III.

(1) There was a man.--Read, But there was a man. Our division of chapters breaks the connection, and the omission of the conjunction leads us to think of the visit of Nicodemus as quite distinct from what has gone before; whereas it really rises out of it (comp. John 3:2 with John 2:23).

The name Nicodemus was not uncommon among the Jews, but like Stephen, Philip, Jason, etc., was derived from their intercourse with the Greeks. (Comp. e.g., Demosth. 549, 23, and Jos. Ant. xiv. 3, ? 2.) Of this particular Nicodemus, we know with certainty nothing more than is told us in this Gospel (John 7:50; John 19:39). The Talmud mentions a Nakedimon, so called from a miracle performed by him, who was the son of Gorion, and whose real name was Bonai. It also gives the name Bonai as one of the disciples of Jesus. He was one of the three richest Jews when Titus besieged Jerusalem, but his family was reduced to the most abject poverty. So far the Talmud. The inference is that this change of fortune is connected with his becoming a Christian and with the persecution which followed, and he is himself identified with the Nicodemus of the Gospel. We can only say this may be so. The reader who cares for more on the subject will find full references in Lampe, and the extracts from the Talmud translated in Lightfoot. Others may be content to accept this latter writer's conclusion. "It is not worth while to take great pains in a question which is very involved, if we may not also call it useless." (For the "Pharisees," to which sect Nicodemus belonged, comp. John 1:24, and Matthew 3:7.) . . .

Verse 1. - But there was a man of the Pharisees. Is this narrative introduced, as Baur thinks, to give a specimen of wrongly directed faith, to which Christ did not entrust himself? and was the evangelist busy at once on his great mission of undervaluing the Jewish parties and nation? Certainly not. We have a clear proof that, in the case of the genuine inquirer, Christ did open His very heart; and to a "ruler of Jews," to a "Pharisee," to a "teacher of Israel," he deigned (because he knew what was in the man, and required nobody's help) to unveil the deepest realities of the kingdom of God and of the salvation of man. Baur is not correct in making Nicodemus out to be a specimen of unbelieving Judaism and unsusceptible Pharisaism, seeing that the later notices of this Sanhedrist show that he became a disciple of Jesus, if secretly, Nicodemus was attracted, as others had been, by the "signs" which Jesus had wrought; but he had gone further and deeper than they, and Jesus "knew it." A controversy has arisen on the point - Did our Lord, by these penetrative glances, manifest his Divine nature, assume a Divine prerogative, or exercise a lofty, penetrative human gift? Westcott, on the philological ground of the contrast in meaning between γινώσκειν and εἰδέναι, urges that the former word, used here, represents knowledge acquired by processes of inquiry and perception, as distinct from the latter, which is reserved for absolute and settled knowledge. Godet, on theological grounds, urges that the phrase refers to the human faculty of observation rather than to the Divine prerogative of heart-searching. There are, however, many other indications of this same thought-mastery, which the evangelists appear to regard as proofs of Divine power; so that I think the real significance of the passage is an ascription to Jesus of Divine power. The supernatural in mind, the superhuman mental processes of Jesus, are part of the proof we have that, though he was Man, he created the irresistible impression that he was more than man. Thus Nathanael and Thomas found these to be the most irresistible proofs of the supreme Divine perfections of their Master (cf. John 1:49; John 4:17; John 6:61; John 11:4, 14; John 13:11; John 21:17; and also Revelation 2:2, 9, 13, etc.). "The man of the Pharisees" furnishes (Godet) a test for determining the authenticity of the narrative. If the lines of the following discourse, which move from the first fundamental conditions of admission into the kingdom of God to the deepest principles of Divine character, and the grounds and consequences of reconciliation with God, are such as meet the standpoint and correct the deductions of the Pharisee, we have, then, all but demonstrative evidence that this conversation did not evolve itself out of the consciousness of the second century. The Pharisaic party was excited by the ministry of John (ch. John 1:24), and throughout the early ministry of Jesus in Galilee followed him, with suspicious, malicious suggestions, even plans for his suppression. The name Nicodemus, if Hebrew in etymology from dam and naki, may have meant "innocent blood;" it Greek, as is more probable, seeing that the plan of bearing Greek as well as Hebrew names was not uncommon, it would signify "Conqueror of the people." Tradition says that he was baptized by Peter and John, and deposed from his position in the Sanhedrin, but supported by his kinsman, Gamaliel. Each reference to him (John 7:50 and John 19:39) implies a certain timidity, and perhaps unworthy reticence. These are relative terms. Much moral courage must have been required for a ruler of the Jews (a phrase only applicable to a man of high ecclesiastical rank) to have dreamed of doing what he is reported to have done here and elsewhere. The Talmud mentions a Nicodemus ben Gotten, who was also called Bonai, a disciple of Jesus, of great wealth and piety, who survived the destruction of Jerusalem, and therein lost nil his fortune (Lightfoot, in loc.; Delitzsch, 'Zeitsch. Luth. Theol.,' 1854). The hint that he was an old man in this year (A.U.C. 781, or A.D. ) renders his survival till A.D. improbable, but not impossible by any means. The identification is not complete. The Talmud does not speak of him as a Sanhedrist, though it gives curious details, which imply that he must have been a priest in the temple, and had the charge of providing the water supply for the pilgrims (Geikie, 1:584; Winer, 'Real.,' 2:152).

