Magpie Tales

Nicodemus is described as a ‘man of the Pharisees’ and a ‘ruler of the Jews’. He was clearly supposed to represent how people in his group were responding to Jesus. So we’ll spend a little time delving into these groups

Jewish Groups/Sects at the time of Jesus

  1. Pharisees. Pharisees were responsible for the revision of Judaism, particularly after the destruction of the temple in AD70. There were around 6000 of them, scattered around Israel. Before being recognised as ‘pharisee’ they were all required to swear an oath in front of three witnesses that they would never break scribal law. Most of them devoted their lives to discussing and writing down interpretive comments on the Torah (Mishnah, or Oral Tradition) and ensuring that they were being implemented. These interpretations were not officially collected and written down before the third century, and authorities agree that it is very hard to get an accurate picture of what the Pharisees were like in AD70, when they were growing in popularity and influence in the synagogues that were starting up around Israel. One of their roles was to interpret the laws of the Torah into practical instructions so that Jews had a clear idea what was and what wasn’t permitted. In order to do this they first had to have a very clear understanding of the Torah.
    The apostle Paul, who trained under Gamaliel, one of the prominent Pharisees, looked back on this (Phil 3:5)  ‘as to the law a Pharisee, as to zeal a persecutor of the church, as to righteousness under the law, blameless’. This verse expresses the paradoxical relationship between the early Christians and the Pharisees. On the one hand, many Pharisees had a zeal for God’s law which meant that they wanted to uphold God’s holiness and call out people who didn’t obey his law. They were particularly zealous in policing the rules relating to blasphemy, which was one of the reasons that they clashed so dramatically with Jesus.
    On the other hand, they were called out by Jesus as being ‘whitewashed sepulchres’ and unable to recognise their Messiah. “Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You are like whitewashed tombs, which look beautiful on the outside but on the inside are full of the bones of the dead and everything unclean. Matt 23:27 Their attempt to ensure adherence to the Torah had added many non-biblical laws to the list of prohibitions: Jesus tackles them in particular regarding Sabbath observance and purity laws (see Mark 7:1-23). He accuses them of having hearts far from God, and ‘teaching as doctrines the commandments of men’. The Mishnah (codified scribal laws) had no fewer than 24 chapters on rules about the Sabbath, and the Talmud (interpretation of the Mishnah) had 64 dense columns of commentary on the same subject. John doesn’t go into as much detail about Jesus’ debates with the Pharisees but he also portrays them as key elements in the cosmic battles between Jesus and the evil spirits: in John 8:13 they finally reject Jesus’ witness about himself, call him demon-possessed/Samaritan and by v59 they are picking up stones to kill him. In Mark 3 the Pharisees responded to finding out that the has healed someone on the Sabbath to plot his destruction with the Herodians – the supporters of Herod Antipas, who was despised by most devout Jews as ungodly at that time.  The portrayal of Pharisees wasn’t all negative, however. In Luke 5:17 Jesus a number of Pharisees from outside Jerusalem visit him to hear what he has to say. They criticise him for forgiving sins (blasphemy), eating with tax collectors and for not advising his disciples to fast regularly.
  2. Sadducees – Priests and Levites. This group was quite prominent in Jerusalem at the time of Christ as they ruled the Temple and were very involved in the festivals such as Passover. Josephus mentions that one of the high priests, Ananas, was a Sadducee. He also states that they enjoyed the patronage of the wealthy, but the masses were more likely to support the Pharisees. In the New Testament, Sadducees were known for rejecting belief in the resurrection compared to Pharisees who did uphold this belief. They were also known for collaborating with the Romans to keep the peace in Jerusalem. The fall of Jerusalem was inevitable after they sided with the Jewish revolt in AD70. During the Roman crackdown many thousands of priests and temple workers were killed, and this group faded into insignificance – Sadducees are not even mentioned by name in John’s gospel. Josephus – one of the only non-Biblical sources of historical information on this period – was a priest and militant in the Jewish war/revolt.  He came from an aristocratic and well off family line, and he later wrote favourably of the Romans so that he would find favour with them. He had no love of Pharisees, believing them to be too powerful. As a trained priest, he didn’t regard Pharisees as having the right to  interpret the law.
  3. Scribes – this group is mentioned a lot in Matthew, Mark, and Luke (but not in John). Originally Scribes were used as recorders and copyists of official data (including the law). Baruch was the scribe who took down Jeremiah’s dictation and acted as his representative. They then became influential in the interpretation of the law – Ezra is a good example (Ezra 7:6-26). During the crisis precipitated by Antiochus IV Epiphanes, the reputation of lay scribes arose as they were zealous for the law to the point of martyrdom – whilst the priestly scribes compromised with Hellenist ideas. Before the time of Jesus, Hillel and Shammai were two leading scribes who started two major schools of interpretation – the two schools met to try and resolve their differences. Some of the scribes referred to in the gospels were ‘Pharisaic scribes’ but there were also ‘priestly scribes’ and others affiliated to other groups. Although Mark’s gospel seems to paint scribes as being universally in opposition to Jesus, Matthew’s gospel seems to have a more sympathetic/nuanced view of Scribes (Matt 8:19).
  4. Essenes/Qumran community  – Whilst these groups are not mentioned in the New Testament, the existence of this sect (numbering at least 4000) confirms that the Jewish community at the time of Jesus was not unified. Whilst Josephus did provide a lot of useful information about this sect/community, the discovery of the ‘Dead Sea Scrolls’ relatively recently has provided documents from that community which show a different side to Judaism. This community was made up exclusively of men who took solemn vows and lived ascetically in a desert community. They practised daily ritual baths for purification. They had a critical and separatist attitude towards the Temple and the High Priests in Jerusalem. They believed that the Temple had become corrupt and polluted, that the High Priests were illegitimate and corrupt, and that the community itself was the true Temple and its members the true priests. They awaited a future time when God would purify the Temple and restore it to its former glory. These writings were written down 50-200 years before Jesus’ ministry, so the Dead Sea Scrolls do not refer to Jesus/Christians. Following the destruction of the Temple this group died out and did not influence the later development of Judaism.  

