Bible Heaven/Bible Heaven.iso/robertsn/rwp-joh/joh9.rwp

Text File | 1993-03-13 | 25KB | 459 lines

9:1 {As he passed by} (\paragôn\). Present active participle of
\paragô\, old verb to go along, by, or past (#Mt 20:30|). Only
example in this Gospel, but in #1Jo 2:8,17|. The day was after
the stirring scenes in chapter 8, but not at the feast of
dedication as Westcott argues. That comes three months later
(#10:22|). {From his birth} (\ek genetês\). Ablative case with
\ek\ of old word from \genô, ginomai\. Here alone in N.T., but
the phrase \tuphlos ek genetês\ is common in Greek writers.
Probably a well-known character with his stand as a beggar (verse
#5|).

9:2 {Who did sin?} (\tis hêmarten;\). Second aorist active
indicative of \hamartanô\. See #Ac 3:2; 14:8| for two examples of
lameness from birth. Blindness is common in the Orient and Jesus
healed many cases (cf. #Mr 8:23; 10:46|) and mentions this fact
as one of the marks of the Messiah in the message to the Baptist
(#Mt 11:5|). This is the only example of congenital blindness
healed. It is not clear that the disciples expected Jesus to heal
this case. They are puzzled by the Jewish notion that sickness
was a penalty for sin. The Book of Job had shown that this was
not always the case and Jesus shows it also (#Lu 13:1-5|). If
this man was guilty, it was due to prenatal sin on his part, a
curious notion surely. The other alternative charged it upon his
parents. That is sometimes true (#Ex 20:5|, etc.), but by no
means always. The rabbinical casuists loved to split hairs on
this problem. Ezekiel (#Eze 18:20|) says: "The soul that sinneth
it shall die" (individual responsibility for sin committed).
There is something in heredity, but not everything. {That he
should be born blind} (\hina tuphlos gennêthêi\). Probably
consecutive (or sub-final) use of \hina\ with first aorist
passive subjunctive of \gennaô\.

9:3 {But that the works of God should be made manifest in him}
(\all' hina phanerôthêi ta erga tou theou en autôi\). Jesus
denies both alternatives, and puts God's purpose (\all' hina\
with first aorist subjunctive of \phaneroô\) as the true
solution. It is sometimes true that disease is the result of
personal sin as in the man in #5:14| and parents can hand on the
effects of sin to the third and fourth generations, but there are
cases free from blame like this. There is comfort for many
sufferers in the words of Jesus here.

9:4 {We must work the works of him that sent me} (\hêmas dei
ergazesthai ta erga tou pempsantos me\). This is undoubtedly the
correct text (supported by the Neutral and Western classes) and
not \eme\ (I) and \me\ (me) of the Syrian class nor \hêmas\ (we)
and \hêmas\ (us) of the Alexandrian class. Jesus associates us
with him in the task committed to him by the Father. Bernard
argues vigorously, but vainly, for \eme\ me. We are not able to
fathom the depth of the necessity (\dei\) here involved in each
life as in this poor blind man and in each of us. {While it is
day} (\heôs hêmera estin\). This clause gives the note of urgency
upon us all. {The night cometh} (\erchetai nux\). "Night is
coming on," and rapidly. Night was coming for Jesus (#7:33|) and
for each of us. Cf. #11:9; 12:35|. Even electric lights do not
turn night into day. \Heôs\ with the present indicative
(#21:22f.|) means "while," not until as in #13:38|.

9:5 {When I am in the world} (\hotan en tôi kosmôi ô\).
Indefinite relative clause with \hotan\ and present active
subjunctive \ô\, "whenever I am in the world." The Latin Vulgate
renders here \hotan\ by _quamdiu_ so long as or while as if it
were \heôs\. But clearly Jesus here refers to the historic
Incarnation (#17:11|) and to any previous visitations in the time
of the patriarchs, prophets, etc. Jesus as God's Son is always
the Light of the World (#1:4,10; 8:12|), but here the reference
is limited to his manifestation "in the world." {I am the light
of the world} (\phôs eimi tou kosmou\). The absence of the
definite article (\to phôs\ in #8:12|) is to be noted (Westcott).
Literally, "I am light to the world, whenever I am in the world."
"The display of the character varies with the occasion"
(Westcott).

