Kejadian 9:1-29

God’s Covenant with Humankind through Noah

9:1 Then God blessed Noah and his sons and said to them, “Be fruitful and multiply and fill the earth. 9:2 Every living creature of the earth and every bird of the sky will be terrified of you. ¹  Everything that creeps on the ground and all the fish of the sea are under your authority. ²  9:3 You may eat any moving thing that lives. ³  As I gave you ⁴  the green plants, I now give ⁵  you everything.

9:4 But ⁶  you must not eat meat ⁷  with its life (that is, ⁸  its blood) in it. ⁹  9:5 For your lifeblood ¹⁰  I will surely exact punishment, ¹¹  from ¹²  every living creature I will exact punishment. From each person ¹³  I will exact punishment for the life of the individual ¹⁴  since the man was his relative. ¹⁵ 

9:6 “Whoever sheds human blood, ¹⁶ 

by other humans ¹⁷ 

must his blood be shed;

for in God’s image ¹⁸ 

God ¹⁹  has made humankind.”

9:7 But as for you, ²⁰  be fruitful and multiply; increase abundantly on the earth and multiply on it.”

9:8 God said to Noah and his sons, ²¹  9:9 “Look! I now confirm ²²  my covenant with you and your descendants after you ²³  9:10 and with every living creature that is with you, including the birds, the domestic animals, and every living creature of the earth with you, all those that came out of the ark with you – every living creature of the earth. ²⁴  9:11 I confirm ²⁵  my covenant with you: Never again will all living things ²⁶  be wiped out ²⁷  by the waters of a flood; ²⁸  never again will a flood destroy the earth.”

9:12 And God said, “This is the guarantee ²⁹  of the covenant I am making ³⁰  with you ³¹  and every living creature with you, a covenant ³²  for all subsequent ³³  generations: 9:13 I will place ³⁴  my rainbow ³⁵  in the clouds, and it will become ³⁶  a guarantee of the covenant between me and the earth. 9:14 Whenever ³⁷  I bring clouds over the earth and the rainbow appears in the clouds, 9:15 then I will remember my covenant with you ³⁸  and with all living creatures of all kinds. ³⁹  Never again will the waters become a flood and destroy ⁴⁰  all living things. ⁴¹  9:16 When the rainbow is in the clouds, I will notice it and remember ⁴²  the perpetual covenant between God and all living creatures of all kinds that are on the earth.”

9:17 So God said to Noah, “This is the guarantee of the covenant that I am confirming between me and all living things ⁴³  that are on the earth.”

The Curse of Canaan

9:18 The sons of Noah who came out of the ark were Shem, Ham, and Japheth. (Now Ham was the father of Canaan.) ⁴⁴  9:19 These were the sons of Noah, and from them the whole earth was populated. ⁴⁵ 

9:20 Noah, a man of the soil, ⁴⁶  began to plant a vineyard. ⁴⁷  9:21 When he drank some of the wine, he got drunk and uncovered himself ⁴⁸  inside his tent. 9:22 Ham, the father of Canaan, ⁴⁹  saw his father’s nakedness ⁵⁰  and told his two brothers who were outside. 9:23 Shem and Japheth took the garment ⁵¹  and placed it on their shoulders. Then they walked in backwards and covered up their father’s nakedness. Their faces were turned ⁵²  the other way so they did not see their father’s nakedness.

9:24 When Noah awoke from his drunken stupor ⁵³  he learned ⁵⁴  what his youngest son had done ⁵⁵  to him. 9:25 So he said,

“Cursed ⁵⁶  be Canaan! ⁵⁷ 

The lowest of slaves ⁵⁸ 

he will be to his brothers.”

9:26 He also said,

“Worthy of praise is ⁵⁹  the Lord, the God of Shem!

May Canaan be the slave of Shem! ⁶⁰ 

9:27 May God enlarge Japheth’s territory and numbers! ⁶¹ 

May he live ⁶²  in the tents of Shem

and may Canaan be his slave!”

9:28 After the flood Noah lived 350 years. 9:29 The entire lifetime of Noah was 950 years, and then he died.

Kejadian 8:2-3

8:2 The fountains of the deep and the floodgates of heaven were closed, ⁶³  and the rain stopped falling from the sky. 8:3 The waters kept receding steadily ⁶⁴  from the earth, so that they ⁶⁵  had gone down ⁶⁶  by the end of the 150 days.

Kejadian 8:1

8:1 But God remembered ⁶⁷  Noah and all the wild animals and domestic animals that were with him in the ark. God caused a wind to blow over ⁶⁸  the earth and the waters receded.

