What are the main biblical interpretations used to defend the point of view that Nicodemus had inferior faith?

score:2

In John 7:46-52, we have evidence that Nicodemus' spiritual condition has changed since his first meeting with Jesus:

Finally the temple guards went back to the chief priests and the Pharisees, who asked them, “Why didn’t you bring him in?”

46 “No one ever spoke the way this man does,” the guards replied.

47 “You mean he has deceived you also?” the Pharisees retorted.

48 “Have any of the rulers or of the Pharisees believed in him?

49 No! But this mob that knows nothing of the law—there is a curse on them.”

50 Nicodemus, who had gone to Jesus earlier and who was one of their own number, asked,

51 “Does our law condemn a man without first hearing him to find out what he has been doing?”

52 They replied, “Are you from Galilee, too? Look into it, and you will find that a prophet does not come out of Galilee.”

A man who would defend Jesus against the unjust anger of the leaders of his people is not a man without faith. Nicodemus did go to hear Jesus first to find out what he was doing. By his own standard, if he had found something wrong with Jesus' teachings and activities, he would have joined in with the accusers. He did not.

Later on, in John 19:38-42, Nicodemus helps Joseph of Arimithea prepare Jesus' body for burial. It says that Joseph of Arimithea asked for the body in secret because he was afraid, but lists him as a disciple. It does not specifically say there that Nicodemus was a disciple, but by including the two of them in the same account, it is reasonable to assume that Nicodemus was by that time also a disciple.

UPDATE:

I am compelled to answer a narrower question: immediately following his meeting with Jesus, what evidence was there that he was NOT YET SAVED?

This question, I believe, has good answers.

There is no description of Nicodemus falling at Jesus' feet or immediately worshiping him in some other way. Compare to a number of people who were healed (the man possessed by Legion, the one leper in ten) or who had a family member healed (man with ill servant). They had an immediate reaction of gratitude and thanksgiving. We do not see that from Nicodemus.
Compare also to people who were forgiven: the woman at the well, the adulteress, the woman who washed Jesus' feet with her hair. They exhibited powerful emotions and displays of affection or allegiance.
He did not openly associate with Jesus as a public disciple (again, see John 19).
He did not ascribe divinity to Jesus as did Peter and others.
He did not immediately confess his sinfulness, as did Zacchaeus.

People had many different responses to Jesus to show the condition of their heart, but Nicodemus did not exhibit any of them at the first meeting except that he did not condemn Jesus, question his authority, or criticize his disciples. So he did not do what the wicked did or the righteous, which is most peculiar.

UPDATE 2

I read this article: http://sbctoday.com/13132/

This made me consider the story of the snake that Moses lifted up to save the lives of the Israelites bitten by snakes. Until and unless they looked at the snake in faith and confessed their sins, they were sick and would soon die. Since we have the story of Nicodemus helping to collect Jesus' body and prepare it for burial, I believe that the story of Nicodemus was intentionally left unfinished. He was told that the Son of man must be lifted up. Thus once Nicodemus saw Christ lifted up on the cross and intentionally went to see him in that state, he was saved, not before. Thus at the time when Nicodemus first visited Jesus, he was not saved, but when he saw Christ lifted up, he was.

Paul Chernoch 11163

Upvote:0

I will provide an answer which has a component of NT textual criticism, because it is based on a biblical verse whose text is contested:

"No one has ascended into heaven except He who descended from heaven, the Son of Man who is in heaven." (Jn 3:13)

The ending who is in heaven is omitted in some old manuscripts of Alexandrian text-type (P66, P75, Sinaiticus, Vaticanus, Washingtonianus). On the other hand, it appears in the works of early Christian writers such as Tatian's "Diatessaron" (c. 160-175) and Hippolytus' (170–235) "Against Noetus", and then consistently in the works of almost all Church Fathers. I share the view [1] that, just as it probably happened with the "worship" verse Jn 9:38, the ending was omitted by an NT scribe to avoid the challenge posed by Jesus telling Nicodemus that, at the same time that He was there talking to him, He was also in heaven!

In my view, it is perfectly likely that Jesus made such a clear and direct statement of his divinity to Nicodemus at an early time of his ministry if He knew, per his divine insight into minds and hearts, that Nicodemus was able to handle the challenge involved. Besides, the ending has even better manuscript and patristical support than Jn 7:53-8:11, the Pericope Adulterae, as the latter is absent in Codex Alexandrinus, which contains the ending.

The relevant point for this question is that Jesus' telling Nicodemus that, at the same time that He was there talking to him, He was also in heaven, amounts to a direct, explicit assertion of divinity. When faced by that, a monotheistic Jew will take one of the options of Lewis' trilemma: this man is a liar, a lunatic, or the Lord. If Nicodemus had taken one of the first two, he would not have then defended Jesus before the Pharisees:

“Does our law judge a man without first giving him a hearing and learning what he does?” (Jn 7:51)

[1] http://faculty.gordon.edu/hu/bi/ted_hildebrandt/ntesources/ntarticles/gtj-nt/black-jn3-gtj-85.pdf

Johannes 1713

Upvote:1

How about researching the passages concerning Nicodemus in which he appears? In John 3:2, we find that Nicodemus sees Jesus as a teacher, not a savior:

This man came to Jesus by night and said to him, “Rabbi, we know that you are a teacher come from God, for no one can do these signs that you do unless God is with him.”

Jesus then gave him an example of the born-again life at 3:8:

The wind blows where it wishes, and you hear its sound, but you do not know where it comes from or where it goes. So it is with everyone who is born of the Spirit.

Nicodemus does not get it, which means he is not born of the Spirit, 3:9:

Nicodemus said to him, “How can these things be?”

Jesus affirms that he has much religious knowledge, but not the kind that matters; he does not truly believe, 3:10-12:

Jesus answered him, “Are you the teacher of Israel and yet you do not understand these things? Truly, truly, I say to you, we speak of what we know, and bear witness to what we have seen, but you do not receive our testimony. If I have told you earthly things and you do not believe, how can you believe if I tell you heavenly things?

So we learn from this encounter that Nicodemus is merely religious, with much knowledge about the Scriptures, but does not have the faith Jesus is looking for in His followers, especially of those who are yielded by the Spirit (according to His illustration of the wind in 3:8). He believes that Jesus is merely a teacher; he has a greater relationship with a book of laws and history than he does in a relationship with God.