We were challenged to think about the miracles of Jesus involving sight. Specifically the two where Jesus makes clay and puts them on the eyes of the blind man.
I'm wondering about the one where the man only partially sees when Jesus heals him. That part has often bothered me because it kind of flies in the face of my main objection to "faith" healers. So often they blame partial healings or reoccurences on something else, lack of faith in the healed for instance, but here, Jesus doesn't fully heal the man in the first place. I hope I haven't been thinking that Jesus messed up... I wonder if that was my flawed thinking, without really thinking it through.
Anyway, upon looking up the actual story, I see that it is sandwiched between two other interesting parts of Jesus' life. Right before, Jesus is questioning why people don't see that Jesus is more than a meal ticket, noting that they are only after another "feeding of the 5000" experience. Immediately after, is Peter's confession that Jesus is "the Christ". Here is an example how people, given the same opportunities, can respond to Jesus in such different ways. One sees, the other only dimly.
John reminds us that Jesus' miracles are more than that, they are in fact "signs". They show us a little of who He is, of the kingdom, of His work. Is this not part of what Jesus brought? Light to some and a veil of secrecy to others?
While I'm posting on this subject. Can anyone tell me if people born blind are born without eyes(or part of their eyes)? I've heard that, but I thought, rather than look it up, I'd see if anyone else has that piece of information tucked away. For now. I'll look it up soon... I guess I just thought it was interesting that perhaps Jesus is replicating the creation of man by taking more dirt and re-forming eyes for these men.
As always, comments are appreciated :)