There’s a particular story in the Bible that speaks to me about my own journey these days. I’m talking about the man born blind, whom Jesus healed. (I’m going to summarize his story in my own words here, but you can find the actual account in John chapter nine if you want to check my facts.)
The story goes that as Jesus was walking by, He saw a man who had been born blind. He spat in the dirt and made mud out it, put it in the man’s eyes, told him to go wash in a certain pool, and when the man did it, he could see. It’s an interesting way to perform a miracle, and discussion Jesus had with His disciples concerning it is interesting, also. But what really has gotten my attention is what is in the rest of the chapter, all the stuff that happened to the guy after he got healed.
You see, the Jewish leaders had a problem with Jesus; His presence was becoming a threat to their influence and to their way of doing things. So they were already looking for something to nail Him on. With this miracle, Jesus technically broke one of their rules by healing this man on the Sabbath (I guess they considered it “doing work”). They wanted very much for this so-called healing not to be legitimate, because it would legitimize Jesus Himself. So they decided to capitalize on this “obvious” disregard for the Law, and do everything they could to discredit Jesus.
They started by interviewing the man. That didn’t help much, because all he could say was, “He put mud in my eyes, and I washed, and now I can see,” and that He believed that Jesus was a prophet.
Then they tried to say the man was faking it, that he really hadn’t been blind, so there really hadn’t been a healing at all. (After all, God certainly wouldn’t have violated His own Sabbath rule to heal someone.) That idea fell flat when his parents were summoned, and they attested that the man had, in fact, been born blind, and they declined to give further comment on how he could see now (today, we Americans call that “pleading the Fifth”).
So the religious leaders’ next tactic was to interview the man again, and basically say, “Okay, so you’re healed. We can’t explain why God used a sinner to do it, but give glory to God, and not to this man we know to be a sinner.” To that, the formerly blind man simply said, “I don’t know if He’s a sinner or not; all I know is, I was blind and now I see.” In other words, the evidence speaks for itself.