Parallel Commentaries ...


Now
δὲ (de)
Conjunction
Strong's 1161: A primary particle; but, and, etc.

there was
Ἦν (Ēn)
Verb - Imperfect Indicative Active - 3rd Person Singular
Strong's 1510: I am, exist. The first person singular present indicative; a prolonged form of a primary and defective verb; I exist.

a man
ἄνθρωπος (anthrōpos)
Noun - Nominative Masculine Singular
Strong's 444: A man, one of the human race. From aner and ops; man-faced, i.e. A human being.

of
ἐκ (ek)
Preposition
Strong's 1537: From out, out from among, from, suggesting from the interior outwards. A primary preposition denoting origin, from, out.

the
τῶν (tōn)
Article - Genitive Masculine Plural
Strong's 3588: The, the definite article. Including the feminine he, and the neuter to in all their inflections; the definite article; the.

Pharisees
Φαρισαίων (Pharisaiōn)
Noun - Genitive Masculine Plural
Strong's 5330: Of Hebrew origin; a separatist, i.e. Exclusively religious; a Pharisean, i.e. Jewish sectary.

named
ὄνομα (onoma)
Noun - Nominative Neuter Singular
Strong's 3686: Name, character, fame, reputation. From a presumed derivative of the base of ginosko; a 'name'.

Nicodemus,
Νικόδημος (Nikodēmos)
Noun - Nominative Masculine Singular
Strong's 3530: Nicodemus, a member of the Sanhedrin. From nikos and demos; victorious among his people; Nicodemus, an Israelite.

a leader
ἄρχων (archōn)
Noun - Nominative Masculine Singular
Strong's 758: Present participle of archo; a first.

of the
τῶν (tōn)
Article - Genitive Masculine Plural
Strong's 3588: The, the definite article. Including the feminine he, and the neuter to in all their inflections; the definite article; the.

Jews.
Ἰουδαίων (Ioudaiōn)
Adjective - Genitive Masculine Plural
Strong's 2453: Jewish. From Iouda; Judaean, i.e. Belonging to Jehudah.


John 3:1 NIV
John 3:1 NLT
John 3:1 ESV
John 3:1 NASB
John 3:1 KJV

John 3:1 BibleApps.com
John 3:1 Biblia Paralela
John 3:1 Chinese Bible
John 3:1 French Bible
John 3:1 Catholic Bible

NT Gospels: John 3:1 Now there was a man (Jhn Jo Jn)