9:6 {He spat on the ground} (\eptusen chamai\). First aorist
active indicative of the old verb \ptuô\ for which see #Mr 7:33|.
\Chamai\ is an old adverb either in the dative or locative (sense
suits locative), in N.T. only here and #Joh 18:6|. Jesus was not
asked to cure this man. The curative effects of saliva are held
in many places. The Jews held saliva efficacious for eye-trouble,
but it was forbidden on the Sabbath. "That Jesus supposed some
virtue lay in the application of the clay is contradicted by the
fact that in other cases of blindness He did not use it" (Dods).
Cf. #Mr 8:23|. Why he here accommodated himself to current belief
we do not know unless it was to encourage the man to believe. {He
made clay} (\epoiêsen pêlon\). Only use of \pêlos\, old word for
clay, in N.T. in this chapter and #Ro 9:21|. The kneading of the
clay and spittle added another offence against the Sabbath rules
of the rabbis. {Anointed his eyes with the clay} (\epechrisen
autou ton pêlon epi tous ophthalmous\). First aorist active
indicative of \epichriô\, old verb, to spread on, anoint, here
only and verse #11| in N.T. "He spread the clay upon his eyes." B
C read \epethêken\ (first aorist active indicative of
\epitithêmi\, to put on).

9:7 {Wash} (\nipsai\). First aorist middle imperative second
person singular of \niptô\, later form of \nizô\, to wash,
especially parts of the body. Certainly bathing the eyes is good
for eye trouble, and yet we are not to infer that the cure was
due to the use of the clay or to the washing. {In the pool of
Siloam} (\eis tên kolumbêthran tou Silôam\). The word
\kolumbêthra\ (from \kolumbaô\, to swim) is a common word for
swimming-pool, in N.T. only here and #5:2,7|. The name _Siloam_
is Hebrew (#Isa 8:6|) and means "sent" (\apestalmenos\, perfect
passive participle of \apostellô\). It was situated south of the
temple area and was apparently connected by a subterranean tunnel
with the Virgin's Well (#5:2|) according to Bernard. The water
was conducted artificially to the pool of Siloam. {Washed}
(\enipsato\). First aorist direct middle (cf. \nipsai\),
apparently bathing and not merely washing his eyes. {Came seeing}
(\êlthen blepôn\). Jesus had healed him. He was tested by the
demand to bathe his eyes.

9:8 {Neighbours} (\geitones\). From \gê\ (land), of the same
land, old word. See #Lu 14:2|. {Saw him} (\theôrountes\). Present
active participle of \theôreô\, who used to observe him.
{Aforetime} (\to proteron\). Adverbial accusative, "the former
time," formerly. {That he was a beggar} (\hoti prosaitês ên\).
See #4:19; 12:19| for declarative \hoti\ after \theôreô\. But it
is entirely possible that \hoti\ here is "because" (Westcott).
\Prosaitês\ is a late word for beggar, in N.T. only here and #Mr
10:46|. It is from \prosaiteô\, to ask in addition (see
\prosaitôn\ below), a thing that beggars know how to do. {Is not
this he that sat and begged?} (\Ouch houtos estin ho kathêmenos
kai prosaitôn;\). He had his regular place and was a familiar
figure. But now his eyes are wide open.

9:9 {Nay but he is like him} (\Ouchi, alla homoios autôi estin\).
Vigorous denial (\ouchi\) and mere similarity suggested.
Associative instrumental case \autoi\ after \homoios\. The crowd
is divided. {He said} (\ekeinos elegen\). Emphatic demonstrative
(as in #11,12,25,36|), "That one spake up." He knew.

9:10 {How then were thine eyes opened?} (\Pôs oun êneôichthêsan
sou hoi ophthalmoi;\). Natural and logical (\oun\) question.
First aorist passive indicative (triple augment) of \anoigô\.
These neighbours admit the fact and want the manner ("how") of
the cure made clear.

9:11 {The man that is called Jesus} (\ho anthrôpos ho legomenos
Iêsous\). He does not yet know Jesus as the Messiah the Son of
God (#9:36|). {I received sight} (\aneblepsa\). First aorist
active indicative of \anablepô\, old verb to see again, to
recover sight, not strictly true of this man who had never seen.
He got back sight that he had never had. Originally the verb
means to look up (#Mt 14:19|).

9:12 {Where is he?} (\Pou estin ekeinos;\). The very question of
#7:11|.

