Matthew Poole and continuators on John 11:37

37 And some of them said , Could not this man , which opened the eyes of the blind, have caused that even this man should not have died ?

Some onely concluded Christs love to the deceased, from his Affection shewed at his grave; but others make a worse conclusion

in derogation to Christs Reputation, from the miracle he had wrought, Chap. 9. in restoring him that was born Blind; for their speech soundeth in this sense; if he had indeed cured one that was born Blind, certainly, he could as well have kept this man, to whom (dead) he expresseth so great Affection, clear from Death. A Learned Interpreter therefore calleth this, a Devilish Sarcasm; they go about to weaken the Reputation of our Saviour, from the miracle which he had wrought, apparently shewing his Divine Power, because he did not keep his Friend from dying. It is much like the scoff with which they afterward scoffed him, while he hung upon the Cross Matth. 27.42. He saved others, himself he could not save: Or the words may have been spoke, if not with an Irony, yet with Admiration; that having cured the Blind man, a Stranger to him, he did not heal his Sick Friend: or as if they were uncertain whether his Power of Working miracles, were not limited to some times, that he could not perform all things when he pleased. But how weak must this their Argumentation be, which could stand upon no other foundation than this: That if Christ were the Son of God, he would at all times, and in all cases, have put forth his Divine Power? As if God acted necessarily, not freely, Governing his Actions by his own Wisdom, as he saw most conducing to the wise ends of his own glory.

Marginal references: Chap. 9.6.