Many of us in our fellowship community have been reading the Bible daily in a two-year plan. In this blog post, I will take the time to investigate an intriguing character encountered in John, Nicodemus, a Pharisee and “member of the Jewish ruling council” (New International Version Bible, 2011, John 3:1). Jesus himself called Nicodemus “Israel’s teacher” (John 3:10). A question about Nicodemus that Bible scholars have explored and that interests me is, did Nicodemus ever truly commit to following Jesus? What does the text say? Let’s go back to the Gospel of John, take a look at the three times that Nicodemus is mentioned there, and see what answers may be found there.
Unlike A Certain Woman
After chronicling the many individuals who encountered Jesus, witnessing His miraculous signs, and listening to him as Christ expounded upon His identity, purpose, and relationship with God the Father, the apostle John, presumed author of the gospel, stated the purpose for writing it:
Jesus performed many other signs in the presence of his disciples, which are not recorded in this book. But these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name.
John 20:30-31
This purpose lies in the background of all the episodes in the gospel. It helps us to understand the organization of the episodes. For instance, wedged between Jesus’s first two miracles, both performed in Cana of Galilee—turning the water into wine at the wedding (John 2:1-11) and healing the royal official’s son (John 4:46-54)—are two encounters Jesus had with very different people, the first being Nicodemus, a man of high standing in the Jewish community, who deliberately approached Jesus at night, perhaps not wanting to compromise himself by visiting during the day (Brooks, 2000). The second was with a Samaritan woman, of questionable morals, who had no intention of meeting Jesus at all, crossing paths with him at a well in the very middle of the day. Already, a contrast between the two encounters, framed in the overall context of the purpose of the Gospel of John, provides the reader with a broad spectrum of those who came into contact with Jesus, each coming away with a different degree of belief in his name. In fact, if we see Nicodemus as representative of the social group known as the Jews (Hakola, 2009), the woman at the well as representative of the Samaritans, and the Greeks that “went up to worship at the Feast” and sought an audience with Jesus as representative of the Gentiles, then together they foreshadow the future church, who would be his “‘witnesses in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the ends of the earth’” (Acts 1:8).
The Samaritan woman appears in John 4, with her subsequent conversion figuring largely in that chapter. In contrast, Nicodemus lingers in the background throughout the gospel after his initial evening encounter with Jesus. Nicodemus gets mentioned in three different situations throughout the gospel, comparable to the number of time other minor characters distinct to Johns’ gospel were mentioned (Stibbe, 1994) on their way to believing in Jesus’ name, including Nathanael (1:45, 21:2) and Lazarus (John 11-12). Each of these individuals encountered Jesus in the context of John’s purpose, hearing his teaching and being called to believe.
With this narrative context, let’s now explore exactly how Nicodemus appears in the gospel, starting first with the well-known passage in chapter 3.
Misunderstanding Jesus or Rejecting Him?
Nicodemus’s greeting to Jesus appears to display curiosity as he addresses him as “Rabbi” and “a teacher who has come from God” (3:2). Meeks (1972) pointed out that Nicodemus, representing the Jews, demonstrates in this evening meeting an understandable level of faith in Christ. Perhaps, he was sent to vet Jesus, much as others were sent to investigate John the Baptist earlier (1:19-34) (Myers, 2023).
Regardless of how learned he was, or how respected he was among the Jews as a member of the Sanhedrin (his name in the Greek is translated as “victorious among the people” (Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance, n.d.)), Nicodemus did not understand Jesus when he declared that “no one can see the kingdom of God unless they are born again” (3:3). Most scholars viewed Nicodemus sympathetically, one who genuinely does not understand the layers of meaning in Jesus’ words (Whitenton, 2016). Nicodemus seemed to believe that Jesus was speaking of a second, physical birth (3:4); in reply, Jesus proclaimed that “no one can enter the kingdom of God unless they are born of water and the Spirit” (3:5).
Now, Nicodemus was even more confused by Jesus’ explanation, managing only to ask another, “How can this be?” (3:9). Meeks (1972) elaborated that “the unbiased reader feels quite sympathetic with poor Nicodemus and the ‘believing’ Jews with whom, it seems, Jesus is playing some kind of language-game whose rules neither they nor we could possibly know” (p. 68).
Unlike many scholars, Whitenton (2016) took a contrarian view of Nicodemus, asserting that Israel’s teacher actually fit the role of a “dissembler” (p. 141). Whitenton highlighted the fundamental ambiguity surrounding Nicodemus in this episode: He visited the Light at night, possibly as an emissary sent by Jews wanting to investigate Jesus’ claims, but harboring motives that were unclear. Whitenton argued that the prevailing culture of those who received John’s gospel would have been familiar with a type of dissembler, someone who heaped praise on the other person and pretended to be ignorant in order to remain ambiguous and fulfill a hidden purpose. He claimed that the audience would have recognized the cultural type that Nicodemus represented: “Nicodemus’s lavish praise, amazement, and claims to ignorance strongly resemble the classical dissembler” (Whitenton, 2016, p. 151).
Still another perspective on Nicodemus’ nighttime discussion with Jesus focused on how much more “in the know” John’s audience would have been, compared to the confused (or insincere?) teacher of Israel. Myers (2023) remarked that today, we are readers of the complete gospel, enjoy a panoramic view of Jesus in it. For example, while Nicodemus might have heard of what Jesus said and did earlier, we benefit from John’s direct accounts of the disciples first encounters with Jesus (1: 35-51), the turning of water into wine (2:1-11), and the clearing of the temple (2: 13-22). Furthermore, Myers remarked how privileged our perspective is as Jesus’ encounter with Nicodemus was prefaced by this insightful observation:
Now while he was in Jerusalem at the Passover Festival, many people saw the signs he was performing and believed in his name. But Jesus would not entrust himself to them, for he knew all people. He did not need any testimony about mankind, for he knew what was in each person.
