John 3:2

John

TEACHER OR SAVIOUR?

Joh 3:2.

The connection in which the Evangelist introduces the story of Nicodemus throws great light on the aspect under which we are to regard it. He has just been saying that upon our Lord’s first visit to Jerusalem at the Passover there was a considerable amount of interest excited, and a kind of imperfect faith in Him drawn out, based solely on His miracles. He adds that this faith was regarded by Christ as unreliable; and he goes on to explain that our Lord exercised great reserve in His dealings with the persons who professed it, for the reason that ‘He knew all men, and needed not that any should testify of man, for He knew what was in man.’

Now, if you note that reiteration of the word ‘man,’ you will understand the description which is given of the person who is next introduced. ‘He knew what was in man. There was a man of the Pharisees named Nicodemus, a ruler of the Jews.’ It would have been enough to have said, ‘There was a Pharisee.’ When John says ‘a man of the Pharisees,’ he is not merely carried away by the echo in his ears of his own last words, but it is as if he had said, ‘Now, here is one illustration of the sort of thing that I have been speaking about; one specimen of an imperfect faith built upon miracles; and one illustration of the way in which Jesus Christ dealt with it.’

Nicodemus was ‘a Pharisee.’ That tells us the school to which he belonged, and the general drift of his thought. He was ‘a ruler of the Jews.’ That tells us that he held an official position in the supreme court of the nation, to which the Romans had left some considerable shadow of power in ecclesiastical matters. And this man comes to Christ and acknowledges Him. Christ deals with him in a very suggestive fashion. His confession, and the way in which our Lord received it, are what I desire to consider briefly in this sermon.

I. Note then, first, this imperfect confession.

Everything about it, pretty nearly, is wrong. ‘He came to Jesus by night,’ half-ashamed and wholly afraid of speaking out the conviction that was working in him. He was a man in position. He could not compromise himself in the eyes of his co-Sanhedrists. ‘It would be a grave thing for a man like me to be found in converse with this new Rabbi and apparent Prophet. I must go cautiously, and have regard to my reputation and my standing in the world; and shall steal to Him by night.’ There is something wrong with any convictions about Jesus Christ which let themselves be huddled up in secret. The true apprehension of Him is like a fire in a man’s bones, that makes him ‘weary of forbearing’ when he locks his lips, and forces him to speak. If Christians can be dumb, there is something dreadfully wrong with their Christianity. If they do not regard Jesus Christ in such an aspect as to oblige them to stand out in the world and say, ‘Whatever anybody says or thinks about it, I am Christ’s man,’ then be sure that they do not yet know Him as they ought to do.

Nicodemus ‘came to Jesus by night,’ and therein condemned himself. He said, ‘Rabbi, we know.’ There is more than a soupcon of patronage in that. He is giving Jesus Christ a certificate, duly signed and sealed by Rabbinical authority. He evidently thinks that it is no small matter that he and some of his fellows should have been disposed to look with favour upon this new Teacher. And so he comes, if not patronising the young man, at all events extremely conscious of his own condescension in recognising Him with his ‘We know.’

Had he the right to speak for any of his colleagues? If so, then at that very early stage of our Lord’s ministry there was a conviction beginning to work in that body of ecclesiastics which casts a very lurid light on their subsequent proceedings. It was a good long while after, when Jesus Christ’s attitude towards them had been a little more clearly made out than it was at the beginning, that they said officially, ‘As for this fellow, we know not whence He is.’ They ‘knew’ when He did not seem to be trenching on their prerogatives, or driving His Ithuriel-spear through their traditional professions of orthodoxy and punctilious casuistries. But when He trod on their toes, when He ripped up their pretensions, when He began to show His antagonism to their formalism and traditionalism, then they did not know where He came from. And there are many of us who are very polite to Jesus Christ as long as He does not interfere with us, and who begin to doubt His authority when He begins to rebuke our sins.

The man that said ‘We know,’ and then proceeded to tell Christ the grounds upon which He was accepted by him, was not in the position which becomes sinful men drawing near to their Saviour. ‘We know that Thou art a Teacher’-contrast that, with its ring of complacency, and, if not superior, at least co-ordinate, authority, with ‘Jesus! Master! have mercy on me,’ or with ‘Lord! save or I perish,’ and you get the difference between the way in which a formalist, conceited of his knowledge, and a poor, perishing sinner, conscious of his ignorance and need, go to the Saviour.

Further, this imperfect confession was of secondary value, because it was built altogether upon miraculous evidence. Now, there has been a great deal of exaggeration about the value of the evidence of miracle. The undue elevation to which it was lifted in the apologetic literature of the eighteenth century, when it was almost made out as if there was no other proof that Jesus came from God than that He wrought miracles, has naturally led, in this generation and in the last one, to an equally exaggerated undervaluing of its worth. Jesus Christ did appeal to signs; He did also most distinctly place faith that rested merely upon miracle as second best; when He said, for instance, ‘If ye believe not Me, yet believe the works.’ Nicodemus says, ‘We know that Thou art a Teacher sent from God, because no man can do these miracles except God be with him.’ Ah! Nicodemus! did not the substance of the teaching reveal the source of the teaching even more completely than the miracles that accompanied it? Surely, if I may use an old illustration, the bell that rings in to the sermon {which is the miracles} is less conclusive as to the divine source of the teaching than is the sermon itself. Christ Himself is His own best evidence, and His words shine in their own light, and need no signs in order to authenticate their source. The signs are there, and are precious in my eyes less as credentials of His authority than as revelations of His character and His work. They are wonders; that is much. They are proofs; as I believe. But, high above both of these characteristics, they are signs of the spiritual work that He does, and manifestations of His redeeming power. And so a faith that had no ears for the ring of the divine voice in the words, and no eyes for the beauty and perfection of the character, was vulgar and low and unreliable, inasmuch as it could give no better reason for itself than that Jesus had wrought miracles,

I need not remind you of how noticeable it is that at this very early stage in our Lord’s ministry there were a sufficient number of miracles done to be qualified by the Evangelist as ‘many,’ and to have been a very powerful factor in bringing about this real, though imperfect, faith. John has only told us of one miracle prior to this; and the other Evangelists do not touch upon these early days of our Lord’s ministry at all. So that we are to think of a whole series of works of power and supernatural grace which have found no record in these short narratives. How much more Jesus Christ was, and did, and said, than any book can ever tell! These are but parts of His ways; a whisper of His power. The fulness of it remains unrevealed after all revelation.

But the central deficiency of this confession lies in the altogether inadequate conception of Jesus Christ and His work which it embodies. ‘We know that Thou art a Teacher, a miracle-worker, a man sent from God, and in communion with Him.’ These are large recognitions, far too large to be spoken of any but a select few of the sons of men. But they fall miserably beneath the grandeur, and do not even approach within sight of the central characteristic, of Christ and of His work. Nicodemus is the type of large numbers of men nowadays. All the people that have a kind of loose, superficial connection with Christianity re-echo substantially his words. They compliment Jesus Christ out of His divinity and out of His redeeming work, and seem to think that they are rather conferring an honour upon Christianity when they condescend to say, ‘We, the learned pundits of literature; we, the arbiters of taste; we, the guides of opinion; we, the writers in newspapers and magazines and periodicals; we, the leaders in social and philanthropic movements-we recognise that Thou art a Teacher.’ Yes, brethren, and the recognition is utterly inadequate to the facts of the case, and is insult, and not recognition.

II. Let me ask you to look now, in the next place, at the way in which Jesus Christ deals with this imperfect confession.

