John 9:41 · Bible study
John 9:41 Commentary: Spiritual Blindness and Sin That Remains
Greek · 11 what the commentators say
Meaning in one sentence
Jesus tells the Pharisees that claiming to see while rejecting him leaves their sin unforgiven. A study of knowledge, humility, and guilt.
Research Summary
- Meaning: Jesus declares that those who claim spiritual sight while rejecting Him remain in unforgiven sin.
- Key words: τυφλός (blind, physical and spiritual), μένω (remains, present tense, ongoing state).
- Main debate: Whether “no sin” means total innocence or comparative guilt; whether this is the unpardonable sin.
- Theological theme: The necessity of confessing spiritual need to receive forgiveness; pride closes the door to grace.
- Best use: Evangelistic call to self-examination and repentance; pastoral warning against religious self-sufficiency.
Translation Comparison
BSB Berean Standard Bible 2020
“If you were blind,” Jesus replied, “you would not be guilty of sin. But since you claim you can see, your guilt remains.”
WEB World English Bible 2000
Jesus said to them, “If you were blind, you would have no sin; but now you say, ‘We see.’ Therefore your sin remains.
KJV King James Version 1769
Jesus said unto them, If ye were blind, ye should have no sin: but now ye say, We see; therefore your sin remaineth.
ASV American Standard Version 1901
Jesus said unto them, If ye were blind, ye would have no sin: but now ye say, We see: your sin remaineth.
YLT Young's Literal Translation 1898
Jesus said to them, `If ye were blind, ye were not having had sin, but now ye say--We see, therefore doth your sin remain.
Darby Darby Bible 1890
Jesus said to them, If ye were blind ye would not have sin; but now ye say, We see, your sin remains.
Douay-Rheims Douay-Rheims Bible 1899
Jesus said to them: If you were blind, you should not have sin: but now you say: We see. Your sin remaineth.
Translations in other languages (10 available)
Díjoles|strong="G2036, G0846" Jesús: Si fuerais ciegos, no tuvierais pecado: mas ahora porque decís, Vemos, por tanto vuestro pecado permanece.
Disse-lhes Jesus: Se fôsseis cegos, não teríeis pecado; mas agora dizeis: Vemos; portanto vosso pecado permanece.
Jésus leur répondit: Si vous étiez aveugles, vous n’ auriez pas de péché. Mais maintenant vous dites: Nous voyons. C’ est pour cela que votre péché subsiste.
Jesus sprach zu ihnen: Wärt ihr blind, so hättet ihr keine Sünde; nun ihr aber sprecht: “Wir sind sehend”, bleibt eure Sünde.
Jezus zeide tot hen: Indien gij blind waart, zo zoudt gij geen zonde hebben; maar nu zegt gij: Wij zien; zo blijft dan uw zonde.
Gesù rispose loro: Se foste ciechi, non avreste alcun peccato; ma siccome dite: Noi vediamo, il vostro peccato rimane.
Rzekł im Jezus: Byście byli ślepymi, nie mielibyście grzechu; lecz teraz mówicie, iż widzimy, przetoż grzech wasz zostaje.
Иисус сказал им: если бы вы были слепы, то не имели бы на себе греха; но как вы говорите, что видите, то грех остается на вас.
耶穌 對他們 說：「你們若 瞎了眼，就 沒 有 罪了；但 如今 你們說『我們能看見』，所以你們的 罪 還在。」
Jesus said to them, If you were blind you would have no sin: but now that you say, We see; your sin is there still.
Verse in Context
Original Language (Koine Greek)
New Testament · Koine Greek · John 9:41
Source: STEPBible TAGNT/TEHB (CC-BY 4.0). Click or tap a morphology code to see the full parsing.