– John 2:24-25
Coming just before Jesus’ meeting with Nicodemus, these verses prompt us to take anything Nicodemus says with a grain of salt. He may have been genuinely confused or hiding his motive, or something else: actually, it may also be altogether likely that Nicodemus himself did not know exactly what to think of the man Jesus.
So, where does this leave us? Was Nicodemus a genuine seeker, yearning to understand Jesus’ words? Or was he disingenuous, coming merely to vet him and ascertain the threat he was to the Jews’ authority?
Nicodemus in John 7:50-52 and 19:39
We encounter Nicodemus a second time in the gospel as the chief priests and Pharisees try to exert their authority and have Jesus brought in (7:45-52). In this context, Nicodemus re-emerges as “one of their own number” and seemingly defends Jesus with the question, “‘Does our law condemn a man without first hearing him to find out what he has been doing?’” (7:50-51). This question initially indicated that Nicodemus did believe in Jesus and displayed limited courage, enough to speak up among the Pharisees and slow down their march to judgment against Jesus. Bassler (1989) contended that another way of seeing Nicodemus’ question would be that he favored using correct procedures to hear out the claims of Jesus, more than fully embracing those claims as the Son of God already. He has enough courage to assert Jesus’ right to a fair hearing, but not enough presence of mind to correct his fellow Pharisees when they asserted that no prophet arises out of Galilee (7:52), when in fact Jonah and Nahum did (Carson, 1991). His defense of Jesus is “tentative” (Bassler, 1989, p. 639), but we observe progression from his initial meeting with Jesus in chapter 3, as he now speaks plainly to his colleagues.
Nicodemus appears one more time in John’s gospel, accompanying Joseph of Arimathea to provide for the burial of the crucified Jesus (19:38-41). Joseph himself was recognized as a disciple, though a secret one “because he feared the Jewish leaders” (19:38). Nicodemus works alongside Joseph, and, interestingly is described as “the man who earlier had visited Jesus at night” (19:39). Israel’s teacher, a Pharisee and member of the Sanhedrin, was now simply referred to as a “man,” and not as a believer or disciple. However, it is noteworthy that Nicodemus brought a large amount of myrrh and aloes (75 pounds) to provide for Jesus’ burial, honoring him by accompanying Joseph to give Jesus’ body a proper Jewish burial, incurring a large expense and mustering considerable courage to do so openly. In contrast, Bassler (1989) noted that the disciples hardly distinguished themselves with courageous actions at this time, as all were still afraid of the Jews. At the same time, the message from the text of the gospel remains somewhat mixed, since it did not explicitly state that Nicodemus was now a disciple. Bassler (1989) wrote that :
Thus, when Nicodemus buries Jesus, he does so as a “Jew”; when he defends him, he does so as a Pharisee; when he confesses him, he does so at night. The result is that Nicodemus falls between the two major anthropological categories in this Gospel: he is defined as neither fully a “Jew” nor fully a disciple, but as somehow bearing traits of both. (p. 643)
Bassler’s conclusion may fall uneasily on our ears, as many commentators incline toward believing that Nicodemus did finally become a disciple. However, John’s gospel appears to chart a trajectory of growth in his faith through these three episodes. Whitenton (2016) in fact, asserted that in the end, the dissembler Nicodemus may have been persuaded by Jesus’s wise responses.
Conclusion
We have sought to determine whether Nicodemus became a disciple or not. As many far more knowledgeable and experienced than me have already concluded, the Bible gives us no definitive answer, either way, though many could make the case that he did. In the end, then, what can we gain from such an exercise? Returning to the purpose for which John wrote his gospel, so that by what is written we may have life in Jesus’ name, I think that this study actually challenges me as a disciple to ask myself : Do my actions, and not just my words, demonstrate that I live completely in the Light of Jesus? Are there any corners of my life still lurking in the night, not fully exposed or all in for Jesus and His mission? What am I still fearful about? We may not be able to conclude definitively that Nicodemus became a disciple, but his faith journey can cause me to reflect on my own. It’s fair to say that Nicodemus made sincere progress in his journey, but his was completed two thousand years ago. Our journey of “believing that we may have life in his name” (John 20:31) remains unfinished.
References
Bassler, J. M. (1989). Mixed signals: Nicodemus in the Fourth Gospel. Journal of Biblical Literature, 108(4), 635.
Brooks, J.A. (2000). Nicodemus. In D. N. Freedman, A.C. Myers, & A. B. Beck (Eds.), Eerdmans dictionary of the Bible (pp. 963). Eerdmans.
Carson, D. A. (1991). The Gospel according to John. W.B. Eerdmans.
Hakola, R. (2009). The burden of ambiguity: Nicodemus and the social identity of the Johannine Christians. New Testament Studies, 55(4), 438–455. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0028688509990014
Meeks, W. A. (1972). The man from heaven in Johannine sectarianism. Journal of Biblical Literature, 91(1), 44–72. https://doi.org/10.2307/3262920
Myers, A. D. (2023). We speak the truth: Rhetoric, epistemology, and audience participation in John 3:1–21. Interpretation, 77(4), 325–335. https://doi.org/10.1177/00209643231183965
Stibbe, M.W.G. (1994). John’s gospel. Routledge.
Strong’s Exhaustive Concordance. (n.d.). 3530. Nikodémos. Strong’s Greek: 3530. Νικόδημος (nikodémos) — nicodemus. https://biblehub.com/greek/3530.htm
Whitenton, M. R. (2016). The dissembler of John 3: A cognitive and rhetorical approach to the characterization of Nicodemus. Journal of Biblical Literature, 135(1), 141–158.