the consequences of their parents' sin is woven into the thought of the Old Testament. 'I the Lord your God am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children to the third and the fourth generation.' (Exodus 20:5: cp. Exodus 34:7, Numbers 14:18). Of the wicked man the psalmist says: 'May the iniquity of his fathers be remembered before the Lord; and let not the sin of his mother be blotted out' (Pslam 109;14). Isaiah talks about their iniquities and the 'iniquities of their fathers,' and goes on to say: 'I will measure into their bosom payment for their former doings' (Isaiah 65:6, 7). One of the keynotes of the Old Testament is that the sins of the fathers are always visited upon the children. It must never be forgotten that no man lives to himself and no man dies to himself. When a man sins, he sets in motion a train of consequences which has no end."*

*William Barclay, The Gospel of John, Volume 2, pp. 37-39

Preexistence - John 3 (Greg Thornberg)

22 After this, Jesus and his disciples went out into the Judean countryside, where he spent some time with them, and baptized. 23 Now John also was baptizing at Aenon near Salim, because there was plenty of water, and people were constantly coming to be baptized. 24 (This was before John was put in prison.) 25 An argument developed between some of John's disciples and a certain Jew over the matter of ceremonial washing. 26 They came to John and said to him, "Rabbi, that man who was with you on the other side of the Jordan—the one you testified about—well, he is baptizing, and everyone is going to him." 27 To this John replied, "A man can receive only what is given him from heaven. 28 You yourselves can testify that I said, 'I am not the Christ but am sent ahead of him.' 29 The bride belongs to the bridegroom. The friend who attends the bridegroom waits and listens for him, and is full of joy when he hears the bridegroom's voice. That joy is mine, and it is now complete. 30 He must become greater; I must become less.

31 "The one who comes from above is above all; the one who is from the earth belongs to the earth, and speaks as one from the earth. The one who comes from heaven is above all. 32 He testifies to what he has seen and heard, but no one accepts his testimony. 33 The man who has accepted it has certified that God is truthful. 34 For the one whom God has sent speaks the words of God, for God gives the Spirit without limit. 35 The Father loves the Son and has placed everything in his hands. 36 Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life, but whoever rejects the Son will not see life, for God's wrath remains on him."
(John 3:22-36, italics mine)

This passage is clear from a number of directions that Jesus is from above and John the Baptist is from below. The implication is that all of us are from below and Christ alone is from above (a specific point made later on in John 8). After reviewing this passage a number of times I was able to compile this short list of ways we can demonstrate that Jesus is literally from heaven and we are literally from the earth.

(1) The word “above” is used synonymously with the location of “heaven” in verse 31. Given this synonymous usage, it seems more likely that “above” is a literal location than a spiritual state of being. Jesus literally came from above.

(2) “Above” is contrasted with the literal location of “the earth”, which is another indicator that it is a literal place and not just a spiritual state. If “above” were contrasted with “the world” (a word used frequently to imply a spiritual state of the unsaved) the argument for a spiritual state would be possible but still not necessary. The fact that the Greek word ges ("gais") for earth is used, clearly demonstrates a physical literal location is intended by John.

(3) Jesus “comes from” heaven in verse 31. It is more likely that Jesus “came from” a literal location than from a spiritual state.

(4) John includes himself as one who only has an earthly perspective because he is one who is “from the earth.” This is one of John’s reasons for why Jesus’ ministry must increase over his own. Remember that John’s explaining why his ministry must decrease. That John is “from the earth” and not “from above” is one of those reasons. If John were thinking of just a spiritual state rather than a literal location, this passage wouldn’t make sense in the best possible way (it may not make any sense for that matter). John’s contrast with Jesus is more literal than just a spiritual sense—Jesus is literally “from above” and John is “from the earth” below. John is not saying that Jesus is spiritual and he is not. Such a meaning doesn’t make the best sense of the context.

(5) Jesus is “from above” and speaks about what he has “seen” and “heard” from heaven (John 3:31). It is easier to think that Jesus was a witness to things in a literal location. This would explain why his testimony is so important. The concept of being a been-there, touched-that, seen-that eyewitness is a major theme in the Gospel of John as it is in his epistles. It is more likely that Jesus is a literal eyewitness of things above, an a major theme in John. In John 8:38 Jesus says

"I am telling you what I have seen in the Father's presence..."
(John 8:38, italics mine)

(6) “The one who is from above is over all things,” including John. Again, this is a list of reasons John gives why his ministry must decrease in contract the Jesus' ministry. John is clearly implying that Jesus is from above and John is from below by saying this. John’s reason for why his ministry must decrease is that Jesus “is above all” things including John who is “from the earth”. It is hard to think that under the list of reasons why John’s ministry must decrease that John would exclude himself from the list of those things “from the earth.” Again a literal location makes the best possible sense of this passage.