Mazmur 2:7

2:7 The king says, ⁶⁹  “I will announce the Lord’s decree. He said to me: ⁷⁰ 

‘You are my son! ⁷¹  This very day I have become your father!

Matius 3:17

3:17 And ⁷²  a voice from heaven said, ⁷³  “This is my one dear Son; ⁷⁴  in him ⁷⁵  I take great delight.” ⁷⁶ 

Matius 26:63

26:63 But Jesus was silent. The ⁷⁷  high priest said to him, “I charge you under oath by the living God, tell us if you are the Christ, ⁷⁸  the Son of God.”

Matius 27:43

27:43 He trusts in God – let God, if he wants to, deliver him now ⁷⁹  because he said, ‘I am God’s Son’!”

Lukas 1:35

1:35 The angel replied, ⁸⁰  “The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow ⁸¹  you. Therefore the child ⁸²  to be born ⁸³  will be holy; ⁸⁴  he will be called the Son of God.

Yohanes 1:34

1:34 I have both seen and testified that this man is the Chosen One of God.” ⁸⁵ 

Yohanes 1:49

1:49 Nathanael answered him, “Rabbi, you are the Son of God; you are the king ⁸⁶  of Israel!” ⁸⁷ 

Yohanes 3:16-18

3:16 For this is the way ⁸⁸  God loved the world: He gave his one and only ⁸⁹  Son, so that everyone who believes in him will not perish ⁹⁰  but have eternal life. ⁹¹  3:17 For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, ⁹²  but that the world should be saved through him. 3:18 The one who believes in him is not condemned. ⁹³  The one who does not believe has been condemned ⁹⁴  already, because he has not believed in the name of the one and only ⁹⁵  Son of God.

Yohanes 3:35-36

3:35 The Father loves the Son and has placed all things under his authority. ⁹⁶  3:36 The one who believes in the Son has eternal life. The one who rejects ⁹⁷  the Son will not see life, but God’s wrath ⁹⁸  remains ⁹⁹  on him.

Yohanes 5:25

5:25 I tell you the solemn truth, ¹⁰⁰  a time ¹⁰¹  is coming – and is now here – when the dead will hear the voice of the Son of God, and those who hear will live.

Yohanes 10:30

10:30 The Father and I ¹⁰²  are one.” ¹⁰³ 

Yohanes 10:36

10:36 do you say about the one whom the Father set apart ¹⁰⁴  and sent into the world, ‘You are blaspheming,’ because I said, ‘I am the Son of God’?

Yohanes 20:28

20:28 Thomas replied to him, ¹⁰⁵  “My Lord and my God!” ¹⁰⁶ 

Yohanes 20:31

20:31 But these ¹⁰⁷  are recorded ¹⁰⁸  so that you may believe ¹⁰⁹  that Jesus is the Christ, ¹¹⁰  the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name. ¹¹¹ 

Kisah Para Rasul 3:13

3:13 The God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, ¹¹²  the God of our forefathers, ¹¹³  has glorified ¹¹⁴  his servant ¹¹⁵  Jesus, whom you handed over and rejected ¹¹⁶  in the presence of Pilate after he had decided ¹¹⁷  to release him.

Kisah Para Rasul 8:37

8:37 [[EMPTY]] ¹¹⁸ 

Kisah Para Rasul 9:20

9:20 and immediately he began to proclaim Jesus in the synagogues, ¹¹⁹  saying, “This man is the Son of God.” ¹²⁰ 

Kisah Para Rasul 9:1

The Conversion of Saul

9:1 Meanwhile Saul, still breathing out threats ¹²¹  to murder ¹²²  the Lord’s disciples, went to the high priest

Kolose 1:9

Paul’s Prayer for the Growth of the Church

1:9 For this reason we also, from the day we heard about you, ¹²³  have not ceased praying for you and asking God ¹²⁴  to fill ¹²⁵  you with the knowledge of his will in all spiritual wisdom and understanding,

Galatia 4:4

4:4 But when the appropriate time ¹²⁶  had come, God sent out his Son, born of a woman, born under the law,

Kolose 1:13-15

1:13 He delivered us from the power of darkness and transferred us to the kingdom of the Son he loves, ¹²⁷  1:14 in whom we have redemption, ¹²⁸  the forgiveness of sins.