Discourses and Signs in John’s Gospel

John’s Gospel is characterised by having a number of quite lengthy discourses in which Jesus’ teaching is explained in some detail. We can see that his style is to mix the words of Jesus with his interpretation, and at times it’s difficult to know where to draw the line between the original words spoken by Jesus and John’s explanation/interpretation. These discourses are woven into the Gospel narrative, often alternating with the ‘signs’.

The new birth                                                  Water into wine

  1. The water of life                                               Healing the nobleman’s son
  2. The Divine Son                                                 Healing the lame man
  3. The bread of life                                               Feeding the multitude
  4. The life giving Spirit                                        Walking on water
  5. The light of the world                                     Healing a man born blind
  6. The Good Shepherd                                       The raising of Lazarus

Nicodemus’ approach

Nicodemus – a wealthy Pharisee, member of the Sanhedrin, comes to speak to Jesus at night. He seems to represent the ‘secret’ disciples that Jesus was referring to at the end of chapter 2. Curious, but not fully committed. He may well have not wanted his colleagues to know that he was having a private discussion with Jesus. If we were in Jesus’ position we might have wanted to have him on our side – he could have a positive influence in the Sanhedrin and if he became a true disciple his learning might have helped to make the gospel more palatable for the Pharisees. Politically an alliance would have made sense, but Jesus is in no mood for compromise. Nicodemus starts off with calling Jesus ‘rabbi’ and saying that from the signs he recognises that Jesus has been sent from heaven. But instead of trying to find common ground Jesus goes straight to the costly bit – you must be BORN AGAIN. Jews, especially Pharisees, thought that they were on the moral high ground. They were born to be children of God, and by keeping the law they were in God’s favour. But Jesus challenges this foundational belief. Nicodemus shows his misunderstanding by asking Jesus how someone can be born twice. Instead of responding directly, Jesus gives him some more deep teachings to think about.  He knew that Nicodemus wasn’t yet ready to make a leap of faith.

This is the second story in John’s series ‘Pathways of faith’ – 7 Dialogues with individuals (in private) in John’s gospel. These stories resonate with our experience in Christian life – people come to Jesus from different places, with different questions, and their path to faith (or otherwise) is unique. And Jesus deals with them in different ways that are quite surprising, too. Next week we’ll be focusing on Jesus’ conversation with the Samaritan women at the well – these two conversations are clearly meant to be contrasted with each other.

  1. Nathanael
  2. Nicodemus
  3. Samaritan woman
  4. Martha
  5. Pilate
  6. Mary Magdalene
  7. Peter

Born Again/Born from above – the Greek word can be translated either way. In other verses in John’s gospel, the meaning is more ‘born from above’, but here it is likely that John intends us to get a double meaning. Jews generally accepted that being born into a Jewish family was all you needed to enter the covenant community (with the exception of the Essenes who required an additional initiation ceremony). Proselytes (adult converts to Judaism) who were baptised were sometimes referred to as ‘newly born’, but nobody was saying that you needed more than your Jewish ‘birthright’ to be part of God’s people.

Baptism in ‘water and spirit’ – this has been interpreted in a number of ways. One popular interpretation that this was Jesus’ way of speaking of the new birth ‘from above’ i.e. only one new birth is envisioned (e.g. Carson). Although for modern Christians the idea of a single Christian baptism makes a lot of sense, it doesn’t seem to fully explain how Nicodemus would  have understood it. Another popular view is that it refers to two baptisms (e.g. NT Wright). At the time they were speaking, John the Baptiser had been preaching a baptism of water (symbolising repentance and purification) and promising that Jesus would follow with a baptism in the Spirit. Jesus’ disciples had continued to baptise but this was not a full Christian baptism as we understand it and the full gift of the Spirit was to be given at Pentecost. Jesus was explaining to Nicodemus that even though he had been born a Jew, he would need to submit to baptism and allow the Spirit to breathe new (eternal) life into him. John’s readers were mainly Christians who understood about the link between living water and the Spirit, so he may have expected his readers to see this as a reference to Christian baptism. Although water remains the outward symbol of our membership in the church, the essence of our baptism must still be our baptism in the Spirit. We need to recognise that these words were spoken at a time before the Holy Spirit had been given at Pentecost – some people call this a period ‘transitional discipleship’. Anyway, there is no need to be too dogmatic in our interpretation!