9:13 {They bring him} (\agousin auton\). Vivid dramatic present
active of \agô\. These neighbours bring him. {To the Pharisees}
(\pros tous Pharisaious\). The accepted professional teachers who
posed as knowing everything. The scribes were usually Pharisees.
{Him that aforetime was blind} (\ton pote tuphlon\). Simply, "the
once blind man."

9:14 {Now it was the sabbath} (\ên de sabbaton\). Literally, "Now
it was a sabbath" (no article). To the Pharisees this fact was a
far more important matter than whether or how the thing was done.
See Volumes I and II for discussions of the minute Sabbath
regulations of the rabbis.

9:15 {Again} (\palin\). Besides the questioning of the neighbours
(verses #8,9|). {Therefore} (\oun\). Since he has been brought to
the Pharisees who must make a show of wisdom. {Also asked him}
(\êrôtôn auton kai\). Inchoative imperfect active of \erôtaô\,
"began also to question him." {How he received his sight} (\pôs
aneblepsen\). No denial as yet of the fact, only interest in the
"how." {He put} (\epethêken\). Genuine here, but see verse #6|.
{And lo see} (\kai blepô\). That is the overwhelming fact.

9:16 {Because he keepeth not the sabbath} (\hoti to sabbaton ou
têrei\). This is reason (causal \hoti\) enough. He violates our
rules about the Sabbath and therefore is a Sabbath-breaker as
charged when here before (#5:10,16,18|). Hence he is not "from
God" (\para theou\). So some. {How can a man that is a sinner do
such signs?} (\Pôs dunatai anthrôpos hamartôlos toiauta sêmeia
poiein;\). This was the argument of Nicodemus, himself a Pharisee
and one of the Sanhedrin, long ago (#3:2|). It was a conundrum
for the Pharisees. No wonder there was "a division" (\schisma\,
schism, split, from \schizô\) as in #7:43; 10:19|.

9:17 {Unto the blind man again} (\tôi tuphlôi palin\). The
doctors disagree and they ask the patient whose story they had
already heard (verse #15|). {In that he opened thine eyes} (\hoti
êneôixen sou tous ophthalmous\). Causal use of \hoti\ and triple
augment in the first aorist active indicative of \anoigô\. They
offer the excuse that the man's experience particularly qualified
him to explain the "how," overlooking the fact he had already
told his story and also trying to conceal their own hopeless
division of opinion. {He is a prophet} (\prophêtês estin\). The
man will go that far anyhow.

9:18 {The Jews} (\hoi Ioudaioi\). Probably the incredulous and
hostile section of the Pharisees in verse #16| (cf. #5:10|). {Did
not believe} (\ouk episteusan\). The facts told by the man, "that
he had been blind and had received his sight" (\hoti ên tuphlos
kai aneblepsen\), conflicted with their theological views of God
and the Sabbath. So they refused belief "until they called the
parents" (\heôs hotou ephônêsan tous goneis\). Usual construction
of \heôs hotou\ ( = until which time, like \heôs\ alone) with
aorist active indicative of \phôneô\, old verb from \phônê\
(voice, sound). They called out loud for his parents to throw
light on this grave problem to cover up their own stupidity.

9:19 {Is this your son who ye say was born blind? how doth he now
see?} (\Houtos estin ho huios humôn, hon humeis lêgete hoti
tuphlos egennêthê; pôs oun blepei arti;\). It was shrewdly put
with three questions in one in order to confuse the parents if
possible and give the hostile Pharisees a handle.

9:20 {We know that this is our son, and that he was born blind}
(\Oidamen hoti houtos estin ho huios hêmôn kai hoti tuphlos
egennêthê\). These two questions the parents answer clearly and
thus cut the ground from under the disbelief of these Pharisees
as to the fact of the cure (verse #18|). So these Pharisees made
a failure here.

9:21 {But how he now seeth we know not} (\pôs de nun blepei ouk
oidamen\). Concerning the third question they profess ignorance
both as to the "how" (\pôs\) and the "who" (\tis\). {Opened}
(\ênoixen\). First aorist active indicative with single augment
of \anoigô\, same form as \êneôixen\ (triple augment) in verse
#17|. They were not witnesses of the cure and had the story only
from the son as the Pharisees had. {He is of age} (\hêlikian
echei\). "He has maturity of age." He is an adult. A regular
classical phrase in Plato, etc. The parents were wholly right and
within their rights.