It was a great thing for a young Rabbi from Nazareth, who had no certificate from the authorities, to find an opening thus into the very centre of the Sanhedrim. There is nothing in life, to an ardent young soul, at the beginning of his career-especially if he feels that he has a burden laid upon him to deliver to his fellows-half so sweet as the early recognition by some man of wisdom and weight and influence, that he too is a messenger from God. In later years praise and acknowledgment cloy. And one might have expected some passing word from the Master that would have expressed such a feeling as that, if He had been only a young Teacher seeking for recognition. I remember that in that strange medley of beauty and absurdity, the Koran, somewhere or other, there is an outpouring of Mahomet’s heart about the blessedness of his first finding a soul that would believe in him. And it is strange that Jesus Christ had no more welcome for this man than the story tells that He had. For He meets him without a word of encouragement; without a word that seemed to recognise even a growing and a groping confidence, and yet He would not ‘quench the smoking flax.’ Yes! sometimes the kindest way to deal with an imperfect conception is to show unsparingly why it is imperfect; and sometimes the apparent repelling of a partial faith is truly the drawing to Himself by the Christ of the man, though his faith be not approved.

So, notice how our Lord meets the imperfections of this acknowledgment. He begins by pointing out what is the deepest and universal need of men. Nicodemus had said, ‘Rabbi, we know that Thou art a Teacher come from God.’ And Christ says, ‘Verily, verily, I say unto you, ye must be born again.’ What has that to do with Nicodemus’s acknowledgment? Apparently nothing; really everything. For, if you will think for a moment, you will see how it meets it precisely, and forces the Rabbi to deepen his conception of the Lord. The first thing that you and I want, for our participation in the Kingdom of God, is a radical out-and-out change in our whole character and nature. ‘Ye must be born again’; now, whatever more that means, it means, at all events, this-a thorough-going renovation and metamorphosis of a man’s nature, as the sorest need that the world and all the individuals that make up the world have.

The deepest ground of that necessity lies in the fact of sin. Brother, we can only verify our Lord’s assertion by honestly searching the depths of our own hearts, and looking at ourselves in the light of God. Think what is meant when we say, ‘He is Light, and in Him is no darkness at all.’ Think of that absolute purity, that, to us, awful aversion from all that is evil, from all that is sinful. Think of what sort of men they must be who can see the Lord. And then look at yourself. Are we fit to pass that threshold? Are we fit to gaze into that Face? Is it possible that we should have fellowship with Him? Oh, brethren, if we rightly meditate upon two facts, the holiness of God and our own characters, I think we shall feel that Jesus Christ has truly stated the case when He says, ‘Ye must be born again.’ Unless you and I can get ourselves radically changed, there is no Heaven for us; there is no fellowship with God for us. We must stand before Him, and feel that a great gulf is fixed between us and Him.

And so when a man comes with his poor little ‘Thou art a Teacher,’ no words are wanted in order to set in glaring light the utter inadequacy of such a conception as that. What the world wants is not a Teacher, it is a Life-giver. What men want is not to be told the truth; they know it already. What they want is not to be told their duty; they know that too. What they want is some power that shall turn them clean round. And what each of us wants before we can see the Lord is that, if it may be, something shall lay hold of us, and utterly change our natures, and express from our hearts the black drop that lies there tainting everything.

Now, this necessity is met in Jesus Christ. For there were two ‘musts’ in His talk with Nicodemus, and both of them bore directly on the one purpose of deepening Nicodemus’s inadequate conception of what He was and what He did. He said, ‘Ye must be born again,’ in order that his hearer, and we, might lay to heart this, that we need something more than a Teacher, even a Life-giver; and He said, ‘The Son of Man must be lifted up,’ in order that we might all know that in Him the necessity is met, and that the Son of Man, who came down from Heaven, and is in Heaven, even whilst He is on earth, is the sole ladder by which men can ascend into Heaven and gaze upon God.

Thus it is Christ’s work as Redeemer, Christ’s sacrifice on the Cross, Christ’s power as bringing to the world a new and holy life, and breathing it into all that trust in Him, which make the very centre of His work. Set by the side of that this other, ‘Thou art a Teacher sent from God.’ Ah, brethren, that will not do; it will not do for you and me! We want something a great deal deeper than that. The secret of Jesus is not disclosed until we have passed into the inner shrine, where we learn that He is the Sacrifice for the world, and the Source and Fountain of a new life. I beseech you, take Christ’s way of dealing with this certificate of His character given by the Rabbi who did not know his own necessities, and ponder it.

Mark the underlying principle which is here-viz. if you want to understand Christ you must understand sin; and whoever thinks lightly of it will think meanly of Him. An underestimate of the reality, the universality, the gravity of the fact of sin lands men in the superficial and wholly impotent conception, ‘Rabbi! Thou art a Teacher sent from God.’ A true knowledge of myself as a sinful man, of my need of pardon, of my need of cleansing, of my need of a new nature, which must be given from above, and cannot be evolved from within, leads me, and I pray it may lead you, to cast yourself down before Him, with no complaisant words of intellectual recognition upon your lips, but with the old cry, ‘Lord! be merciful to me a sinner.’

III. And now, dear friends, one last word. Notice when and where this imperfect disciple was transformed into a courageous confessor.

We do not know what came immediately of this conversation. We only know that some considerable time after, Nicodemus had not screwed himself up to the point of acknowledging out and out, like a brave man, that he was Christ’s follower; but that he timidly ventured in the Sanhedrim to slip in a remonstrance ingeniously devised to conceal his own opinions, and yet to do some benefit to Christ, when he said, ‘Does our law judge any man before it hear him?’ And, of course, the timid remonstrance was swept aside, as it deserved to be, by the ferocious antagonism of his co-Sanhedrists.

But when the Cross came, and it had become more dangerous to avow discipleship, he plucked up courage, or rather courage flowed into him from that Cross, and he went boldly and ‘craved the body of Jesus,’ and got it, and buried it. No doubt when he looked at Jesus hanging on the Cross, he remembered that night in Jerusalem when the Lord had said, ‘The Son of Man must be lifted up,’ and he remembered how He had spoken about the serpent lifted in the wilderness, and a great light blazed in upon him, which for ever ended all hesitation and timidity for him. And so he was ready to be a martyr, or anything else, for the sake of Him whom he now found to be far more than a ‘Teacher,’ even the Sacrifice by whose stripes he was healed.

Dear brethren, I bring that Cross to you now, and pray you to see there Christ’s real work for us, and for the world. He has taught us, but He has done more. He has not only spoken, He has died. He has not only shown us the path on which to walk, He has made it possible for us to walk in it. He is not merely one amongst the noble band that have guided and inspired and instructed humanity, but He stands alone-not a Teacher, but the Redeemer, ‘the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sins of the world.’

If He is a Teacher, take His teachings, and what are they? These, that He is the Son of God; that ‘He came from God’; that He ‘went to God’; that He ‘gives His life a ransom for many’; that He is to be the Judge of mankind; that if we trust in Him, our sins are forgiven and our nature is renewed. Do not go picking and choosing amongst His teachings, for these which I have named are as surely His as ‘Whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them,’ or any other of the moral teachings which the world professes to admire. Take the whole teachings of the whole Christ, and you will confess Him to be the Redeemer of your souls, and the Life-giver by whom, and by whom alone, we enter the Kingdom of God.

Alexander MacLaren, Expositions of Holy Scripture (1904–1910) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

3:2 After dark: Nicodemus might have feared public association with Jesus. Night also symbolizes the realm of evil, untruth, and unbelief (9:4; 11:10; 13:30).

