[Which is by interpretation, Sent.~] There is undeniable diffi- culty about this seutence. It is naturally asked, — Whv is this parenthetical explanation inserted by St. John? Why are we specially told that the word Siloara means Sent, or He that was sent? — The most probable answer seems to be, that the name of the fountain was meant to refer the blind man's mind to the Messiah, whom God had " sent." All pious Jews would under- stand the expression which so frequently occurs in John's Gos- pel, " He whom God hath sent," to point to Messiah. When therefore Jesus said, " Go, wash in Siloam,'' the naming of that particular fountain would be a silent hint that He who gave the command was the Sent One of God, the great Healer of all dis- eases. St. John's parenthesis would then mean, when ex- pounded : " This was a most suitable and proper pool for Jesus to name. It was fitting that He who was ' Sent of God ' should work a miracle in the pool called ' Sent."' — This is the view of Chrysostom and Augustine.
It is impossible to help feeling that the clause looks very much like the insertion of some ignorant early copyist, who wished to show his own knowledge of etymology, and perhaps found it in an old copy as a marginal gloss. The Syriac and Persian ver- sions do not contain the clause. Yet it certainly is found in most manuscripts and versions.
Hutcheson thinks that John inserted this clause for no other end than to remind readers that this fountain was a special gift " sent" by God, among the hills near Jerusalem, for the benefit of the Jews.
Hengstenberg says: "As Jesus represents Himself and His Church as the real Pool of Bethesda, in chap, v., so here He declares Himself the real Sent One, or Siloam, the Fountain of blessings."
[He went.. .washed.. .came seeing.'] The blind man, as is often the case with people born blind, was probably able to find his way about Jerusalem without trouble, and the road from the temple-gate to the pool of Siloam was likely to be much fre- quented. His implicit faith and obedience contrast favourably with the conduct of Naaman, when told to go and wash in Jor- dan. (2 Kings v. 14.) The word "came" must either mean " to his own home," or simply "came back to the tempie-gate." The miracle of healing seems to have taken place in the act of washing in Siloam.
Let us remember that the blind man's conduct is meant to be a pattern to us. He did not stumble at Christ's command, but simply obeyed; and in obeying he was healed. We must do likewise.
Melancthon thinks it likely that a crowd of curious and jeer- ing spectators accompanied the man to Siloam to see the result of our Lord's prescription.