9:22 {Because they feared the Jews} (\hoti ephobounto tous
Ioudaious\). Imperfect middle, a continuing fear and not without
reason. See already the whispers about Jesus because of fear of
the Jews (#7:13|). {Had agreed already} (\êdê sunetetheinto\).
Past perfect middle of \suntithêmi\, to put together, to form a
compact (#7:32,47-49|). {If any man should confess him to be
Christ} (\ean tis auton homologêsêi Christon\). Condition of
third class with \ean\ and first aorist active subjunctive of
\homologeô\ and predicate accusative \Christon\. Jesus had made
confession of himself before men the test of discipleship and
denial the disproof (#Mt 10:32; Lu 12:8|). We know that many of
the rulers nominally believed on Jesus (#12:42|) and yet "did not
confess him because of the Pharisees" (\alla dia tous Pharisaious
ouch hômologoun\), for the very reason given here, "that they
might not be put out of the synagogue" (\hina mê aposunagôgoi
genôntai\). Small wonder then that here the parents cowered a
bit. {That he should be put out of the synagogue} (\hina
aposunagôgos genêtai\). Sub-final use of \hina\ with second
aorist middle subjunctive of \ginomai\. \Aposunagôgos\ (\apo\ and
\sunagôgê\) is found in N.T. only here and #12:42; 16:2|. A
purely Jewish word naturally. There were three kinds of
excommunication (for thirty days, for thirty more, indefinitely).

9:23 {Therefore} (\dia touto\). "For this reason." Reason enough
for due caution.

9:24 {A second time} (\ek deuterou\). He had given the Pharisees
the facts the first time (#9:15|). It was really the third time
(see \palin\ in #9:17|). Now it was like a joke unless the
Pharisees meant to imply that his previous story was untrue.
{Give glory to God} (\dos doxan tôi theôi\). Second aorist active
imperative of \didômi\ (cf. \sches, hes\). This phrase does not
mean gratitude to God as in #Lu 17:18|. It is rather an
adjuration to speak the truth (#Jos 7:19; 1Sa 6:5|) as if he had
not done it before. Augustine says: "_Quid est Da gloriam Deo?
Nega quod accepisti._" Is a sinner (\hamartôlos estin\). They can
no longer deny the fact of the cure since the testimony of the
parents (#9:19|) and now wish the man to admit that he was lying
in saying that Jesus healed him. He must accept their
ecclesiastical authority as proving that Jesus had nothing to do
with the cure since Jesus is a sinner. They wish to decide the
fact by logic and authority like all persecutors through the
ages. Recall the Pharisaic distinction between \dikaios\
(righteous) and \hamartôlos\ (sinner).

9:25 {One thing I know} (\hen oida\). This man is keen and quick
and refuses to fall into the trap set for him. He passes by their
quibbling about Jesus being a "sinner" (\hamartôlos\) and clings
to the one fact of his own experience. {Whereas I was blind, now
I see} (\tuphlos ôn arti blepô\). Literally, "Being blind I now
see." The present active participle \ôn\ of \eimi\ by implication
in contrast with \arti\ (just now, at this moment) points to
previous and so past time. It must be borne in mind that the man
did not at this stage know who Jesus was and so had not yet taken
him as Saviour (#9:36-38|).

9:26 {What did he do to thee?} (\Ti epoiêsen soi;\). Another
cross-examination, now admitting that Jesus opened his eyes and
wishing again (#9:15,17|) to know "how."

9:27 {I told you even now} (\eipon humin êdê\). In verses
#15,17,25|. {Would ye also become his disciples?} (\Mê kai humeis
thelete autou mathêtai genesthai;\). Negative answer formally
expected, but the keenest irony in this gibe. Clearly the healed
man knew from the use of "also" (\kai\) that Jesus had some
"disciples" (\mathêtai\, predicate nominative with the infinitive
\genesthai\) and that the Pharisees knew that fact. "Do ye also
(like the Galilean mob) wish, etc." See #7:45-52|. It cut to the
bone.

9:28 {They reviled him} (\eloidorêsan auton\). First aorist
active indicative of \loidoreô\, old verb from \loidoros\
(reviler, #1Co 5:11|), in N.T. only here, #Ac 23:4; 1Co 4:12; 1Pe
2:23|. {Thou art his disciple} (\su mathêtês ei ekeinou\).
Probably a fling in \ekeinou\ (of that fellow). He had called him
a prophet (#9:17|) and became a joyful follower later
(#9:36-38|). {But we are disciples of Moses} (\hêmeis de tou
Môuseôs esmen mathêtai\). This they said with proud scorn of the
healed beggar. All orthodox rabbis so claimed.