Tyndale Open Study Notes — © Tyndale Open Resources, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

Joh 3:2. Νυκτός, by night) There is never a time that Christ does not receive comers to Him.—οἴδασμεν, we know) I, and those like me: the rulers rather than the Pharisees, ch. Joh 12:42. To this plural answers the plural, Joh 3:7, “Ye must be born again.” The Antecedent is put by Nicodemus as the consequent: For this reason I wished to confer with Thee. He wished to hear as to heavenly things and as to sublime things, Joh 3:12 [but Jesus brings him up to first principles.—V. g.]—[49] σημεῖα, signs) ch. Joh 2:23, “At the passover, on the feast day, many believed on Him when they saw the miracles which He did.”

[49] διδάσκαλος, master, [teacher]) That indeed is true; but it by no means carries with it every point [that is needed for salvation]; ver. 14, 16, “As Moses lifted up the serpent, etc., so must the Son of Man be lifted up, etc.: for God so loved the world, that He gave His Only-begotten Son, that whosoever believeth on Him should not perish,” etc.—V. g.

Bengel's Gnomon of the New Testament — English translation (T&T Clark, Edinburgh, 1860) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Joh 3:2 . οὗτος ἦλθε πρὸς αὐτὸν . The pronoun instead of the name Jesus, as Holtzmann remarks, shows the close connection with the closing verses of the last chapter. Nicodemus came to the fountain head, dissatisfied with the way in which his colleagues were dealing with Jesus, and resolved to judge for himself. Nothing could be more hopeful than such a state of mind. When a man says, I will see for myself what Jesus is, not influenced by what other men say; before I sleep I will settle this matter, the result is fairly certain to be good. See chap. Joh 7:50 , Joh 19:39 . He came νυκτὸς , certainly with the purpose of secrecy, and yet for a man in his position to come at all was much. No timidity is shown in Joh 7:50 . In Joh 19:39 John still identifies him as “he that came to Jesus by night,” but adds “at the first” in contrast to the courage he afterwards showed. Similarly, as Grotius tells us, Euclid of Megara visited Socrates by night when Athens was closed by edict against the Megarians. Modestly and as if not presuming to speak as an individual but as representing a party however small (Joh 3:2 ), he says, Ῥαββεί οἴδαμεν ὅτι ἀπὸ θεοῦ ἐλήλυθας διδάσκαλος , “Rabbi, we know that Thou art come from God as a teacher”. We need not see in the words anything either patronising or flattering, but merely the natural first utterance of a man wishing to show the state of his mind. He was convinced that Jesus was a divinely commissioned teacher. He came to hear what He had to teach. His teaching, in the judgment of Nicodemus, was divinely authenticated by the miracles; but to Nicodemus at any rate the teaching was that for which the miracles existed. They were σημεῖα , and though not recorded, they must have been of a kind to strike a thoughtful mind ταῦτα τὰ σημεῖα ἃ σὺ ποιεῖς , the emphatic pronoun, as if other miracles might not have been so convincing. At the same time the reply of Jesus shows that behind this cautious designation of “teacher” there lay in the mind of Nicodemus a suspicion that this might be the Messiah. Nicodemus may have taken to heart the Baptist’s proclamation. Grotius supposes the conversation is abridged, and that Nicodemus had intimated that he wished to learn something about the kingdom which formed the subject of our Lord’s teaching. “Responsio tacite innuit, quod adjectum a Nicodemo fuerat, nempe, velle se scire, quandoquidem Jesus Regni coelestis inter docendum mentionem saepe faceret, quae ratio esset eo perveniendi.” But with the introduction to this incident (Joh 2:23-25 ) in our mind, it seems gratuitous to suppose that part of the conversation is here omitted. Jesus speaks to the intention and mental attitude of His interlocutor rather than to his words. He saw that Nicodemus was conceiving it as a possible thing that these miracles might be the signs of the kingdom; and in this visit of Nicodemus He sees what may be construed into an overture from the Pharisaic party. And so He cuts Nicodemus remorselessly short. As when the Pharisees (Luk 17:20 ) demand of Him when the Kingdom of God should come, He replied: The Kingdom of God cometh not with observation , not with signs which the natural man can measure, it comes within you; so here in strikingly similar language He says, ἐὰν μή τις γεννηθῇ ἄνωθεν , οὐ δύναται ἰδεῖν τὴν βασιλείαν τοῦ θεοῦ . This allusion to the kingdom, which is not a favourite idea of John’s, is one of the incidental marks of his historical trustworthiness. ἄνωθεν is sometimes local = ἐξ οὐρανοῦ , from above; sometimes temporal = ἐξ ἀρχῆς , de novo . The former meaning is advocated here by Baur, Lücke, Meyer, and others. But the use of παλιγγενεσία and the difficulty stated by Nicodemus in Joh 3:4 rather indicate that the Syriac and Vulgate [nisi quis renatus fuerit], Augustine, Calvin, and among many others Weiss are right in adopting the temporal meaning and rendering with R.V [38] “anew”. [Wetstein, in proof of this meaning, quotes from Artemidorus, who tells of a father who dreamt that there was born to him a child exactly like himself; “he seemed,” he says, “to be born a second time,” ἄνωθεν . And in the touching story which gave rise to the Domine quo vadis Church at Rome where Peter met Christ, the words of the Lord, as given in the Acta Pauli, are ἄνωθεν μέλλω σταυρωθῆναι .] The answer of Nicodemus might seem to indicate that he had understood ἄνωθεν as equivalent to his own δεύτερον . But it is impossible to determine with certainty which is the correct meaning. A man must be born again, says our Lord, because otherwise οὐ δύναται ἰδεῖν τὴν βασιλείαν τοῦ θεοῦ . Is ἰδεῖν here to be taken in the sense of “seeing” or of “enjoying,” “partaking”? Meyer and Weiss, resting on such expressions as ἰδεῖν θάνατον (Luk 2:26 , Heb 11:5 ), διαφθοράν (Act 2:27 ), ἡμέρας ἀγαθάς (1Pe 3:10 ), understand that “participation” is meant. So Calvin, “ videre regnum Dei idem valet ac ingredi in regnum Dei,” and Grotius, “participem fieri”. Confirmation of this view is at first sight given by the εἰσελθεῖν of Joh 3:5 . But it is of “signs” Nicodemus has been speaking, of observing the kingdom coming; and Christ says: To see the kingdom you must be spiritual, born anew, for the signs are spiritual. In this language there should have been nothing to stumble Nicodemus. All Jerusalem was ringing with the echoes of the Baptist’s preaching, the essence of which was “ye must be born again”. To be children of Abraham is nothing. There is nothing moral, nothing spiritual, nothing of the will, nothing related to the Kingdom of God in being children of Abraham. As regards your fleshly birth you are as passive as stones and as truly outside the kingdom. In fact John had excommunicated the whole nation, and expressly told them that they must submit to baptism, like Gentile proselytes, if they were to be prepared for the Messiah’s reign. The language may not have puzzled Nicodemus. Had our Lord said: “Every Gentile must be born again,” he would have understood. It is the idea that staggers him. His bewilderment he utters in the words:

[38] Revised Version.

The Expositor's Greek Testament, edited by W. Robertson Nicoll (1897–1910) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

We know that thou art sent from God to teach us.

But he in whom some part of the excellency of God appeareth. And if Nicodemus had known Christ aright, he would not only have said that God was with him, but in him: as Paul doth, 2 Cor. 1:19.

