John 9 16

John 9:16 kjv

Therefore said some of the Pharisees, This man is not of God, because he keepeth not the sabbath day. Others said, How can a man that is a sinner do such miracles? And there was a division among them.

John 9:16 nkjv

Therefore some of the Pharisees said, "This Man is not from God, because He does not keep the Sabbath." Others said, "How can a man who is a sinner do such signs?" And there was a division among them.

John 9:16 niv

Some of the Pharisees said, "This man is not from God, for he does not keep the Sabbath." But others asked, "How can a sinner perform such signs?" So they were divided.

John 9:16 esv

Some of the Pharisees said, "This man is not from God, for he does not keep the Sabbath." But others said, "How can a man who is a sinner do such signs?" And there was a division among them.

John 9:16 nlt

Some of the Pharisees said, "This man Jesus is not from God, for he is working on the Sabbath." Others said, "But how could an ordinary sinner do such miraculous signs?" So there was a deep division of opinion among them.

John 9 verses

John 9 16 Meaning

John 9:16 describes the immediate aftermath of Jesus healing a man born blind on the Sabbath, revealing a profound division among the Jewish religious leaders, specifically the Pharisees. Some vehemently declared that Jesus could not be from God because He apparently violated their interpretation of the Sabbath law. Others, however, acknowledged the undeniable miracle He performed and questioned how a sinner could possibly do such signs, suggesting a divine source for His power. This verse encapsulates the core tension of the narrative: the clash between strict legalism and the clear manifestation of divine power, leading to a split in belief even among those expected to recognize God's work.

John 9 16 Context

John chapter 9 narrates a powerful healing miracle where Jesus gives sight to a man born blind since birth. This act, performed on the Sabbath day (John 9:14), ignites a severe controversy among the Jewish authorities. Rather than celebrating the divine compassion and power demonstrated, the Pharisees prioritize their rigid interpretation of the Sabbath law. They questioned the formerly blind man repeatedly and summoned his parents, seeking to discredit the miracle and accuse Jesus. Verse 16 highlights the immediate impact of this event within their inner council: it did not lead to a unanimous condemnation, but to a palpable "division" among them, foreshadowing further discord. Historically, the Pharisees were a powerful religious sect dedicated to the strict observance of the Mosaic Law and a vast body of oral traditions. Their adherence to these traditions sometimes superseded the compassionate spirit of God's Law. This episode directly challenges their legalistic worldview and their understanding of who truly embodies divine authority, igniting polemics against their rigid traditions and self-righteousness.