[For reference if it comes up in discussion – other explanations: Some have suggested that water & Spirit is equivalent to ‘born of God’ – but not clear why there would be a need to mention water. Or alternatively water might refer to natural birth or conception. This is possible in the context, but it seems unlikely given that there are no other texts that refer to childbirth as ‘water’ – blood would have been a more likely metaphor. ]

Born of the Spirit – in some churches, a great emphasis has been placed on the experience of conversion and the filling with the Spirit. Across the New Testament we see an emphasis on the need for new birth (See also 1 Peter 1:3,23; Tim 3:5, Rom 6:1-11, Gal 6:15, Ephesians 4:22-24, Heb 5:12-14, Matt 18:3) – but how this is experienced may well be different for different Christians.  There is nothing more inspiring than hearing a new believer give their testimony about how their life has been turned upside down by being ‘born again’. However, many believers who have come to faith after being brought up in Christian homes may not have quite as dramatic a story to tell – but their faith may be just as strong. As NT Wright puts it, putting so much emphasis on the moment  of conversion is a bit like framing your birth certificate and insisting on showing it to everyone who visits your house! In other (Pentecostal) denominations, some churches think that you haven’t been baptised in the Spirit if you didn’t speak in tongues. Again, it is not wrong to emphasise the power of the Holy Spirit at work in the lives of Christians and how the gifts of the Spirit can glorify God – but it is wrong to judge believers by the outward signs of their new faith. We now recognise more clearly how the journey to faith can be quite different for different people and we should all be thanking God that we’re adopted into the family of God and celebrating the fresh work of the Spirit in our lives and the lives of the church.

3:10 describes the Spirit as like the ‘wind’, a metaphor that goes back to the first verses of Genesis 1. Wind and Spirit have identical translations in Hebrew and Greek. If you open the windows and let the fresh breeze of the Spirit to blow around your house there’s no telling what dusty things might be blown about! This would be a great time to read Ezekiel’s vision about the Spirit of God blowing through the valley of dry bones (Ezekiel chapter 37).

As NT Wright puts it ‘if we aren’t ready to do that, we aren’t ready for the gospel’. And that was part of the problem for Nicodemus. He had a lot of dusty old documents neatly organised in his office, and if he opened that window to let the wind blow in his life was going to be turned upside down! But Nicodemus, like some of us, came to believe in a rather roundabout/gradual way. Read 7:50-51, 19:39-42

Response from Pharisees/Jewish leaders –  unbelief. (v11,12) This will be contrasted with the response of the ‘uneducated’ Samaritan woman in Chapter 4.

The Snake and The Love of God 3:14-21

The discourse begins with a reference to a story in Num 21: 5-8. The Israelites had grumbled at Moses, and as punishment poisonous snakes had been sent into their camp. God had provided a remedy to Moses – make a bronze serpent and put it up on a pole. When people look up at the serpent they’ll be healed. The serpent on a pole is now an almost universal symbol of healing (it’s the symbol of the British Medical Association, for instance). John says that Jesus dying on the cross would also achieve healing – ‘the son of man must be lifted up’. So it was God’s purpose from the beginning that Jesus would die on the cross, and his suffering would bring eternal life to everyone who believes in him.

v16 (NT Wright’s version): ‘This, you see, is how much God loved the world, enough to give his only, special, son, so that everyone who believes in him should not be lost but should have eternal life’ 

Although the cross of Christ must have been a traumatic and difficult time for all the disciples, and at the beginning the suffering of Jesus would have been most prominent in the thoughts of the disciples. However, with the passage of time, John can now see clearly that the cross was the ultimate way for God’s love to be shown to the world, showing us the fullness of his glory. ‘The Cross is at the heart of John’s amazing new picture of who God is’ (NT Wright)

But this pivotal point in history also marks the opening of a great divide – between those who believe and those who don’t, between light and darkness, between redemption and condemnation. ‘Everyone who does evil hates the light’.  See Matt 20:34-36  (refers to Micah 7:6) 34 “Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword. 35 For I have come to turn a man against his father,  a daughter against her mother, a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law, a man’s enemies will be the members of his own household.’ Family/friendship ties have to take second place when we commit to Christ. However, this even also marks the closure of an even more important divide – between God and man. Jesus now bridges the gap between mankind and God: 1 Tim 2:5 ‘For there is one God and one mediator between God and mankind, the man Christ Jesus’