Geneva Bible (1599) marginal notes — public domain. Text via Bolls.life.

came to Jesus by night--One of those superficial "believers" mentioned in Joh 2:23-24, yet inwardly craving further satisfaction, Nicodemus comes to Jesus in quest of it, but comes "by night" (see Joh 19:38-39; Joh 12:42); he avows his conviction that He was

come from God--an expression never applied to a merely human messenger, and probably meaning more here--but only as "a teacher," and in His miracles he sees a proof merely that "God is with Him." Thus, while unable to repress his convictions, he is afraid of committing himself too far.

Jamieson, Fausset & Brown — Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (1871) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

Verse 2. Came to Jesus by night] He had matters of the utmost importance, on which he wished to consult Christ; and he chose the night season, perhaps less through the fear of man than through a desire to have Jesus alone, as he found him all the day encompassed with the multitude; so that it was impossible for him to get an opportunity to speak fully on those weighty affairs concerning which he intended to consult him. However, we may take it for granted that he had no design at present to become his disciple; as baptism and circumcision, which were the initiating ordinances among the Jews, were never administered in the night time. If any person received baptism by night, he was not acknowledged for a proselyte. See Wetstein. But as Jews were not obliged to be baptized, they being circumcised, and consequently in the covenant, he, being a Jew, would not feel any necessity of submitting to this rite.

Rabbi] My Master, or Teacher, a title of respect given to the Jewish doctors, something like our Doctor of Divinity, i.e. teacher of Divine things. But as there may be many found among us who, though they bear the title, are no teachers, so it was among the Jews; and perhaps it was in reference to this that Nicodemus uses the word διδασκαλος, didaskalos, immediately after, by which, in Joh 1:38, St. John translates the word rabbi. Rabbi, teacher, is often no more than a title of respect: didaskolos signifies a person who not only has the name of teacher, but who actually does teach.

We know that thou art a teacher come from God] We, all the members of the grand Sanhedrin, and all the rulers of the people, who have paid proper attention to thy doctrine and miracles. We are all convinced of this, though we are not all candid enough to own it. It is possible, however, that οιδαμεν, we know, signifies no more than, it is known, it is generally acknowledged and allowed, that thou art a teacher come from God.

No man can do these miracles] It is on the evidence of thy miracles that I ground my opinion of thee. No man can do what thou dost, unless the omnipotence of God be with him.

Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible (1810–1826) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

2. He came to Jesus by night. From the circumstance of his coming by night we infer that his timidity was excessive; for his eyes were dazzled, as it were, by the splendor of his own greatness and reputation. Perhaps too he was hindered by shame, for ambitious men think that their reputation is utterly ruined, if they have once descended from the dignity of teachers to the rank of scholars; and he was unquestionably puffed up with a foolish opinion of his knowledge. In short, as he had a high opinion of himself, he was unwilling to lose any part of his elevation. And yet there appears in him some seed of piety; for hearing that a Prophet of God had appeared, he does not despise or spurn the doctrine which has been brought from heaven, and is moved by some desire to obtain it, — a desire which sprung from nothing else than fear and reverence for God. Many are tickled by an idle curiosity to inquire eagerly about any thing that is new, but there is no reason to doubt that it was religious principle and conscientious feeling that excited in Nicodemus the desire to gain a more intimate knowledge of the doctrine of Christ. And although that seed remained long concealed and apparently dead, yet after the death of Christ it yielded fruit, such as no man would ever have expected, (John 19:39.)

Rabbi, we know. The meaning of these words is, “Master, we know that thou art come to be a teacher.” But as learned men, at that time, were generally called Masters, Nicodemus first salutes Christ according to custom, and gives him the ordinary designation, Rabbi, (which means Master, ) and afterwards declares that he was sent by God to perform the office of a Master. And on this principle depends all the authority of the teachers in the Church; for as it is only from the word of God that we must learn wisdom, we ought not to listen to any other persons than those by whose mouth God speaks. And it ought to be observed, that though religion was greatly corrupted and almost destroyed among the Jews, still they always held this principle, that no man was a lawful teacher, unless he had been sent by God. But as there are none who more haughtily and more daringly boast of having been sent by God than the false prophets do, we need discernment in this case for trying the spirits. Accordingly Nicodemus adds:

For no man can do the signs which thou doest, unless God be with him. It is evident, he says, that Christ has been sent by God, because God displays his power in him so illustriously, that it cannot be denied that God is with him He takes for granted that God is not accustomed to work but by his ministers, so as to seal the office which he has entrusted to them. And he had good grounds for thinking so, because God always intended that miracles should be seals of his doctrine. Justly therefore does he make God the sole Author of miracles, when he says that no man can do these signs, unless God be with him; for what he says amounts to a declaration that miracles are not performed by the arm of man, but that the power of God reigns, and is illustriously displayed in them. In a word, as miracles have a twofold advantage, to prepare the mind for faith, and, when it has been formed by the word, to confirm it still more, Nicodemus had profited aright in the former part, because by miracles he recognizes Christ as a true prophet of God.

Yet his argument appears not to be conclusive; for since the false prophets deceive the ignorant by their impostures as fully as if they had proved by true signs that they are the ministers of God, what difference will there be between truth and falsehood, if faith depends on miracles? Nay, Moses expressly says that God employs this method to try if we love him, (Deuteronomy 13:3.) We know also, the warning of Christ, (Matthew 24:14,) and of Paul, (2 Thessalonians 2:9,) that believers ought to beware of lying signs, by which Anti-Christ dazzles the eyes of many. I answer, God may justly permit this to be done, that those who deserve it may be deceived by the enchantments of Satan. But I say that this does not hinder the elect from perceiving in miracles the power of God, which is to them an undoubted confirmation of true and sound doctrine. Thus, Paul boasts that his apostleship was confirmed by signs, and wonders, and mighty deeds, (2 Corinthians 12:12.) To whatever extent Satan may, like an ape, counterfeit the works of God in the dark, yet when the eyes are opened and the light of spiritual wisdom shines, miracles are a sufficiently powerful attestation of the presence of God, as Nicodemus here declares it to be.

John Calvin's Commentaries (1540-1563) — public domain. Text from the Calvin Translation Society English edition (1840s-50s) via the Christian Classics Ethereal Library (ccel.org). Calvin's coverage is partial (roughly two-thirds of the Bible); uncommented books and verses are honest gaps, never fabricated. The 19th-century editor's footnotes and remarks are omitted so the notes are faithfully Calvin's own voice.

(2) By night.—This has impressed itself upon the writer’s mind, so that it becomes part of the description of Nicodemus in Joh_19:39, and in some MSS. in Joh_7:50. We have to think of him as having heard the answer of the messengers sent to the Baptist (Joh_1:20 et seq.), as present at the cleansing of the Temple, as the witness of miracles in Jerusalem, as by these means convinced that this Teacher had a message from God, and resolved to hear it. But the Sanhedrin had officially taken a hostile position, and an individual member of it dare not openly take any other. His own conviction is expressed by his coming to Jesus at all; his fear of public opinion and of the possible exclusion from the synagogue by his coming at night. (Comp. Joh_12:42-43.)

Rabbi.—The customary title of reverence for a teacher (comp. Note on Joh_1:38), but given here by a technically trained Rabbi to One who had no formal title to it (Joh_7:15).

