Nicodemus--John 2

Henry Ossawa Tanner, Jesus and Nicodemus, 1898

A few things convict me greatly in my faith. One is that Christians should know their Bibles well enough to articulate the context of favorite scripture passages. I think it does the Word of God a disservice to pull it apart into bite-sized quotes that can be slung around--sometimes rather carelessly--for this or that occasion.

John 3:16 is such a passage. All of the 4-6th grade students in my Sunday School class could quote this verse from memory. I bet none, excepting my own daughter possibly, could provide the context and tell me that it was spoken in a conversation Jesus had with Nicodemus. In fact, last time Nicodemus came up in our Sunday School, none were familiar with him at all. But, that's another post!

So, this morning, I am settling into John 2 and the story of the conversation between Jesus and Nicodemus. Here are some notable pieces of commentary, along with my observations:

He was a Pharisee, a member of the Sanhedrin, and a teacher. (BKC)

"Nicodemus later rebuked the Pharisees for condemning Jesus without hearing Him (Joh_7:50-51), and he helped Joseph of Arimathea bury Jesus (Joh_19:39-40)." -BKC

I admire the way Nicodemus goes directly to Jesus to get to the bottom of things---albeit at night, which shows a sense of caution, discretion, and perhaps fear--but he does go.

Nicodemus begins his visit with a statement:

"...we all know that God has sent you to teach us."

Jesus' enigmatic reply elicits questions:

Jesus replied, “I tell you the truth, unless you are born again,[a] you cannot see the Kingdom of God.”

Nicodemus said to him, "How can a man be born when he is old? Can he enter a second time into his mother's womb and be born?"

Is Jesus refuting Nicodemus' statement that they all know that God has sent him to teach them?

Joh 3:9 Nicodemus said to him, "How can these things be?"

What does Jesus mean by his response in John 3:11?

"but you do not receive our testimony"

 And afterwards by his quite long sermon-like reply? This is where John 3:16 happens...in the midst of a complex explanation to Nicodemus about being born again, about believing or being already condemned, about the difference between light and darkness, the difference between flesh and spirit.  The explanation presents riddle upon riddle.

The Word does not share Nicodemus' reception or any further questions.

The Bible Knowledge Commentary suggests that Jesus was pointing Nicodemus to reexamine truths that he should know:

"The titles “Rabbi” and “Teacher” are polite and flattering on one hand, but they showed Nicodemus’ inadequate comprehension of who Jesus is. The words “from God” are in an emphatic position in the Greek. The signs had pointed out Jesus as God’s Man (God was with Him), and Nicodemus wanted to talk to Him as one Rabbi to another.

Nicodemus asked… how this spiritual transformation takes place. Jesus answered that Nicodemus, as the teacher of Israel (the Gr. has the article “the”), ought to know. The Old Testament prophets spoke of the new Age with its working of the Spirit (Isa_32:15; Eze_36:25-27; Joe_2:28-29). The nation’s outstanding teacher ought to understand how God by His sovereign grace can give someone a new heart (1Sa_10:6; Jer_31:33)." 
But Nicodemus was ignorant of the realm of which Jesus spoke. He represented the nation’s unbelief and lack of knowledge. Jesus, like the prophets, spoke to the nation about divine themes but the Jews rejected His witness. “Witness” (or testimony; martyrian) is a common word in John’s Gospel (see the chart at Joh_5:33-34)." -BKC

Before this, I'd always thought of Nicodemus as the "good Pharisee," and he was in many ways. But, this is also a helpful reminder that Nicodemus was imperfect, just as we are, trying to figure it all out in real time, working through the lens of our own weaknesses and preconceptions.

Robertson's Word Pictures notes that Nicodemus addressed Jesus with a degree of respect inherent in his title of address:

"Rabbi (Rabbei). Technically Jesus was not an acknowledged Rabbi of the schools, but Nicodemus does recognize him as such and calls him “My Master” just as Andrew and John did (Joh_1:38). It was a long step for Nicodemus as a Pharisee to take, for the Pharisees had closely scrutinized the credentials of the Baptist in Joh_1:19-24 (Milligan and Moulton’s Comm.)."

"to Try, to Make Proof of..."

The Temptation of Christ, J. Kirk Richards

I'm lingering in the temptation stories of Christ again this morning. 

How could Christ be tempted if he could not sin?  Was this a legitimate temptation if the choice was not a choice? My band of Biblical commentators gravitate toward an exploration of the Greek word for tempt, peirazō.  Strong's defines it as "to test (objectively), that is, endeavor, scrutinize, entice, discipline: - assay, examine, go about, prove, tempt (-er), try."  Jamison, Fasset, and Brown go on to point out that this is the same word used in the temptation of Abraham.   Hmmm, that story always hit me a bit funny also, perhaps because it doesn't seem loving or fair to tempt a person to evil.

Also, I think of Job's journey, another temptation story that isn't an easy one to reconcile. Here Satan claims that Job is faithful only because God has provided physical blessings and placed a hedge around him. Satan taunts, "put forth thy hand and touch all that he hath, and he will curse thee to thy face."  The wording of God's response is curious:  "Behold, all that he hath is in thy power..."  The statement alludes to Satan's present dominion over this world, but does not suggest that God has a hand in the evil.