Scholars' Consensus
Commentators across traditions agree that this verse turns the tables on the Pharisees. Jesus has just healed a man born blind, and the Pharisees have interrogated him and rejected Jesus. Now Jesus uses their own question from v.40, “Are we also blind?”, to deliver a verdict. The Greek construction is crucial: “If you were blind” (εἰ τυφλοὶ ἦτε) is a contrary-to-fact condition. It assumes the opposite, they are not blind, but they think they see. Barnes notes that sin is measured by ability and opportunity; if they were genuinely ignorant and willing to learn, they would not be guilty. Clarke adds that “no sin” means the sin would not be imputed or would be pardonable. But because they say “We see,” their sin “remains”, the verb μένει (menei) in the present tense means it abides, unforgiven. Calvin explains that those who are aware of their blindness can be cured, but those who think they see are incurable. The Cambridge Bible underlines that “therefore” may be an insertion; the point is simply that their sin abides. The consensus is clear: claimed spiritual sight without submission to Christ seals one in guilt.
How settled is the interpretation?
Interpretive difficulty: Medium
Main views:
- Pardoning ignorance: If they were genuinely blind (humble and teachable), sin would not be imputed; their guilt is in claiming sight (Barnes, Clarke)
- Curable disease: Acknowledged blindness can be healed; claimed sight makes the condition incurable (Calvin, Cambridge)
- Unforgivable sin: Willful rejection of known truth is the sin against the Holy Spirit, hence sin remains unforgiven (Gill)
What is clear: Claiming to have spiritual sight while rejecting Jesus leaves sin unforgiven and abiding.
What Scholars Agree and Debate
| Topic | Agreed | Debated |
|---|---|---|
| Meaning of 'no sin' | It does not mean sinlessness but that guilt would not be imputed or would be curable | Some see it as hypothetical innocence based on ignorance (Barnes), others as a pardonable state that could lead to forgiveness (Clarke, Calvin) |
| Does this refer to the unforgivable sin? | It is a grave warning against willful rejection of light | Gill identifies it as the sin against the Holy Spirit; others see it as persistent unbelief that remains unforgiven unless repented, not an automatic final impenitence |
| The insertion of 'therefore' | The sense is the same with or without the conjunction | Cambridge Bible argues οὖν is a scribal insertion and should be omitted; most manuscripts include it, and most translations retain it |
| Role of opportunities and knowledge | Greater knowledge brings greater accountability | Some emphasize that ignorance mitigates guilt (Wesley), others stress that even ignorance is sinful but not willful; the key is the posture of humility toward truth |
Historical & Cultural Context
This verse is the climax of John 9, a chapter that begins with a man blind from birth and ends with the Pharisees declared spiritually blind. The narrative unfolds on a Sabbath, when Jesus heals the man by making mud and sending him to wash. The Pharisees immediately launch an investigation, questioning the man, his parents, and then the man again. They become increasingly hostile, eventually excommunicating the man. Jesus finds the man afterward, and the man worships him. Then Jesus speaks v.39: “I came into this world for judgment, that those who don’t see may see; and that those who see may become blind.” The Pharisees, who were present, hear this and react defensively: “Are we also blind?” (v.40).
In Jewish culture, physical blindness was often associated with sin (as the disciples assume in v.2), but Jesus rejects that link. By calling the Pharisees blind, he is using the metaphor spiritually. The Pharisees see themselves as the true interpreters of the law, guardians of Israel’s covenant. They believe they possess spiritual sight. Jesus turns their confidence into a condemnation. His logic echoes Old Testament warnings about being wise in one’s own eyes (Proverbs 26:12; Isaiah 5:21). The Pharisees’ claim to see is a declaration of self-sufficiency, which bars them from seeking the very healer they need. Their rejection is not ignorance; it is willful refusal of the light that stands before them.
The immediate context also echoes John 15:22-24, where Jesus says that if he had not come and spoken to them, they would not have sin. Here the emphasis is different: the Pharisees are held accountable because they have seen the evidence and still reject him. Their sin “remains”, a present tense that signals an ongoing state. The chapter ends with no resolution for the Pharisees, only a stark warning.