We know that thou art a teacher come from God.—This explains the title he has used. He does not go beyond this. There has been, -as in the case of John the Baptist, sufficient to prove a more than human mission, but with this there has been nothing to meet the common Messianic expectation. Still, if this is a Prophet, working miracles like those of old, and evidently sent from God, He will be able to solve all doubts, and answer the questions pressing on the hearts of men. The plural pronoun expresses nothing more than the general conviction that the power to work miracles was a divine attestation of the teaching (Joh_9:16; Joh_9:33). There were, indeed, others in the same mental position as Nicodemus, but none accompanied him; and it is not probable that his visit was known to any of them. The “we” occurs again in our Lord’s reply in Joh_3:11, and it may be that both find their true explanation in the fact that this interview took place in the house, and in the presence of John, who had led Nicodemus to come, as he himself had gone, with doubting heart, to the place where Jesus was dwelling (Joh_1:38).

(2) The word for “bloweth,” “breatheth,” is of the same root as πνεῦμα. It is used in the New Testament with “wind,” but naturally has the meaning of its cognate substantive. The Vulgate can exactly render it by “Spiritus ubi vult spirat,” but we have in English no verb cognate with “Spirit.”

A Bible Commentary for English Readers, edited by Charles John Ellicott (1878–1897) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

2. we know] Others are disposed to believe as well as Nicodemus.

a teacher come from God] In the Greek the order is, that Thou art come from God as teacher. We are not sure that ‘come from God’ points to the Messiah, ‘He that should come.’ But if so, we see the timidity of Nicodemus; he begins with an admission of Christ’s Messiahship, and ends with the weak word ‘teacher;’ the Messiah was never thought of as a mere teacher. But ‘come from God’ may only mean divinely sent, as a Prophet (Joh_1:6), or even less.

these miracles] Better, these signs, as in Joh_2:11.

except God be with him] A similarly weak conclusion, shewing timidity: one expects ‘unless he be a Prophet,’ or ‘the Messiah.’

The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges (gen. ed. J. J. S. Perowne; Cambridge University Press, 1878–1918) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Jesus answered and said unto him,.... Not to any express question put by Nicodemus; unless it can be thought, that a question of this kind might be asked, what is the kingdom of God, so much spoken of in thy ministry? and what is requisite to the seeing and enjoying of it? though not recorded by the evangelist; but rather to the words of Nicodemus, concluding from his miracles, that he was the Messiah; and that the kingdom of God was now approaching, or the world to come, the Jews so much speak of; and in which all Israel, according to their notion, were to have a part (o); and which notion, our Lord in the following words, seems to oppose:

verily, verily, I say unto thee, except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God; Nicodemus, according to the general sense of the nation, thought that when the Messiah came, and his kingdom was set up, they should all share in it, without any more ado; they being the descendants of Abraham, and having him for their father: but Christ assures him, that he must be "born again"; in distinction from, and opposition to his first birth by nature; in which he was vile, polluted, carnal, and corrupt, being conceived in sin, and shapen in iniquity, and was a transgressor from the womb, and by nature a child of wrath; and in opposition to, his descent from Abraham, or being born of him, and of his seed; for this would be of no avail to him in this case, nor give him any right to the privileges and ordinances of the kingdom of God, or the Gospel dispensation; see Mat 3:9; as also to birth by proselytism; for the Jews have a frequent saying (p), that

"one that is made a proselyte, , "is like a child new born".''

Which they understand, not in a spiritual, but in a civil sense; such being free from all natural and civil relations, and from all obligations to parents, masters (q), &c. And by this phrase our Lord signifies, that no man, either as a man, or as a son of Abraham, or as a proselyte to the Jewish religion, can have any true knowledge of, or right unto, the enjoyment of the kingdom of God, unless he is born again; or regenerated, and quickened by the Spirit of God; renewed in the spirit of his mind; has Christ formed in his heart; becomes a partaker of the divine nature; and in all respects a new creature; and an other in heart, in principle, in practice, and conversation; or unless he be "born from above", as the word is rendered in Joh 3:31; that is, by a supernatural power, having the heavenly image stamped on him; and being called with an heavenly calling, even with the high calling of God in Christ Jesus: if this is not the case, a man can have no true knowledge of the kingdom of the Messiah, which is not a temporal and carnal one; it is not of this world, nor does it come with observation; nor can he have any right to the ordinances of it, which are of a spiritual nature; and much less can he be thought to have any true notions, or to be possessed of the kingdom of grace, which lies in righteousness, peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost; or to have either a meetness for, or a right unto the kingdom of glory: though by the following words it seems, that the word is rightly rendered "again", or a second time, as it is by Nounus.

(o) Misn. Sanhedrin, c. 11. sect. 1. (p) T. Bab. Yebamot, fol. 22. 1. 48. 2. 62. 1. & 97. 2. (q) Vid. Maimon. Issure Bia, c. 14. sect. 11. & Eduth, c. 13. sect. 2.

John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible (1746–1763) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

2 The same came to Jesus by night, and said unto him, Rabbi, we know that thou art a teacher come from God: for no man can do these miracles that thou doest, except God be with him.

Ver. 2. We know] But will not know. Hence they became sinners against the Holy Ghost, Mat 12:23, &c. The devil that commits this sin every day, is full of objective knowledge, and thence hath his name. {a}

No man can do these miracles] Those magicians of Egypt, Jannes and Jambres, did but cast a mist, and beguile the sight of Pharaoh and his followers. How Tyndale hindered the magician of Antwerp, that he could not do his feats, see Acts and Monuments, fol. 985.

{a} Δαιμων quasi Δαημων. Plato. Miracula a diabolo edita sunt praestigiae, imposturae, phantasmata, ludibria. Bacholcer.

John Trapp, A Commentary or Exposition upon All the Books of the Old and New Testament (1647–1656) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

The same came to Jesus - The design of his coming seems to have been to inquire more fully of Jesus what was the doctrine which he came to teach. He seems to have been convinced that he was the Messiah, and desired to be further instructed in private respecting his doctrine, It was not usual for a man of rank, power, and riches to come to inquire of Jesus in this manner; yet we may learn that the most favorable opportunity for teaching such men the nature of personal religion is when they are alone. Scarcely any man, of any rank, will refuse to converse on this subject when addressed respectfully and tenderly in private. In the midst of their companions, or engaged in business, they may refuse to listen or may cavil. When alone, they will hear the voice of entreaty and persuasion, and be willing to converse on the great subjects of judgment and eternity. Thus Paul says Gal 2:2, “privately to them which are of reputation,” evincing his consummate prudence, and his profound knowledge of human nature.

By night - It is not mentioned why he came by night. It might have been that, being a member of the Sanhedrin, he was engaged all the day; or it may have been because the Lord Jesus was occupied all the day in teaching publicly and in working miracles, and that there was no opportunity for conversing with him as freely as he desired; or it may have been that he was afraid of the ridicule and contempt of those in power, and fearful that it might involve him in danger if publicly known; or it may have been that he was afraid that if it were publicly known that he was disposed to favor the Lord Jesus, it might provoke more opposition against him and endanger his life. Since no bad motive is imputed to him, it is most in accordance with Christian charity to suppose that his motives were such as God would approve, especially as the Saviour did not reprove him. We should not be disposed to blame men where Jesus did not, and we should desire to find goodness in every man rather than be ever on the search for evil motives. See 1Co 13:4-7. We may learn here:

That our Saviour, though engaged during the day, did nor refuse to converse with an inquiring sinner at night. Ministers of the gospel at all times should welcome those who are asking the way to life. That it is proper for men, even those of elevated rank, to inquire on the subject of religion. Nothing is so important as religion, and no temper of mind is more lovely than a disposition to ask the way to heaven. At all times men should seek the way of salvation, and especially in times of great religions excitement they should make inquiry. At Jerusalem, at the time referred to here, there was great solicitude. Many believed on Jesus. He performed miracles, and preached, and many were converted. There was what would now be called a revival of religion, having all the features of a work of grace. At such a season it was proper, as it is now, that not only the poor, but the rich and great, should inquire the path to life.