This idea of God tempting anyone, by our modern understanding of the word, seems antithetical to His character, so it must be my understanding of the word or my understanding of the nature of temptation that is flawed.

In the archetypes of literature, a test or a series of tests is a common motif;  Sir Gawain and the Green Knight, Beowulf, and the Odyssey, come to mind as quick examples.  Let me stop and clarify that I am not beginning from a man's perspective on this---suggesting that the temptation archetypes are built into the scriptures by man.  I believe the scriptures were inspired and created by God.  But the archetypes are there all the same.  I wonder if they reflect a pattern, a DNA of our own self discovery, that God has placed in our hearts which is reflected through these literary motifs.  They appear again and again and again because they are part of our collective and inherent struggle and story. 

But, back to idea of temptation, or "trying" if you prefer.  Part of the rub is that I don't think we care to think of ourselves as needing a test.  We'd prefer to be sufficient without help and testing.  Also who enjoys the thought that we are made better through testing and difficulty?   I think the key to the mystery is a piece of the larger puzzle of beauty from ashes and refinement through tribulation.

Even then, it does send me into a tailspin to wonder how Christ could be tempted if he was unable to sin by his very nature.  It doesn't take long for my mind to bump up again its limits on this one. When I was young, I recall thinking that it was really no sacrifice for Christ to die when he knew that his Father would "save" him.  If I'm completely honest with myself, I still struggle with this at times.  If you know the outcome and rule the universe, betrayal and death doesn't have the same sting, I reason.

Faith, to me, is not an absolution of all doubt.  It is wrestling with the doubt and making a conscientious decision to come to a certain point with my intellect and then leap into the gap trusting His hand with the difference.  It is entirely reasonable that as a finite creature, I cannot understand an infinite God and all of His ways.  I see His hand more clearly in other areas and this allows me to exercise faith in the weaker, mysterious areas of my spirit.   

And, after all, perhaps this brings me back, in a way, to temptation---to testing---to my own testing and trying.  There must be areas of struggle in which we can prove ourselves, like Christ.  I won't come to the bottom of this enigma before I come to the bottom of my morning coffee, but it's worthwhile to ponder all the same.

In the Wilderness

Right now I am reading about the early ministry of Christ.  Some of the events seem episodic.  If I was a liberal critic, I would suggest they are folkish--following patterns.   But, I am a believer---in Christ, in the purity of the Scriptures as a source of doctrine and not of man's manipulations.  Though I do not always understand the source and intent of scripture, I press on to better understand my God through them.

Perhaps part of the problem is that narrative events do not explain themselves, and I long for context and explanation.  I prefer the letters of the New Testament because of they are by nature an explanation, directed toward Christians to help them understand their God and their faith.  

In the gospels, we are given bones and must construct the flesh.

Christ's temptations in the wilderness cry out for flesh.  Why does his professional life begin by a baptism and this journey into the wilderness?  Why the detailed temptations and conversations with the devil?  The feel of this dialog brings me back to Job and the wrestling of God and Satan over Job's fate.  Perhaps it is that I shrink from evil, don't wish to acknowledge the spiritual wrestling.

The individual temptations impart lessons.  Here are excerpts from the BKC commentary:

"The first test pertained to the matter of sonship. Satan assumed that if He were the Son, perhaps He could be persuaded to act independently of the Father... It is better to obey God’s Word than to satisfy human desires."

"The second test by Satan appealed to personal display or popularity. This test built on the first, for if He is the Son of God and the Messiah, nothing could harm Him...Here Satan made a subtle suggestion to Jesus as the Messiah. In effect he was reminding Jesus of Malachi’s prophecy (Mal_3:1), which had led to a common belief among the Jews that Messiah would suddenly appear in the sky, coming down to His temple. Satan was saying, in essence, “Why don’t You do what the people are expecting and make some marvelous display?"

 "Satan’s final test related to God’s plan for Jesus. It was and is God’s design that Jesus Christ rule the world. Satan showed Jesus the kingdoms of the world with all their splendor. These kingdoms presently are Satan’s, as he is “the god of this Age” (2Co_4:4) and “the prince of this world” (Joh_12:31; cf. Eph_2:2). He had the power to give all these kingdoms to Jesus at that time — if only Jesus would bow down and worship him. Satan was saying, “I can accomplish the will of God for You and You can have the kingdoms of this world right now.” This of course would have meant Jesus would never have gone to the cross. He supposedly could have been the King of kings without the cross. However, this would have thwarted God’s plan for salvation and would have meant Jesus was worshiping an inferior."

"Interestingly Satan’s temptations of Eve in the Garden of Eden correspond to those of Jesus in the desert. Satan appealed to the physical appetite (Gen_3:1-3; Mat_4:3), the desire for personal gain (Gen_3:4-5; Mat_4:6), and an easy path to power or glory (Gen_3:5-6; Mat_4:8-9). And in each case Satan altered God’s Word (Gen_3:4; Mat_4:6). Satan’s temptations of people today often fall into the same three categories (cf. 1Jn_2:16)."