John 9 16 Word analysis

• Therefore (οὖν, oun): Connects this verse as a consequence or reaction to the healing on the Sabbath mentioned in the preceding verses. It indicates a conclusion drawn from the immediate action of Jesus.
• some of the Pharisees (τινὲς ἐκ τῶν Φαρισαίων, tines ek tōn Pharisaiōn): Reveals a critical point: the judgment against Jesus was not unanimous, even within the most outwardly zealous religious group. This shows a splintering, indicating varying perspectives or convictions, and challenges the monolithic image of the opposition to Jesus. The Pharisees were deeply influential and dedicated to the Law, yet even they could not agree on Jesus's nature.
• were saying (ἔλεγον, elegon): The imperfect tense signifies an ongoing, repeated, or habitual discussion rather than a single, resolved statement. It suggests an active, continuous debate among them.
• This Man (οὗτος, houtos): A slightly dismissive, formal, or even contemptuous reference to Jesus, often used to express distance or disapproval, avoiding direct naming. It underscores their unwillingness to acknowledge Him or His divine identity.
• is not from God (οὐκ ἔστιν παρὰ Θεοῦ, ouk estin para Theou): This is a profound theological accusation. To be "from God" meant to be divinely sent, sanctioned, and speaking/acting on God's behalf. Their reasoning for this condemnation is stated next: He violates their understanding of the Sabbath. This reflects their criteria for judging divine authenticity—strict adherence to their interpretations of the Law.
• because He does not keep (ὅτι τὸ σάββατον οὐ τηρεῖ, hoti to sabbaton ou tērei): The core charge against Jesus. The word tērei (keep/observe) refers to obeying the Law. For the Pharisees, their oral traditions greatly expanded upon the Mosaic Law regarding Sabbath restrictions. Jesus, in healing, specifically by making clay, violated their traditions, which they elevated to divine authority. They equated this with not keeping the Sabbath at all, a grave sin in their view, potentially incurring death.
• the Sabbath (τὸ σάββατον, to sabbaton): The divinely ordained day of rest in Jewish tradition, meant for worship and communion with God. Its strict observance was a central pillar of Jewish identity, but its legalistic application had, for many Pharisees, overshadowed its merciful and life-giving spirit.
• But others were saying (ἄλλοι ἔλεγον, alloi elegon): This explicitly presents the counter-argument, highlighting the active, conflicting perspectives. The term alloi differentiates this group, implying a distinct perspective within the larger body of Pharisees.
• How can a man who is a sinner (Πῶς δύναται ἄνθρωπος ἁμαρτωλὸς, Pōs dynatai anthrōpos hamartōlos): This rhetorical question forms the basis of the opposing argument. Hamartōlos (sinner) implies one who habitually or fundamentally breaks God's law. The premise here is that God would not grant such miraculous power to a true "sinner," as this would imply divine approval of unrighteousness or lawbreaking.
• do such signs? (τοιαῦτα σημεῖα ποιεῖν;, toiauta sēmeia poiein?): The word sēmeion (sign) refers to miracles with a revelatory purpose—they point to something beyond themselves, typically the power and presence of God. This group acknowledges the undeniable nature and extraordinary quality of the miracle. They perceive the work itself as having divine origin and question how such a powerful, positive demonstration of God's power could come through someone condemned by the other faction.
• And there was a division among them (καὶ σχίσμα ἦν ἐν αὐτοῖς, kai schisma ēn en autois): This phrase perfectly encapsulates the outcome: a schisma (schism), a literal tear or split. This division underscores that Jesus's actions and identity provoked internal strife, causing people to choose sides. It also subtly shows that not all within the religious elite were equally blind or unwilling to consider the evidence.

John 9 16 Bonus section

The debate among the Pharisees implicitly touches on a key issue: by what criteria do you identify one sent by God? The first group relies on outward conformity to religious law. The second group relies on supernatural signs. Both criteria have biblical grounding, but in Jesus, they clashed. This tension points to a deeper truth about the Sabbath: while divinely appointed, its ultimate purpose was not to restrict acts of compassion or hinder the giving of life and healing, but to point to God’s rest and salvation. Jesus repeatedly challenged the spiritless application of the Sabbath law (Mk 2:27, "The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath"). This entire chapter serves as a stark parable of spiritual blindness, where the physically blind man gains sight and spiritual understanding, while those who claim to see remain spiritually darkened by their adherence to flawed human traditions.

John 9 16 Commentary

John 9:16 vividly portrays the moral and spiritual conflict initiated by Jesus’s ministry. The Pharisees, though meticulously observing the Mosaic Law, became so ensnared by their traditional interpretations and regulations, especially concerning the Sabbath, that they missed the very essence of God's intent – mercy, compassion, and divine life. One faction, prioritizing their man-made rules over manifest divine power, summarily rejected Jesus, asserting that breaking their Sabbath traditions meant He could not be from God. Their judgment was based purely on legalistic externals, ignoring the unprecedented miracle.

The other faction, however, demonstrates a glimmer of openness or a greater emphasis on divine manifestation. They argue from the irrefutable evidence of the "sign"—a miracle that spoke clearly of God's power. Their logic was, "If He's truly a 'sinner' (as defined by you), how could God empower Him to perform such a profound work?" This highlights an enduring biblical principle: God's genuine works authenticate His messenger.

This verse exemplifies the reality that light often creates division (Jn 3:19-21, 7:43). Jesus, the Light of the World, brought clarity, forcing individuals to confront their own biases, priorities, and definitions of righteousness. The healing of the man born blind was a testament to God's compassionate will and redemptive power, but it also became a touchstone revealing the spiritual blindness of those who could "see" yet refused to believe. It exposes the danger of valuing tradition above truth and mercy, showcasing how self-imposed legalism can prevent recognition of God's own direct intervention. This serves as a warning against letting religious rituals or strict codes overshadow the deeper spiritual meaning and active power of God.