Rabbi - This was a title of respect conferred on distinguished Jewish teachers, somewhat in the way that the title “Doctor of Divinity” is now conferred. See the notes at Joh 1:38. Our Saviour forbade his disciples to wear that title (see the notes at Mat 23:8), though it was proper for Him to do it, as being the great Teacher of mankind. It literally signifies great, and was given by Nicodemus, doubtless, because Jesus gave distinguished proofs that he came as a teacher from God.

We know - I know, and those with whom I am connected. Perhaps he was acquainted with some of the Pharisees who entertained the same opinion about Jesus that he did, and he came to be more fully confirmed in the belief.

Come from God - Sent by God. This implies his readiness to hear him, and his desire to be instructed. He acknowledges the divine mission of Jesus, and delicately asks him to instruct him in the truth of religion. When we read the words of Jesus in the Bible, it should be with a belief that he came from God, and was therefore qualified and authorized to teach us the way of life.

These miracles - The miracles which he performed in the Temple and at Jerusalem, Joh 2:23.

Except God be with him - Except God aid him, and except his instructions are approved by God. Miracles show that a prophet or religious teacher comes from God, because God would nor work a miracle in attestation of a falsehood or to give countenance to a false teacher. If God gives a man power to work a miracle, it is proof that he approves the teaching of that man, and the miracle is the proof or the credential that he came from God.

Albert Barnes' Notes on the Bible (1834–1885) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

By night. Nicodemus was at this time weak in faith, and therefore did not wish to endanger himself by coming to our Saviour in open day, when the enemies of Christ could see him. For many (as this evangelist informs us in chap. xii. ver. 42,) of the chief men also believed in him; but because of the Pharisees they did not confess, that they might not be cast out of the Synagogue. (St. John Chrysostom) --- It appears from this verse that Jesus Christ wrought many miracles, even in the first year of his preaching: though not very publicly, and amidst the crowd. However, few of those which he performed in Judea are noticed by the evangelist.

George Leo Haydock (1774–1849), Haydock's Catholic Family Bible and Commentary, 1859 edition — public domain. Excludes Psalms (Douay-Rheims chapter numbering differs from Protestant) and Deuterocanonical books (Catholic canon only).

He came by night to Christ, not, as some (too charitably) possibly may think, that he might have the freer and less interrupted communion and discourse with him; but either through fear, or possibly shame, being a master in Israel, to be looked upon as a scholar going to learn of another. He saluteth him by the name they usually gave to their teachers, (as we showed, Joh 1:49), and saith,

we know, by which he hints to us, that not only he, but others of the Pharisees also, knew that he was a teacher sent from God in a more extraordinary manner; and he giveth the reason of this their knowledge, because of those miraculous operations which he had wrought. God hath his number among all orders and sorts of men; and those that are his shall come unto Christ. There was a weakness in the faith and love of this Nicodemus; (his station amongst the Jews was a great temptation to him); but yet there was a truth of both in him, which further discovered itself, Joh 7:50, and more upon Christ’s death, Joh 19:39. But here ariseth a greater question, viz. How Nicodemus could conclude that Christ was a teacher sent from God, by his miracles.

Answer. It is to be observed, that he doth not say, in the general, that no man does signs or wonders of any kind, unless the power and favour of God be with him. But he speaks particularly and eminently of those things which Jesus did; they were so great in their nature, so real and solid in their proof, so Divine in the manner of performing them by the empire of his will; so holy in their end, to confirm a doctrine most becoming the wisdom and other glorious attributes of God, and that were the verification of the prophecies concerning the Messiah, whose coming it was foretold should be with miraculous healing benefits; that there was the greatest assurance, that none without the omnipotent hand of God could do them; for it is clear by the light of reason and Scripture, that God will not assist by his almighty power the ministers of Satan, to induce those who sincerely search for truth to believe a lie. The magicians indeed performed divers wonders in Egypt, but they were outdone by Moses, to convince the spectators that he was sent from a power infinitely superior to that of evil spirits. Real miracles, that are contrary to the order and exceed the power of nature, can only be produced by creating power, and are wrought to give credit to those who are sent from God. And when God permits false miracles to be done by seducers, that would thereby obtain authority and credit amongst men, the deception is not invincible; for it is foretold expressly to give us warning, that the man of sin shall come with lying wonders, by the working of Satan, 2Th 2:9; and the heavenly doctrine of the gospel has been confirmed by real miracles, incomparably greater than all the strange things done to give credit to doctrines opposite to it.

Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible (1683–1685) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

2. By night—Night studies of the law were a great merit with the rabbis. “Around him who studies by night,” was their maxim, “God draws a thread of mercy by day.” But fear for the Jews and a regard for his reputation no doubt were the cause of this nightly visit. Compare notes on Joh_19:38-39. He had a head conviction, but little of the martyr spirit. He could not trust God, because he feared man.

Rabbi—Nicodemus addresses him as a teacher, yea, a God-sent teacher, but not as the Messiah.

We know—This we includes the class of thinkers to which he belonged, namely, the many specified in Joh_2:23. See notes.

Come from God— Not as the scribes and doctors, with mere human authority; but with a commission fresh from Jehovah, and so at least a prophet, if not the Messiah.

Miracles… except God be with him—For these miracles are too great to be done by man, and too good to be done by devils.

Daniel D. Whedon (gen. ed.), Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1874–1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

This man came to him by night, and said unto him. To suppose, with many commentators (after Augustine), that the night is here symbolic of the mental condition of the man, is far-fetched. Thoma, here intent on his principle of the fabricated character of the Gospel, compares this to King Saul (Paul"s ancestor!) going by night to Samuel a type of Christ! There is more probability that the night of the Last Supper was in the mind of John, and that these two nights, the one at the beginning, the other at the close of the ministry of Jesus nights of extraordinary significance were impressed ineffaceably on his memory, and, to some extent, contrasted with each other. Nicodemus did not fear the Lord or his disciples, but his own colleagues, whose excitement had already betrayed their sentiments. Without "believing on his Name," they had come to some conclusions, and Nicodemus with them. Rabbi, said he, we know. He does not conceal a common sentiment at that moment agitating his own class in society, and he bestows the honorific title of Rabbi, "my Master," which, as coming from a learned doctor to a humble peasant, was a remarkable testimony to the effect Jesus had indirectly exerted beyond the circle of his immediate hearers: that thou art a Teacher come from God. The phrase, apo Yeou , precedes "the Teacher come." Certainly it yields to Jesus great dignity. He is God-sent, like the prophets of old. He has a right to teach. His doctorate is a heavenly diploma; and Nicodemus draws a wiser conclusion than the many did who, in some sense, believed on his Name. They were rushing heedlessly forward to further conclusions. Nicodemus saw a grand authority as a Teacher of men, a Heaven-sent Messenger, in the Lord Jesus, and he came to this conclusion from the settled persuasion that no man can tie the signs which thou art performing, if God be not with him. This confession was true, indicating candid and honest inquiry and a teachable mind. It was the very truth which Peter in subsequent times gave to Cornelius as explanation of the healing and beneficent powers of Jesus. Christ knew the whole man, understood at once the honesty of the inquiry, and did entrust himself to Nicodemus. There was more faith in this modest inquiry, in this honest scepticism of his own position, than in the clamours and hosannas of the fickle crowd.

