.png)
Nicodemus’ Second Dilemma: To Testify, Advocate, or Remain Silent?
- Fred Farrokh
- 3 hours ago
- 5 min read
Nicodemus successfully navigated his first dilemma. Rather than ignoring the news about Him, Nicodemus visited Jesus by night. John reports this meeting in chapter 3 of his Gospel.
Several years passed before Nicodemus faced another excruciating dilemma. As Jesus' popularity grew among the Jewish laypeople, so grew the suspicion about Him among the religious leaders. He did not specifically seek out their blessing or approval, and their hearts were becoming increasingly hardened toward the Man from Nazareth. News about Him continued to pour in from Galilee.
A Visit to Jerusalem
Jewish worshippers converged upon Jerusalem three times a year to celebrate Passover, Pentecost, and the Feast of Booths (or Tabernacles). In John 7, the Gospel narrates Jesus and His brothers discussing whether they will go to Judea to celebrate the Feast of Booths. Jesus eventually arrived in Jerusalem, which was the hotbed of religious opposition to His claim to be Messiah.
Of course, Jesus was the author of these feasts. He was not afraid of what people thought of Him or might do to Him. He used the occasion of the feast to teach the people. He even interjected into the proceedings by calling out in a loud voice:
Now on the last day, the great day of the feast, Jesus stood and cried out, saying, “If anyone is thirsty, let him come to Me and drink. He who believes in Me, as the Scripture said, ‘From his innermost being will flow rivers of living water.’” (John 7:37-38)
This intervention by Jesus then caused a massive rift among the people:
Some of the people therefore, when they heard these words, were saying, “This certainly is the Prophet.” Others were saying, “This is the Christ.” Still others were saying, “Surely the Christ is not going to come from Galilee, is He? Has not the Scripture said that the Christ comes from the descendants of David, and from Bethlehem, the village where David was?” So a division occurred in the crowd because of Him. Some of them wanted to seize Him, but no one laid hands on Him. (John 7:39-44, emphasis added)
Some observers felt Jesus must be the Messiah. Others rejected Him, using the rationale that the Messiah would come from Bethlehem, while Jesus came from Galilee. However, they had not done their homework! Jesus was actually born in Bethlehem and was from David’s messianic lineage.
At this point, the religious leaders brought in the “officers,” the religious police who guarded the Temple. They wanted to know why the officers did not arrest Jesus. The narrative continues:
The officers then came to the chief priests and Pharisees, and they said to them, “Why did you not bring Him?” The officers answered, “Never has a man spoken the way this man speaks.” The Pharisees then answered them, “You have not also been led astray, have you?” “No one of the rulers or Pharisees has believed in Him, has he? But this crowd which does not know the Law is accursed.” (John 7:45-49)
The frustration expressed by the chief priests and the Pharisees was palpable. They wanted to get rid of the problem that they believe Jesus posed. So they pivoted to a shame-based approach, citing that none of the “rulers” (that is, Sanhedrin) had believed in Jesus. In other words, they were accusing anyone who believed in Jesus as being abnormal, dishonorable, and reproachful. They accused believers in Christ as being ignorant of the Law. Then, they called down curses upon them. Yet, who were they to say that believers in Jesus had been cursed?
Nicodemus’ Second Dilemma: Testify of Christ, Advocate, or Remain Silent?
In the midst of this tension, Nicodemus emerges into the narrative once again:
Nicodemus (he who came to Him before, being one of them) said to them, “Our Law does not judge a man unless it first hears from him and knows what he is doing, does it?” They answered him, “You are not also from Galilee, are you? Search, and see that no prophet arises out of Galilee.” (John 7:50-52)
While Nicodemus’ night visit to Jesus followed a lot of deliberation on his part, this dilemma seemed to spring up suddenly. Some of the leading Pharisees (some of whom also served on the Sanhedrin) claimed that none of the Pharisees or Sanhedrin members had believed in Jesus. But could they have known this for sure?
Nevertheless, the Pharisees’ public condemnation of believers in Christ created a crisis for Nicodemus. He faced a dilemma with three options:
Remain silent, thus denying he knew or had met Jesus
Testify of what he believed about Christ to that point
Advocate that Jesus be given fair treatment and a chance to speak for himself
Nicodemus, navigating that difficult rush of the moment, chose option #3. It would have been less risky to remain silent, that is, to remain a “secret believer.” We don’t know exactly what level of faith was in Nicodemus’ heart at that time, so we want to avoid arguments from silence. The Pharisees clearly issued a public challenge, “None of the rulers have believed in Him, has He?” Nicodemus could have “rained on their parade,” by calling out something like, “Well, yes, at least one of us has believed in Him!”
Though Nicodemus did not take that option, and perhaps his heart was not ready for that, he did not make the fear-based decision to remain silent. He wisely advocating that people hear Jesus out and not prejudge Him. This would have given Jesus the chance to testify on His own behalf. Nicodemus’ bold interjection drew a derisive insult suggesting he, too, was from Galilee!
The Dilemma for Muslims and Muslim-background believers in Christ (MBBs)
Sometimes situations emerge quickly; we don’t have time to think about a response. I recall one time in New York City in which a large group of Chinese Christians asked our ministry if we could arrange a mosque visit in their neighborhood. They lived among Muslims and were unfamiliar with Islam. So they wanted to get to know their neighbors and what they believed.
Another MBB and I accompanied these Chinese Christians to a local mosque. The group was somewhat large, so they broke the visitors up into two groups for questions and answers. One of the Chinese Christians asked the particular mosque leader speaking to our group, “What would happen if a Muslim became a Christian?” The man stated with self-confidence, “Search throughout the whole world and you will never find a Muslim who has become a Christian!”
This took me by surprise. Obviously, the man was not too well informed. I did not know whether to interject, “Well, two of us are here today!” Since I wanted to keep the focus on the Chinese Christians, I did not say anything. They were boldly witnessing of Christ to the man, anyway. But I recall the incident when reflecting on Nicodemus’ second dilemma! Sometimes events unfold quickly.
To Advocate or Testify?
Nicodemus’ second dilemma speaks to the hearts of MBBs today. If remaining permanently silent is not a godly option, is it better to testify of Christ even if that will likely bring persecution? Or is advocating that Muslims give Jesus fresh consideration another viable alternative? Will other Muslims equate advocacy with actual belief?
Perhaps Nicodemus was not as bold as some would have wanted, but we don’t know exactly where he was on his spiritual journey at that moment. His boldness caused him to suffer insults. Most MBBs can readily identify with being insulted for believing in Christ as Lord. Likewise, it is not always possible to know where Muslim inquirers and MBBs are at on their spiritual journey at a given moment in time. Just as boldness is needed by MBB, patience is needed by those ministering to them.
In the final analysis, I believe Nicodemus provides a good example for Muslims facing this dilemma.
In the final blog, we will see where Nicodemus’ journey ends, as he faces his third dilemma.