The Temptation on the Mountain, DUCCIO di Buoninsegna; 1308-11

Jesus and Prayer

Prayer is difficult, especially in our rushed and ready culture.  We heedlessly bypass activities that necessitate patience, waiting, meditating, and introspection with good hopes that we will have time for such another day.  The screaming demands of each day drown out the whispers of reflection.

Prayer, for me, is a form of decompression and processing. It forces me to stop and frame the events of my life and the thoughts of my heart with an eye to God's hand in things. What is His perspective on this situation?  How is He working through it?  What is the correct posture of my heart on this matter?  How can I intercede for others?  What attitudes and thoughts need cleansing, purging, or redirecting?  All this, and a counter-full of dishes awaits me...more glaring, immediate.  

But, despite his brief window of ministry on earth, Christ prioritized prayer. He folded it into every significant event.  He blocked off this time even when the crowds pressed and authorities plotted against him.  His intentionality and consistency in this regard should evoke not just admiration but a desire to pattern our own prayer lives in this way.

The Believer's Bible Commentary notes the many instances of prayer throughout Christ's life:

The prayer life of our Lord is a dominant theme in this Gospel. He prayed here, at the outset of His public ministry. He prayed when He was becoming well known and crowds were following Him (Luk_5:16). He spent a whole night in prayer before choosing the twelve disciples (Luk_6:12). He prayed prior to the incident at Caesarea Philippi, the high-water mark of His teaching ministry (Luk_9:18). He prayed on the Mount of Transfiguration (Luk_9:28). He prayed in the presence of His disciples, and this called forth a discourse on prayer (Luk_11:1). He prayed for backsliding Peter (Luk_22:32). He prayed in the garden of Gethsemane (Luk_22:41, Luk_22:44).

Humility

From my quiet time this morning---I thought this passage on humility by John Ruskin lovely and worth contemplating:

"I believe the first test of a truly great man is his humility. I do not mean by humility doubt of his own power, or hesitation of speaking his opinions; but a right understanding of the relation between what he can do and say, and the rest of the world’s sayings and doings. All great men act only know their business, but usually know that they know it; and are not only right in their main opinions, but they usually know that they are right in them, only they do not think much of themselves on that account. Arnolfo knows he can build a good dome at Florence; Albert Durer writes calmly to one who has found fault with his work, “It cannot be better done”; Sir Isaac Newton knows that he has worked out a problem or two that would have puzzled anybody else; only they do not expect their fellow-men, therefore, to fall down and worship them. They have a curious under-sense of powerlessness, feeling that the greatness is not in them, but through them; that they could not do or be anything else than God made them—and they see something Divine and God-made in every other man they meet, and are endlessly, foolishly, incredibly merciful."

Regarding Ruskin's quote above, I wish I was "endlessly, foolishly, incredibly merciful." Humility is inherently winsome and easily spotted among false affectations.  One hallmark is that there is no self-gain and the focus in on another's best interests without thought of how it may impact oneself.  

John the Baptist was humble---a mere platform for Christ, a preparing, the "opening show." For a long awaited son and precursor to a Savior, from a humanistic perspective, the manner and cause of his death is capricious and ignoble.  He died too soon, he died as the result of his candor and humility.

Humility is not a popular sentiment in our self-reliant and self-promoting culture. It's difficult to catch of glimpse of one's soul in this regard---like looking in the mirror and trying to see you how others see  you.  I find it painful to think about personally--it's easy to spot pride in others, difficult to spot it in oneself and elusive to weed out.. Just when you feel you've managed to rip out a few deep-seated roots in one's heart,  ten more have bloomed anew.

It also reminded me of an excellent short meditation on humility I read this summer by Andrew Murray (1828-1917).

Andrew Murray's work is available free online here.

John the Baptist

John the Baptist, Guido Reni, 1637

Some thoughts on John the Baptist:

1. John was unpretentious and cared not for the opinions of men he didn't respect.  He dressed simply, wildly, and for function. He preached his message in the wilderness not the cities.   He told the high and low alike to repent and bear fruit.   Admonishing both the common crowds and lofty Herod, he didn't soften his message to assuage his audience or save his skin.

2. John joins the long list of men and women who did noble work for God but did not receive their reward on earth.  "That a man so worthless should be permitted to cut short the labours and the life of so holy and useful a character, and that, too, in order to gratify the revenge of an abandoned adulteress, and to reward the vain exhibition of a giddy damsel, must, no doubt, at first appear strange." -James Foote

Beware of judging our work on earth by the world's standards.  If we are different, if we are long suffering, if we have our eyes on rewards in Heaven, then it's not logical or reasonable that we should also expect rewards on earth.  The two are rarely on the same page in the world's present condition.

"Therefore if you have been raised up with Christ, keep seeking the things above, where Christ is, seated at the right hand of God. Set your mind on the things above, not on the things that are on earth. For you have died and your life is hidden with Christ in God.…"

-Colossians 3:2