What is the context?
The questioners call the man back and urge him to give glory to God while declaring that Jesus is a sinner. The phrase is a serious call to tell the truth, not simply an invitation to sing praise. Joshua 7:19–21 uses the same appeal when Joshua asks Achan to confess what he has done. Here the pressure is to accept the questioners’ conclusion about Jesus.
The man keeps returning to the fact he knows: he was blind and now sees. When they ask him to repeat the details, he challenges whether they have listened and asks whether they also want to become Jesus’ disciples. They answer with insults and appeal to Moses. Their claimed knowledge of Jesus’ supposed sinfulness sits beside their admission that they do not know where He comes from.
The man reasons that such a healing points to God’s work through Jesus. Verse 31 is part of that reasoning: God listens to the person who honors Him and does His will. It should be read within this discussion of whether Jesus is acting against God, rather than made into a rule that God never hears a sinner asking for mercy. Jesus’ own account of the repentant tax collector in Luke 18:9–14 shows why that broader conclusion would be mistaken.
They end by accusing the man of having been born in utter sin and throwing him out. The accusation returns to the kind of blame Jesus rejected at the beginning. Their action removes the witness from their presence, but it does not undo his sight or answer his testimony.
How is this passage commonly understood?
Christian readings commonly emphasize the man’s courage in holding to what Jesus has done and the questioners’ refusal to receive his testimony. On verse 31, Wesley specifically distinguishes unrepentant sinners and this kind of answered prayer, while Calvin stresses sincere prayer offered in faith; neither treats sinful behavior as an obstacle that people can never turn from.
Where does this fit in God's plan?
The man’s testimony anticipates a pattern seen as the gospel spreads. In Acts 4:13–20, Peter and John stand before authorities after a healing, face an order to stop speaking about Jesus, and hold to what they have seen and heard. This is a parallel, not a claim that the two encounters are identical.
God’s work is made known through witnesses who do not control the response to their message. Here a man with growing knowledge of Jesus can still speak truthfully about what he has received. His testimony leads the story toward a fuller encounter with Christ, rather than ending with the authorities’ verdict.
What is our position?
We don't have a position on this passage yet. When our study reaches a conclusion the text supports, it will appear here.