Vers. 2, 3. Jesus humbling vaunted knowledge.

I THE VAUNTED KNOWLEDGE OF NICODEMUS. Nicodemus wants to come to Jesus with safety to his own position, and he gets over the difficulty, as he thinks, by coming at night. But such a proceeding may produce greater difficulties than it removes. Now he has come, what shall he say? His aim is to sound Jesus a little, and find out if it will be politic to encourage him. We may be tolerably sure that, with such aims, Jesus would not make his task the easier. Imagine Nicodemus, after going through the usual salutations and beginnings of conversation, making his way to the business that has brought him. How, then, ought he to have begun? Surely something after this fashion: "You will think it a strange thing for me to come under cover of the dark, but you must know that I am a Pharisee and a ruler of the Jews, and so I cannot come just at any hour I please. Coming in the daylight, my coming would get known, and all the good things I have worked so hard to gain would speedily vanish. So, before I risk them, I want to know a little more about you." But instead of beginning with simple truth, he says the very thing he ought not to have said the very thing which was in plain contradiction to the way of his coming, he says he knows Jesus has come from God, and these Pharisees, one and all of them, were professed servants of God, ostentatious even in their service. If, then, Nicodemus had really believed Jesus to have come from God, would he have sought conference with him in this ignominious fashion? Nicodemus feared men more than he feared God. He really knows nothing at all about God. As yet he is a mere player with words instead of an earnest dealer in deep realities. Talking about words and names must not be confounded with real searching into things. Nicodemus should have none to Jesus, saying, "Thou doer of marvels, whence hast thou come? what hast thou brought? what dost thou ask for?

II THE WAY TO TRUE KNOWLEDGE. Nicodemus must have his mind cleared of cant and illusion and empty tradition. Jesus does this at once by one of those fundamental declarations going down to the heart of human need. "Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God." Thus an indication is given as to the sort of people who profit by the teaching of Jesus. Nicodemus is right in calling Jesus a Teacher; but, then, he can only teach certain people. Jesus, who came to establish a spiritual kingdom of God, can as yet do nothing for Nicodemus, whose notions of a kingdom are of something having a power and splendour to be perceived by the bodily eye. Both Jesus and Nicodemus can talk about the kingdom of God, but they mean very different things. Jesus knows well what the Pharisee has come for. He suspects that Jesus, unlikely as he looks, may be a great one in the expected kingdom, and if so Nicodemus may get the first chance of a good position. So the heart of the man must be altogether altered before he can listen sympathetically to the teaching of Jesus. Y.

The Pulpit Commentary (1880–1919), ed. H.D.M. Spence-Jones & Joseph S. Exell — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

The same came - Through desire; but by night - Through shame: We know - Even we rulers and Pharisees.

John Wesley, Explanatory Notes Upon the Whole Bible (1754–1765) — public domain. Text via the GEBible commentary corpus.

2. The same came to Jesus by night. He probably chose the night in order to escape observation. He did not dare encounter the hostility of the priests, filled with rage over the cleansing of the temple, and yet he wished to know more of one whom he believed to be sent from God. Rabbi, we know that thou art a teacher come from God. Nicodemus confesses, not only his belief, but that of his fellow Pharisees and rulers. The miracles of Jesus convinced them, even if they would not admit it, that he was a teacher sent from God. He came for information, and Jesus recognized it in what follows.

B. W. Johnson's The People's New Testament with Notes (1889–1891) — public domain. Electronic text from the Christian Classics Ethereal Library (CCEL) ThML edition.

2. πρὸς αὐτόν for πρ. τὸν Ἰησοῦν (a correction for clearness at the beginning of a lection: comp. Joh 4:16; Joh 4:46, Joh 6:14, Joh 8:21, Joh 11:45).

2. οὗτος. S. John’s use, to recall a previous subject; comp. Joh 1:2; Joh 1:7; Joh 1:42, Joh 4:47, Joh 6:71, Joh 21:24.

νυκτός. This proved his timidity and illustrated his spiritual condition; he was coming out of the night to the Light of men, as Judas went out from Him into the night (see on Joh 13:30, Joh 10:22, Joh 18:1, Joh 21:19 and Introduction, chap. v. § 3). Jesus welcomes him; He does not quench the smoking flax.

οἴδαμεν. Others also are inclined to believe, and he claims a share in their enlightenment; but there is a touch of Pharisaic complacency in the word: ‘some of us are quite disposed to think well of you.’ The report of the deputation sent to the Baptist (Joh 1:19-28) and Christ’s signs have to this extent influenced even members of the Sanhedrin. On Ῥαββί see Joh 1:39, Joh 4:31.

ἀπὸ θεοῦ. First for emphasis; it was from God that His commission to be a Rabbi came, not from having gone through the ordinary training (Joh 7:15-16). Does ‘art come from God’ indicate the Messiah, ὁ ἐρχόμενος? If so, Nicodemus again shews his weakness; he begins with admitting Messiahship and ends with the vague word διδάσκαλος: the Messiah was never thought of as a mere teacher. But ἀπὸ θεοῦ may indicate only a Prophet (Joh 1:6), or even less.

ἐὰν μὴ κ.τ.λ. Again a weak conclusion; one expects ‘unless he be a Prophet,’ or, ‘the Messiah.’

Cambridge Greek Testament for Schools and Colleges (Cambridge University Press, 1896; 21 vols, various authors incl. Carr, Maclear, Plummer, Farrar, Lumby, Moule, M. R. James, Simcox) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

2.] νυκτός—for fear of the Jews: see ch. 12:42. The discourse seems to have taken place between Jesus and Nicodemus alone,—and may have been related by our Lord to the Evangelist afterwards. If this be deemed improbable (though I do not see why it should),—of the two other alternatives I would rather believe that John was present, than that Nicodemus should have so minutely related a conversation which in his then position he could not understand.

οἴδαμεν] This plural may be merely an allusion to others who had come to the same conclusion, e.g. Joseph of Arimathea; or it may express that Nicodemus was sent in the name of several who wished to know the real character of this Person who wrought such miracles. It is harsh, in this private conversation, to take the plural as merely of singular import, as Lightfoot seems to do. His other rendering, “vulgo agnoscitur,” is better,—but not satisfactory; for the common people did not generally confess it, and Nicodemus, as an ἄρχων, would not be likely to speak in their name (see ch. 7:49). I would rather take it to express the true conviction respecting Jesus, of that class to which Nicodemus belonged—the ἄρχοντες: and see in it an important fact, that their persecutions and murder of the Prince of Life hence found their greatest aggravation, that they were carried on against the conclusions of their own minds, out of bitter malice, and worldly disappointment at His humble and unobtrusive character, and the spiritual purity and self-sacrifice which He inculcated. Still this must not, though undoubtedly it has truth in it, be carried too far: cf. Act 3:17 note, and Act 13:27: 1Co 2:8. Some degree of ignorance there must necessarily have been in all of them, even Caiaphas included, of our Lord’s Office and Person. Stier (iv. 11 ff., edn. 2) seems to think that Nicodemus, by using the plural, is sheltering himself from expressing his own conviction, so as to be able to draw back again if necessary.