Textual Notes
The Cambridge Bible notes that the word “therefore” (οὖν) is omitted in some early manuscripts and may be a scribal insertion. The interlinear includes it; most English translations retain it. The variant does not change the core meaning. In the broader textual tradition, the verse is stable. The present tense of μένει (“remains”) is undisputed.
Reception History
This verse has been used throughout church history to warn against spiritual pride and willful unbelief. Early church fathers, including Augustine, preached it as an indictment of the Pharisees’ hardness of heart. In the Reformation, Calvin expounded it as a lesson that self-satisfaction in knowledge blocks the grace of God. For Wesley and the Methodist tradition, it underscored the importance of honest confession as the path to pardon. Gill and other Baptist commentators connected it to the unpardonable sin. In modern evangelicalism, the verse often appears in evangelistic sermons challenging those who rely on religious background rather than personal submission to Christ.
Preaching This Verse
Three-point outline
- The condition of true blindness. Acknowledging spiritual need opens the door to healing. Those who confess their darkness find grace and forgiveness.
- The claim of false sight. Insisting “we see” while rejecting Jesus is a posture of pride that closes the door. The Pharisees thought they understood the law; in reality, they missed the Lawgiver standing before them.
- The consequence of remaining sin. Sin that is not confessed and forgiven “remains”, it persists, unremoved. The good news is that Jesus came to take away sin, but only for those who come in humility.
Five-point outline
- Jesus confronts the Pharisees after the healing of the blind man (vv.39-41).
- The hypothetical: if they were blind, they would have no sin, not innocence, but a curable condition.
- The reality: they claim to see, which reveals self-deception.
- The verdict: “your sin remains”, an abiding guilt because they reject the cure.
- The call: honest confession of blindness leads to sight; proud sight leads to blindness.
Illustration hooks
- A person who refuses to visit a doctor because they think they are perfectly healthy. The diagnosis never comes; the disease progresses.
- A student who already believes they know the material and won’t listen to the teacher. They fail the exam because they never learned what they thought they knew.
- A driver lost on a road trip who insists they know the way and ignores GPS. They stay lost longer than necessary.
Questions your congregation is asking
- “How do I know if I am spiritually blind or if I truly see?”
- “Is my sin unforgivable if I have rejected Christ in the past?”
- “What does it mean for sin to ‘remain’, is there no hope for the proud?”
Leading a Discussion
This small-group guide explores the sharp edge of Jesus’ words to the Pharisees. The goal is not to induce fear but to invite honest self-examination. Read the whole chapter of John 9, then focus on verses 35-41. Notice how the man born blind progresses from calling Jesus “a man” to “Lord.” The Pharisees, who had every opportunity, move in the opposite direction.
Discussion questions
- What does the man born blind understand about Jesus that the Pharisees do not? Look at vv.30-38.
- Jesus says he came “for judgment” (v.39). How is this judgment different from the final judgment?
- Why do the Pharisees ask, “Are we also blind?” What does their question reveal about their self-perception?
- How can Jesus say that if they were blind they would have “no sin”? What kind of “blindness” is he talking about?
- What is the significance of the verb “remains” (μένει) in verse 41? Why is the present tense important?
- In what areas of life are we tempted to claim “we see” when we actually need help from Christ?
- How does this passage encourage us to confess our spiritual needs rather than pretend we have it all together?
Word Study
The key original-language words in this verse. Select any word for its full lexicon entry — meaning, every occurrence in Scripture, and related words.
Cross-References
Source: Treasury of Scripture Knowledge (TSK, public domain)
| Proverbs 26:12 | Do you see a man wise in his own eyes? There is more hope for a fool than for him. |
| Isaiah 5:21 | Woe to those who are wise in their own eyes, and prudent in their own sight! |
| Jeremiah 2:35 | “Yet you said, ‘I am innocent. Surely his anger has turned away from me.’ “Behold, I will judge you, because you say, ‘I have not sinned.’ |
| Luke 12:47 | That servant who knew his lord’s will, and didn’t prepare nor do what he wanted, will be beaten with many stripes, |
| Luke 18:14 | I tell you, this man went down to his house justified rather than the other; for everyone who exalts himself will be humbled, but he who humbles himself will be exalted.” |
| John 15:22 | If I had not come and spoken to them, they would not have had sin; but now they have no excuse for their sin. |
| John 15:24 | If I hadn’t done among them the works which no one else did, they wouldn’t have had sin. But now they have seen and also hated both me and my Father. |
| Hebrews 10:26 | For if we sin willfully after we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remains no more a sacrifice for sins, |
Interlinear and lexical data from STEPBible (CC BY 4.0). Cross-reference data from OpenBible.info (CC BY 4.0). Commentaries are public domain.