9:29 {We know that God hath spoken unto Moses} (\hêmeis oidamen
hoti Môusei lelalêken ho theos\). Perfect active indicative of
\laleô\, so still on record. See #Ex 33:11|. For \laleô\ used of
God speaking see #Heb 1:1|. They are proud to be disciples of
Moses. {But as for this man, we do not know whence he is}
(\touton de ouk oidamen pothen estin\). "This fellow" they mean
by "\touton\" in emphatic position, we do not even know whence he
is. Some of the people did (#7:27|), but in the higher sense none
of the Jews knew (#8:14|). These Pharisees neither knew nor
cared.

9:30 {Why, herein is the marvel} (\en toutôi gar to thaumaston
estin\). This use of \gar\ (\ge + ara\, accordingly indeed) to
bring out an affirmation from the previous words is common
enough. "Why in this very point is the wonder" (\thaumaston\, old
verbal adjective from \thaumazô\ as in #Mt 21:42|). The man is
angry now and quick in his insight and reply. You confess your
ignorance of whence he is, ye who know everything, "and yet
(adversative use of \kai\ again) he opened my eyes" (\kai ênoixen
mou tous ophthalmous\). That stubborn fact stands.

9:31 {God does not hear sinners} (\ho theos hamartôlôn ouk
akouei\). Note genitive case with \akouei\. This was the argument
of the Pharisees in #9:16|. It is frequent in the O.T. (#Job
27:9; Ps 66:18; Isa 1:15; 59:2|, etc.). The conclusion is
inevitable from this premise. Jesus is not \hamartôlos\. {If any
man be a worshipper of God} (\ean tis theosebês êi\). Condition
of third class with \ean\ and present active subjunctive \êi\.
\Theosebês\ (\theos\, God, \sebomai\, to worship) is an old
compound adjective, here alone in the N.T. {And do his will}
(\kai to thelêma autou poiei\). Same condition with present
active subjunctive of \poieô\, "keep on doing his will."

9:32 {Since the world began} (\ek tou aiônos\). Literally, "from
the age," "from of old." Elsewhere in the N.T. we have \apo tou
aiônos\ or \ap 'aiônos\ (#Lu 1:70; Ac 3:31; 15:18|) as is common
in the LXX. {Of a man born blind} (\tuphlou gegennêmenou\).
Perfect passive participle of \gennaô\. This is the chief point
and the man will not let it be overlooked, almost rubs it in, in
fact. It was congenital blindness.

9:33 {If this man were not from God} (\ei mê ên houtos para
theou\). Negative condition of second class with imperfect
indicative. Assuming that Jesus is not "from God" (\para theou\)
as some argued in #9:16|, "he could do nothing" (\ouk êdunato
poiein ouden\). Conclusion of the second-class condition with
imperfect indicative (double augment in \êdunato\) without \an\
as is usual in conditions of possibility, propriety, obligation
(Robertson, _Grammar_, pp. 920,1014). The man has scored with
terrific power in his use of Scripture and logic.

9:34 {Thou wast altogether born in sin} (\en hamartiais su
egennêthês holos\). First aorist passive indicative of \gennaô\.
"In sins thou wast begotten (or born) all of thee." \Holos\ is
predicate nominative and teaches total depravity in this case
beyond controversy, the Pharisees being judges. {And dost thou
teach us?} (\kai su didaskeis hêmas;\). The audacity of it all.
Note emphasis on \su\ (thou). It was insufferable. He had not
only taught the rabbis, but had utterly routed them in argument.
{And they cast him out} (\kai exebalon auton exô\). Effective
second aorist active indicative of \ekballô\ intensified by the
addition of \exô\. Probably not yet expulsion from the synagogue
(#9:22|) which required a formal meeting of the Sanhedrin, but
certainly forcible driving of the gifted upstart from their
presence. See #6:37| for another use of \ekballô exô\ besides
#9:35|.

9:35 {Finding him} (\heurôn auton\). Second aorist active
participle of \heuriskô\, after search because of what he had
heard (\êkousen\). {Dost thou believe on the Son of God?} (\Su
pisteueis eis ton huion tou theou;\). So A L Theta and most
versions, but Aleph B D W Syr-sin read \tou anthrôpou\ (the Son
of Man), almost certainly correct. In either case it is a
distinct Messianic claim quite beyond the range of this man's
limited knowledge, keen as he is.