ἐλήλυθας] Stier (and Schleiermacher, cited by Stier, iv. 12, edn. 2, note) thinks that there is involved in this word a recognition by Nicodemus of the Messianic mission of Jesus:—that it expresses His being ὁ ἐρχόμενος (Mat 11:3 .). It is never used of any but the Messiah, except by the Lord Himself, when speaking of John the Baptist as the subject of prophecy (see Mat 11:14 al.).

διδάσκαλος] In this and the following words, Nicodemus seems to be cautiously withdrawing from his admission being taken as expressing too much. For who of the Jews ever expected a teacher to come from God? They looked for a King, to sit on David’s throne,—a Prophet, to declare the divine will;—but the Messiah was never designated as a mere teacher, till the days of modern Socinianism. So that he seems trying to qualify or recall his ἐλήλυθας by this addition.

The following words exhibit the same cautious inconsistency. No one can do, &c. unless—we expect some strong expression of the truth, such as we had from Nathanael in ch. 1:50, but the sentence drops to merely—‘God be with him,’ which is a very poor and insufficient exponent of ἀπὸ θ. ἐλήλυθας. Against this inconsistency,—the inner knowledge that the Kingdom of God was come, and He who was to found it, on the one hand,—and the rationalizing endeavour to reduce this heavenly kingdom to mere learning, and its Founder to a mere teacher, on the other,—is the following discourse directed.

Henry Alford, The Greek Testament (1849–1861) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

2. For the rec. τὸν Ἰησοῦν (N),אABLTbWΘ have αὐτόν.

οὗτος ἤλθεν πρὸς αὐτὸν νυκτός. This was the feature of the visit of Nicodemus which attracted attention: he came by night. Cf. 7:50, 19:39. He was impressed by what he had heard, and he gradually became a disciple; cf. 12:42.

The form into which the conversation is thrown is similar to that in c. 4.2 There is a mysterious saying of Jesus (3:3, 4:10), at which the interlocutor expresses astonishment (3:4, 4:11, l2), whereupon the saying is repeated (3:5f, 4:13, 14), but still in a form difficult to understand. That, in both cases, there was an actual conversation is highly probable; but the report, as we have it, cannot in either case be taken to represent the ipsissima verba. Nothing is said in c. 3 of any one being present at the interview between Jesus and Nicodemus; but, on the other hand, there is nothing to exclude the presence of a disciple, and hence the account of the interview may be based, in part, on his recollections.

καὶ εἶπεν αὐτῷ Ρ̓αββεί. See on 1:38. Nicodemus was ready to address Jesus as Rabbi, because he recognised in Him a divinely sent διδάσκαλος. This was not to recognise Him as Messiah; but Nicodemus and others of his class (note the plural οἴδαμεν, “we all know,” as at 9:31 and Mar 12:14),1 like the blind man of 9:33, were convinced by the signs which Jesus did that He had come ἀπὸ θεοῦ (cf. 13:3, 16:30). That “signs” are a mark of Divine assistance and favour was a universal belief in the first century; and Jn. repeatedly tells that this aspect of His signs was asserted by Jesus Himself (see on 2:11 above, and cf. Introd., p. xcii). The declaration of Nicodemus that no one could do the miracles which Jesus did, ἐὰν μὴ ᾖ δ θεὸς μετʼ αὐτοῦ, however foreign to modern habits of thought, expressed the general belief of Judaism. That Jesus went about doing good and healing, ὅτι ὁ θεὸς ἦν μετʼ αὐτοῦ is the declaration ascribed to Peter in Act 10:38. The σημεῖα to which Nicodemus referred were those mentioned 2:23 as having inspired faith at Jerusalem. See note in loc.

International Critical Commentary — older volumes (1896–1929), various authors — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

To Jesus. The best texts substitute prov aujton, to him.

By night. Through timidity, fearing to compromise his dignity, and possibly his safety. The fact is noticed again, Joh 19:39 (see on 7 50). By night, "when Jewish superstition would keep men at home." He could reach Jesus ' apartment without being observed by the other inmates of the house, for an outside stair led to the upper room.

Rabbi. The teacher of Israel (ver. 10) addresses Jesus by the title applied by his own disciples to himself - my master (see on 1 38). "We may be sure that a member of the sect that carefully scrutinized the Baptist's credentials (i. 19 - 24) would not lightly address Jesus by this title of honor, or acknowledge Him as teacher" (Milligan and Moulton).

We know [οιδαμεν] . Assured conviction based on Jesus ' miracles (see on 2 24).

Thou art a teacher. According to the Greek order, that thou art come from God as teacher.

From God. These words stand first in the sentence as emphatic. It is from God that thou hast come.

Marvin R. Vincent, Word Studies in the New Testament (1887–1900) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

Ver. 2. “He came to him by night and said: Master, we know that thou art a teacher come from God; for no one can do these miracles which thou doest, except God be with him.”

What was the purpose of this visit? These first words of Nicodemus are only a preamble; it would be idle to seek here the revelation of the purpose of his procedure. Koppe has supposed that he came to act as a spy on the Lord. But Jesus treats him as an honest person, and Nicodemus shows himself sincere during the course of the conversation, and also afterwards. Meyerhas supposed that he came to inquire about the way to be saved. But as a good Jew and pious Pharisee, he by no means doubted as to his own salvation. We must, rather, suppose that he had discerned in Jesus an extraordinary being, and as he must have known the answer of the forerunner to the deputation of the Sanhedrim, he asked himself seriously whether Jesus might not be the Messiah announced by John as already present. In that case he would try to sound His plans respecting the decisive revolution which His coming was to involve. This supposition appears to me more natural than that of Weiss, who, because of the title of teacher with which Nicodemus salutes Jesus, thinks that he wished to question Him concerning what new teaching He had just given. But Nicodemus evidently could not salute Jesus by any other title than that of teacher, even if, as he must have had from the testimony of John the Baptist and in consequence of the expulsion of the traders, he had a presentiment that there was in Him something still greater. The plural οἴδαμεν, we know, proves that He did not take this step solely in his own name, but that a certain number of his colleagues entertained the same thoughts with himself.—He comes by night.

This circumstance, noticed expressly in Joh 19:39 and perhaps also in Joh 7:50, is easily explained by the fear which he had of compromising himself before the other members of the Sanhedrim, and even before the people. Perhaps, also, he wished to avoid further increasing, through a step taken in broad daylight, the reputation of the young teacher. Nicodemus gives Him the title of ῥαββί, Master; this is saying very much on his part; since Jesus had not passed through the different degrees of rabbinical studies which gave a right to this title. Comp. Joh 7:15 : “The Jews were astonished, saying: How does this man know the Scriptures, not being a man who has studied?” It is precisely this extraordinary course of the development of Jesus which Nicodemus characterizes by saying: a teacher come from God. ᾿Απὸ θεοῦ, from God, is placed at the beginning as the principal idea, opposed to that of a regular doctorate. The same contrast is found in Joh 7:16 in the mouth of Jesus Himself. This designation: from God, depends neither on the verb, come, nor on the word teacher, separately, but on the complex phrase; the sense is: “come as a teacher from God.” The argument is consonant with theocratic precedents (Exodus 4). Miracles prove divine assistance, and this proves the divine mission. But this formal demonstration, intended to prove to Jesus a truth which he does not doubt, is somewhat pedantic and must have shocked the ear of Him to whom it was addressed. So Jesus cuts short the discourse thus commenced by a sudden apostrophe, intended rather to answer the inmost thoughts of His interlocutor than his spoken words.

Frédéric Louis Godet — Commentaries on Luke, John, Romans, and 1 Corinthians — English translation (T&T Clark, Edinburgh, 1870s–1890s) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.