He therefore answered (and said £), Whether he be a sinner—using the words of "the Jews" ironically—I know not. You assert it, but the facts of my experience are altogether of a different kind. I do not know, as you say that you do.
The Jews reason from foregone prejudices; the healed man has no such evidence, no such grounds—he adds in immortal words, One thing I know with invincible conviction, that whereas I was blind (De Wette says there is no need to regard the ὤν as an imperfect participle, and the present suggests the whole career of the man from birth till that memorable morning), now I see.
The plain consistent testimony of the man triumphs over their logic, which sought to bewilder his judgment. The language which a deeply felt experience can always bring against the a priori demonstrations of the insufficiency of the evidence of Divine revelation.
I was blind; now I see the face of God in nature, the kingdom of God all around me, the fact of my own forgiveness, the dawning of a brighter day.