9:36 {And who is he, Lord, that I may believe on him?} (\Kai tis
estin, kurie;\). The initial \kai\ (and) is common (#Mr 10:26; Lu
10:29; 18:26|). Probably by \kurie\ he means only "Sir." It
usually comes at the beginning of the sentence, not at the end as
here and verse #38|. {That I may believe on him} (\hina pisteusô
eis auton\). Ellipsis to be supplied before this final clause. He
catches up the words of Jesus in the preceding verse, though he
does not yet know who the Son of Man (or Son of God) is, but he
trusts Jesus.

9:37 {Thou hast both seen him} (\kai heôrakas auton\). Perfect
active indicative (double reduplication) of \horaô\. Since his
eyes were opened. {And he it is that speaketh with thee} (\kai ho
lalôn meta sou ekeinos estin\). "And the one speaking with thee
is that man." See #19:35| for \ekeinos\ used of the speaker. In
#4:26| Jesus reveals himself in like manner to the Samaritan
woman as Messiah while here as the Son of Man (or the Son of
God).

9:38 {Lord, I believe} (\Pisteuô, kurie\). \Kurie\ here = Lord
(reverence, no longer respect as in #36|). A short creed, but to
the point. {And he worshipped him} (\kai prosekunêsen autôi\).
Ingressive first aorist active indicative of \proskuneô\, old
verb to fall down in reverence, to worship. Sometimes of men (#Mt
18:26|). In John (see #4:20|) this verb "is always used to
express divine worship" (Bernard). It is tragic to hear men today
deny that Jesus should be worshipped. He accepted worship from
this new convert as he later did from Thomas who called him "God"
(#Joh 20:28|). Peter (#Ac 10:25f.|) refused worship from
Cornelius as Paul and Barnabas did at Lystra (#Ac 14:18|), but
Jesus made no protest here.

9:39 {For judgement} (\eis krima\). The Father had sent the Son
for this purpose (#3:17|). This world (\kosmos\) is not the home
of Jesus. The \krima\ (judgement), a word nowhere else in John,
is the result of the \krisis\ (sifting) from \krinô\, to
separate. The Father has turned over this process of sifting
(\krisis\) to the Son (#5:22|). He is engaged in that very work
by this miracle. {They which see not} (\hoi mê blepontes\). The
spiritually blind as well as the physically blind (#Lu 4:18; Isa
42:18|). Purpose clause with \hina\ and present active
subjunctive \blepôsin\ (may keep on seeing). This man now sees
physically and spiritually. {And that they which see may become
blind} (\kai hoi blepontes tuphloi genôntai\). Another part of
God's purpose, seen in #Mt 11:25; Lu 10:21|, is the curse on
those who blaspheme and reject the Son. Note ingressive aorist
middle subjunctive of \ginomai\ and predicate nominative. \Hoi
blepontes\ are those who profess to see like these Pharisees, but
are really blind. Blind guides they were (#Mt 23:16|). Complacent
satisfaction with their dim light.

9:40 {Are we also blind?} (\Mê kai hêmeis tuphloi esmen;\).
Negative answer expected (\mê\) and yet these Pharisees who
overheard the words of Jesus to the new convert vaguely suspected
that Jesus was referring to them by the last clause. Up in
Galilee Jesus had called the Pharisees blind guides who stumble
into the pit (#Mt 15:14|).

9:41 {If ye were blind} (\ei tuphloi ête\). Condition of second
class with imperfect indicative in the protasis. The old word
\tuphlos\ is from \tuphô\, to raise a smoke, to blind by smoke
(literally and metaphorically). Here, of course, it is moral
blindness. If the Pharisees were born morally blind, they would,
like idiots, be without responsibility. {Ye would not have sin}
(\ouk an eichete hamartian\). Regular form for conclusion of
second-class condition, \an\ with imperfect. {But now ye say}
(\nun de legete\). In contrast to the previous condition. See
like contrast in #15:22,24|. They arrogantly asserted superior
knowledge. {We see} (\blepomen\). The ignorant mob do not
(#7:49|). It is sin against light and is hopeless (#Mr 3:29; Mt
12:31f.|). "Ye are witnesses against yourselves" (\martureite
heautois\, #Mt 23:31|).