Why Did God Send Jesus? (John 2:23-3:21) Series

Last week, I worked very hard to end on a sour note. Let's reread 2:23-24:

(23) Now, while he was in Jerusalem during the Passover at the feast, many gave allegiance to his name,

seeing his signs that he was doing.

(24) Now, Jesus himself wasn't giving his own allegiance to them

because he knew all people,

and because need, he didn't have

that anyone should testify about man.

For himself knew what was in man.

While Jesus was in Jerusalem, he did a bunch of other signs that AJ hasn't told us about. Miracles, of some sort or another. But AJ doesn't tell us about any of them. For AJ, what Jesus did, specifically, is less important here than how "the many" respond to Jesus. "Many" people, when they saw the signs Jesus was doing, "gave their allegiance" to Jesus.

But this allegiance, shockingly, wasn't reciprocated by Jesus. Jesus sees all of these people coming to him, saying the right things, doing the right things, and he knows that this response isn't trustworthy. There is something about it that is lacking.

What is it? This week, we get at least a partial answer. Our story continues, in 3:1:

(3:1) Now, there was a man from the Pharisees-- Nicodemus by name, a ruler of the Judeans.

(2) This one came to him at night,

and he said to him,

"Rabbi, we know that from God, a teacher, you have come.

For no one is able these signs to do that you are doing,

except only if God was with him."

Let's pause here. John gives us four clues here, for how to read everything that follows, and we need to make sure we catch these.

(1) Nicodemus is a man.

This maybe doesn't grab you. So let me try reading 2:24-3:1, taking out the chapter division and the white space:

(24) Now, Jesus himself wasn't giving his own allegiance to them

because he knew all people,

and because need, he didn't have

that anyone should testify about man.

For himself knew what was in man.

(3:1) Now, there was a man from the Pharisees.

John just told us that Jesus didn't trust the many who gave their allegiance to him, because Jesus knew what was in man. There is something about man that's just off. Then in verse 1, John deliberately opens by saying that there was a man from the Pharisees. We are being invited to read this story, as a story about what's wrong with "man."

(2) Nicodemus is a ruler of the Judeans.

Nicodemus is not simply a "man." John goes out of his way to describe him a second way, as a ruler of the Judeans.

At this, we are supposed to remember John 1:10-12. These words are about Jesus, and how he was received by his own people, the Judeans:

"In the world, he (Jesus) was,

and the world through him happened (=was created),

and the world, him it didn't know.

For/to his own he came,

and his own didn't receive him.

Now, as many as received him, he gave to them authority/right children of God to be--to the ones giving allegiance to his name."

The gospel of John doesn't really hide anything from us at the beginning of the book. There are no surprises about how all of this is going to turn out. You are going to read Jesus shine as a light, as truth, in the world. But the world didn't know him. And his own people-- the Judeans-- didn't receive him. So when Nicodemus comes, as a ruler of the Judeans, we expect him to act as part of the majority who reject Jesus.

(3) Nicodemus comes to Jesus at night.

When we hear this detail, we are supposed to remember John 1:5:

"And the light in the darkness shines,

and the darkness didn't understand (or: seize) it.

John will have a lot more to say about darkness and light as the gospel continues, but even on the basis of this one verse, we should understand darkness negatively.

The question, though, is how are we supposed to view Nicodemus coming "at night." Some scholars (Schnackenburg, for one) think we are supposed to understand this positively. They argue that Nicodemus is coming out of the darkness, and to the Light.

But I think this is wrong. It's not how AJ describes it, for one thing. Nicodemus comes "at" night, and not "out of the darkness." And, for another, given the framework AJ has given us, I think it's more likely that there is something fundamentally deceitful about the way Nicodemus approaches Jesus. My own take on this is that if Nicodemus was sincere, and trustworthy, he'd be coming to Jesus during normal business hours. Not slinking to him at night.

I'm going to try really hard to read John from left to right, but let's turn to John 12:42-48 (NKJV modified):