For personal reflection
Read the devotional page — prayer, application, and "for families"
What the Commentators Say
11 public-domain commentaries, condensed into plain language.
Adam Clarke's Commentary Methodist/Wesleyan 1826
Clarke notes the tragic irony: the Pharisees' claim to spiritual sight makes their sin irreversible. Because they had full evidence from Christ's miracles and teaching, their rejection could not be excused as ignorance. Their sin "remains" in the sense that it is permanently unforgiven, the opposite of pardon.
Barnes' Notes on the Bible Protestant 1832
Barnes argues that guilt depends on a person’s actual capacity and opportunity to know the truth. Those who are truly ignorant and willing to confess it are not blamed, but those who claim understanding yet reject the truth remain unforgiven. Pride, not lack of knowledge, is the real source of condemnation.
Calvin's Commentaries Reformed 1564
Calvin argues that acknowledging spiritual blindness makes it curable, while insisting you see makes it incurable. He clarifies that Christ's "no sin" for the blind does not excuse ignorance but means a confessed disease can be healed by God's grace, whereas self-satisfied pride refuses help.
Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges Anglican 1880
The commentator stresses that the Pharisees' claim to see spiritually is what traps them in sin. Those who admit their ignorance and genuinely seek the light are not held responsible and have good hope of finding it. But those who deny their blindness and reject instruction remain accountable and have no prospect of ever being freed.
Geneva Bible Notes Reformed 1599
The Geneva Note emphasizes that spiritual ignorance, when acknowledged, does not incur the same guilt as willful blindness. The Pharisees' claim to see reveals their self-deception, and because they refuse to admit their need, their sin remains unforgiven.
Gill's Exposition of the Bible Baptist 1748
Gill observes that Jesus offers hope to those aware of their spiritual blindness and desiring light; their sin could be pardoned. But the Pharisees, claiming to see while rejecting Christ, sin willfully against light and knowledge. This is the unforgivable sin against the Holy Spirit, and their guilt remains.
Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Commentary Protestant 1871
JFB observes that Jesus contrasts genuine spiritual blindness, which could be forgiven, with the willful rejection of light by those who claim to see. Their boast of spiritual insight while refusing Christ is what seals them in the guilt of unbelief.
Lange's Commentary Reformed 1857
Lange emphasizes the symbolic layers Jesus intentionally builds into this healing. By using clay and sending the man to the pool of Siloam, whose name means "Sent," Jesus presents Himself as the true Sent One who works even on the Sabbath. The gradual process mirrors the blind man's developing faith and judges the Pharisees' willful blindness.
Matthew Henry's Commentary Reformed/Presbyterian 1710
Matthew Henry sees Christ not primarily as a teacher but as a judge holding court. His coming is a judicial act that tests and distinguishes every person, revealing their true character by how they respond to him. The blind who admit their need are given sight; the self-seeing are left in darkness.
Vincent's Word Studies Evangelical 1887
Vincent observes that the Greek phrase "to have sin" appears nowhere else in the New Testament except in John's Gospel and his first letter. This distinctive wording, he suggests, is characteristic of John's own way of describing sin as a condition one carries.
Wesley's Explanatory Notes Methodist/Wesleyan 1754
Wesley draws a sharp contrast between invincible ignorance and willful knowledge. Those who lack the means to know have comparatively little sin. But those who claim to see, acknowledging their knowledge, have no excuse and no remedy for their sin.