01/18/2024
In these notes, I first show the point of John 3:1-2 by offering a biblical apologetic for Jesus as having the authority of a prophet to reveal new revelation. Then, I explore the theological environment of First Century Judea to provide historical context for Jesus's conversation with Nicodemus. It is no surprise that a large part of the debate among Jews was the degree or mode of human free will and God's sovereignty. While the Sadducees (akin to Arminians or Fundamental Baptists), who believed righteousness depended on the ability of people to keep the Law, both Pharisees and Essenes believed that God was entirely sovereign in salvation. They believed differently about the way God's sovereignty and human will related. Pharisees believed more like Southern Baptists and classical calvinists--that God regenerates the heart of people who are condemned because of their own sin, thus bringing people to desire and choose him. Essenes believed more like neo or hyper calvinists--that from the foundation of the world God has chosen some for salvation and some for condemnation in like manner. Jesus blatantly affirms the soteriology of the Pharisees but does not argue against the soteriology of the Essenes. Instead, he also calls the Essenes righteous. Though they disagree on the particulars, they agree that God is the one who must save. Jesus spends John 3 informing the Pharisee doctrine of personal salvation.
In these notes, I first show the point of John 3:1-2 by offering a biblical apologetic for Jesus as having the authority of a prophet to reveal new revelation. Then, I explore the theological environment of First Century Judea in order to provide historical context for Jesus's conversation with Nico...