Duvduv

We find someone with that name involved in a conversation with Jesus in GJohn 3, and the same wealthy man is discussed in several places in the Talmud. Here is the summary.

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/...4_0_14513.html

He must have been a very famous personage living at the time of the destruction in Jerusalem if somehow the anti-Pharisee author(s) of GJohn decided to use the reference as a prop in a logium in the gospel, especially since it would not have made any difference at all to readers whether the conversation was with Nicodemus/Nakdimon or with Tom Thumb or Jack Spratt.

However, what is of additional interest is that one place in the gemara states that his real name was Buni (Tractate Taanit 20a), which was also the name of one of the five disciples of Yeshu ben Pandera (Tractate Sanhedrin 43a) some 120 years earlier, although it appears that in either case the name Buni is simply a nickname.

Nicodemus is only described briefly in GJohn 3:
There was a man named Nicodemus, a Jewish religious leader who was a Pharisee. In GJohn 19: 39:
With him came Nicodemus, the man who had come to Jesus at night.

Otherwise the author of GJohn relates nothing about this person, so it just reasserts the question as to why the author would have bothered to use him as a prop for a storyline rather than any other Joe Shmoe, unless the author simply heard a story about him from a Jewish source, which would lend the gospel another air of authenticity to archival readers, Jews, historians, and their emerging educated clerics.
And......NO, I am NOT suggesting that GJohn came out after the Talmud, but simply that the story was known among Jews even before the Talmud was produced.

With regard to the phraseology itself, it almost sounds as if the original did not include anyone's name, but merely descriptive qualifications of importance, i.e. that not only was he a Pharisee, but also a leader or "ruler" of the Jews. Technically speaking according to the Talmud he was not a "Jewish leader" but merely a wealthy citizen.

There was a man [named Nicodemus], a Jewish religious leader who was a Pharisee.

And in chapter 19: With him came [Nicodemus,] the man who had come to Jesus at night.

Jeffrey Gibson

Your source says Boni.

Nickname? That's not what your source says. See above.

In any case, just when do you date the Babylonian Talmud?

Jeffrey

Jeffrey Gibson

Er .. what? Are you saying that it was of no importance to John and his readers (and to the argument John is making that Jews should accept that the purpose of God for Israel is made known in Jesus and not in Moses/the Pharisaic interpretation of the Torah) that a prominent and (anti Zealot) Pharisee accepted Jesus as Messiah and was willing to follow Jesus?

Jeffrey

semiopen

Duvi's standard MO. Take something from the gospels and assert that the Jews thought of it first, even though the gospels are earlier than the Jewish references.

For no special reason, this guy would be remembered for 300 years. How many rich guys do you remember from 300 years ago?

NICODEMUS = NAKDIMON BEN GURION?

is from another forum.

It seems to have a little more detail.

Ironically, the guy starting it claims to be a Christian who wants to prove that Yoshke was cool because he had a disciple of Nicodemus' character.

Jeffrey Gibson

Who was cool?

Jeffrey

semiopen

Yoshke was my father's pet name for Jesus.

Jeffrey Gibson

I see.

But then I fail to see why you say that the claim that Yoshke was cool because he had a disciple of Nicodemus' character is "ironic". let alone that it is ironic that a Christian makes it, since that is exactly what the author of the Gospel of John is claiming in having Nicodemus showing interest in following Jesus and learning from him.

Jeffrey

semiopen

Duvi started this thread (like virtually every other one he starts) to demonstrate that the Gospels simply copy older Jewish concepts (even though the Talmud is more recent than the gospels) even down to the most trivial things.

For this thread he claims, that Nicodemus was originally a well known Jewish character that the gospels inserted.

The Nicodemus link I provided had a Christian guy who was using the same argument to prove some superiority for xianity.

It is interesting that the same argument can support opposite conclusions. Perhaps this is proof that the argument is circular.

Duvduv

Jeffrey, I am saying that there could not possibly be any difference to some gentile reader in Italy or Asia Minor whether the rich Pharisee was a Nicodemus or Jack Spratt. However, for purposes of adding an air of authenticity in relation to the Jews the NAME known from Jewish sources could have been inserted in relation to a previous anonymous individual. I mentioned this in a previous posting.

Duvduv

Thank you for serving as my spokesman, Semiopen. Do you always assert the rationale of why participants start this or that thread? WHAT is the big deal if one gospel took the NAME of a known Jew from Jewish sources? What *sin* has been committed for suggesting this?