Yorkville enquirer. [volume] (Yorkville, S.C.) 1855-2006, 1875-02-18
(Original.)
"WHO SINNED 2"


the work of the same Being.
"WHO sINNED?"
On one occasion, as our Saviour was going
about doing good, he passed by man who
had been born blind. The disciples asked
him, "Who sinned this man, or his parents,
that he was born blind? 2" John 9:2. In
this question of the disciples, there is some
thing very interesting and instructive We
are naturally led to inquire, why did they
ask the question: 1t may be that the disci-
Piles of our Lord, as was the case with most
of their nation, had imbibed the doctrine of
Pythagoras on this subject. This celebrated
philosopher was born on the island Samos,
about five hundred years before Christ. We
say about five hundred years, for it is not
certainly known when he was born. One Of
the tenets of the Pythagorean philosophy was,
that souls passed from one individual to an
another, and even from individuals to brute
beasts. 1t may have been that in some way
or other the disciples made an application OF
the doctrine of metempsychosis, as it was call.
led, to the case of this blind man. This hardly
seems probable, however. The true reason
why the disciples asked the question, was be-
cause of the connection which all men &C
knowledge to exist between sin and suffering,
and also the admitted fact that children suffer
for the sins of the parents Men universally
acknowledge the fact that where there is no
sin, there is and can be no suffering. 10 be
born blind is to be born defective, and is the
result of sin in some one. 1t was possible
that it might be the result Of God visiting the
niquity of the parents upon the child, or 1t
might have been the result Of the mans own
sin. 1t was clearly result of sin. Had
there never been any sin in the world, this
man, nor any other man, would ever have
been blind or deaf or dumb. But in the
same connection, our Saviour positively de-
clares that neither this man nor his parents
had sinned. Now it is clear that the Saviour
does not mean that the persons spoken of
we're absolutely free from sin. All that he
means is, that they had not sinned in the
sense that the disciples thought they had.
In other words, he means that blindness had
not been inflicted upon this man on account
of any particular sin, either Of himself or his
parents. He does not design that we should
understand him as teaching that the man or
his parents were any better than the rest Of
the human family, or that the blindness of
the man was not part of the wages of sin
but that his blindness was not visitation OF
God on account of some particular sin. The
disciples made wrong application of cor
rect principle. Others have done the same
thing. They, like many others, thought that
since blindness is great calamity, therefore
either this man or his parents were great sim
ners. Our Saviour says that the reason this
man was born blind, "was that the works o.
God might be manifest in him." John 9: 3
1t was not on account Of sin, in the sense
that the disciples thought it was-be thai
what it might-but on account of sin permit
ted that the wisdom, justice and glory of God
might be manifest in overrulng it for good
1t is clear that God, in the exercise of his owr
omnipotence could have caused this man tc
have been born seeing. But had the mar
not been born blind, or blind at all, the mira
Gle of restoring him to sight could not have
been performed. Sin is, beyond all contro
versy, the cause of all our pains. Not pain
from the slightest uneasiness to the most ex
cruciating torture, but is the wages OF sin
God we may say, could, by an omnipoten
fat, have prevented sin from entering the
world. No one will doubt that he could have
prevented Satan from tempting Adam, OF
sustained Adam under any temptation. Thl;
he did not do. Satan was permitted to enter
Paradise, and Adam was suffered to yield tc
the cunning tempter. All this was that the
works of God, as God Of grace, might be
manifest in saving sinners. Had Adam moi
sinned, then none of his race would have
sinned. Then there would have been no sick
men, no blind men, no deaf men, no suffering
men of any kind. The glory Of God would
have been manifest as Creator, but not al
g. Saviour. Sin was suffered to enter oul
world, and its terrible consequences are still
suffered to remain in the world, that the
mighty works of the Saviour, in redeeming anc
sanctifying sinners, may be manifest. Still
: notwithstanding all this, it is wrong to sin
In this there is much that the human mine
cannot understand The facts remain, wheth
er we can understand them or not and W.
may add, whether we believe them or not.
The practical lessons which we may lear1
from this portion of Scripture, are two: First
, we must not conclude that because person
is greatly afflicted, that he is consequently
greater sinner than those who are less atf1lct
? ed. Second, we must be very careful in ira
3 cling particular suffering to a particular sin
This may do very we'll with regard to our
: selves, but we will be very liable to max
mistakes respecting Others