- Instructions for Contributors
- Index by Authors
- Index by Biblical Books
- Font Instructions
- Vol 20 (2007)
- Vol 19 (2006)
- Vol 18 (2005)
- Vol 17 (2004)
- Vol 16 (2003)
- Vol 15 (2002)
- Vol 14 (2001)
- Vol 13 (2000)
- Vol 12 (1999)
- Vol 11 (1998)
- Vol 10 (1997)
- Vol 9 (1996)
- Vol 8 (1995)
- Vol 7 (1994)
Home
>
Filología Neotestamentaria
>
Vol 16 (2003)
>
J. Duncan - M. Derrett, «The True Meaning Of Jn 9, 3-4», Vol. 16 (2003) 103-106
In Jn 9:5 the relative negative coupled with an ellipsis before i3na reveal that Jesus did not deny hereditary sin or reincarnation in a specific test case.
See more by the same author
«Ἔνοχος (Mt 5, 21-22) and the Jurisprudence of Heaven.» 2006 89-97 
«Jewish Law and Johaninne Vocabulary: a)lhqh&j at Jn 5,31-32; 7,18; 8,13. 17.» 2004 89-98
«The mission originates in captivation: a(lieu/w, pia/zw, su/rw, e3lkw. (JN 21:6-11)» 2002 95-109
« Palin: The Ass Again (Mk 11,3d)» 2001 121-130
«Jewish Law and Johaninne Vocabulary: a)lhqh&j at Jn 5,31-32; 7,18; 8,13. 17.» 2004 89-98
«The mission originates in captivation: a(lieu/w, pia/zw, su/rw, e3lkw. (JN 21:6-11)» 2002 95-109
« Palin: The Ass Again (Mk 11,3d)» 2001 121-130

103
THE TRUE MEANING OF JN 9, 3-4
J. DUNCAN M. DERRET
In Jn 9:5 the relative negative coupled with an ellipsis before ἵνα reveal
that Jesus did not deny hereditary sin or reincarnation in a specific “test
case”.
1. Introduction
In this case I do not turn to the Jewish background to explain a dif-
ficult passage, but to points of Greek syntax, to a superstition which John
knew, and to an early Buddhist adaptation of the Johannine passage.
Why did the disciples raise the question why a man was blind from birth,
and what does Jesús’ answer really mean?
The words are so punctuated:
ἀπεκρίθη Ἰησοῦς, οὔτε οὗτος ἥμαρτεν οὔτε οἱ γονεῖς αὐτοῦ, ἀλλ᾿
φανερωθῇ τὰ ἔργα τοῦ θεοῦ ἐν αὐτῷ. ἡμᾶς δεῖ ἐργάζεσθαι τὰ ἔργα τοῦ
πέµψαντός με ἕως ἡμέρα ἐστίν...
All agree, and I too used to agree, that Jesus denied that the Man Born
Blind owed his congenital blindness to any sin on the part of his parents,
or any sin of his own in a previous life. On the contrary his blindness
was evidence of the divine providence, whose programme has two parts:
(1) divine miracles include cures even of congenital diseases, and (2) by
enlightening that man. physically - with its consequences - Jesus will pro-
vide, at one remove, for the enlightening of others after his own miracles
cease. Ps 146,8 and Is 35,5 are not terminated by Mt 11,5.
The man’s previous history has been summed up in the Pharisees’
words (9,34b), “thou wast entirely born in sin”. His condition at birth was
contaminated by some sin. His testimony was inadmissible by Jewish law
on account of his way of life (9,8)1. Yet he sees Christ (9,37), converses
with him (which the Pharisees did not), and believes (9,38) and worships
Jesus. The incident, says Jesus, is a crisis-incident. Those unconditioned
by worldly sight are capable of truly seeing; those who rely on worldly
sight are to be redefined as “blind”.
J.D.M. Derrett, “‘Dost thou teach us? (Jn 9,34c)’”, Downside Review 117 (1998) 183-
1
94.
Filología Neotestamentaria - Vol. XVI - 2003, pp. 103-106
Facultad de Filosofía y Letras - Universidad de Córdoba (España)


RSS