The Supremacy of Christ

1:15 ¹²⁹ He is the image of the invisible God, the firstborn ¹³⁰  over all creation, ¹³¹ 

Kolose 1:1

Salutation

1:1 From Paul, ¹³²  an apostle of Christ Jesus by the will of God, and Timothy our brother,

Kolose 1:10

1:10 so that you may live ¹³³  worthily of the Lord and please him in all respects ¹³⁴  – bearing fruit in every good deed, growing in the knowledge of God,

Kolose 1:1

Salutation

1:1 From Paul, ¹³⁵  an apostle of Christ Jesus by the will of God, and Timothy our brother,

Yohanes 1:3

1:3 All things were created ¹³⁶  by him, and apart from him not one thing was created ¹³⁷  that has been created. ¹³⁸ 

Yohanes 3:8

3:8 The wind ¹³⁹  blows wherever it will, and you hear the sound it makes, but do not know where it comes from and where it is going. So it is with everyone who is born of the Spirit.” ¹⁴⁰ 

Yohanes 3:23

3:23 John ¹⁴¹  was also baptizing at Aenon near Salim, ¹⁴²  because water was plentiful there, and people were coming ¹⁴³  to him ¹⁴⁴  and being baptized.

Yohanes 4:9-10

4:9 So the Samaritan woman said to him, “How can you – a Jew ¹⁴⁵  – ask me, a Samaritan woman, for water ¹⁴⁶  to drink?” (For Jews use nothing in common ¹⁴⁷  with Samaritans.) ¹⁴⁸ 

4:10 Jesus answered ¹⁴⁹  her, “If you had known ¹⁵⁰  the gift of God and who it is who said to you, ‘Give me some water ¹⁵¹  to drink,’ you would have asked him, and he would have given you living water.” ¹⁵² 

Yohanes 4:15

4:15 The woman said to him, “Sir, give me this water, so that I will not be thirsty or have to come here to draw ¹⁵³  water.” ¹⁵⁴ 

Yohanes 4:1

Departure From Judea

4:1 Now when Jesus ¹⁵⁵  knew that the Pharisees ¹⁵⁶  had heard that he ¹⁵⁷  was winning ¹⁵⁸  and baptizing more disciples than John

Yohanes 5:1

Healing a Paralytic at the Pool of Bethesda

5:1 After this ¹⁵⁹  there was a Jewish feast, ¹⁶⁰  and Jesus went up to Jerusalem. ¹⁶¹ 

Yohanes 5:5

5:5 Now a man was there who had been disabled for thirty-eight years. ¹⁶² 

Yohanes 5:10-13

5:10 So the Jewish leaders ¹⁶³  said to the man who had been healed, “It is the Sabbath, and you are not permitted to carry your mat.” ¹⁶⁴  5:11 But he answered them, “The man who made me well said to me, ‘Pick up your mat ¹⁶⁵  and walk.’” 5:12 They asked him, “Who is the man who said to you, ‘Pick up your mat ¹⁶⁶  and walk’?” ¹⁶⁷  5:13 But the man who had been healed did not know who it was, for Jesus had slipped out, since there was a crowd in that place.

Yohanes 5:20

5:20 For the Father loves the Son and shows him everything he does, and will show him greater deeds than these, so that you will be amazed.

Wahyu 2:18

To the Church in Thyatira

2:18 “To ¹⁶⁸  the angel of the church in Thyatira write the following: ¹⁶⁹ 

“This is the solemn pronouncement of ¹⁷⁰  the Son of God, the one who has eyes like a fiery flame ¹⁷¹  and whose feet are like polished bronze: ¹⁷² 

[9:2]  ¹ tn Heb “and fear of you and dread of you will be upon every living creature of the earth and upon every bird of the sky.” The suffixes on the nouns “fear” and “dread” are objective genitives. The animals will fear humans from this time forward.

[9:2]  ² tn Heb “into your hand are given.” The “hand” signifies power. To say the animals have been given into the hands of humans means humans have been given authority over them.

[9:3]  ³ tn Heb “every moving thing that lives for you will be for food.”

[9:3]  ⁴ tn The words “I gave you” are not in the Hebrew text, but are supplied in the translation for stylistic reasons.

[9:3]  ⁵ tn The perfect verb form describes the action that accompanies the declaration.

[9:4]  ⁶ tn Heb “only.”

[9:4]  ⁷ tn Or “flesh.”

[9:4]  ⁸ tn Heb “its life, its blood.” The second word is in apposition to the first, explaining what is meant by “its life.” Since the blood is equated with life, meat that had the blood in it was not to be eaten.

[9:4]  ⁹ tn The words “in it” are supplied in the translation for stylistic reasons.

[9:4]  sn You must not eat meat with its life…in it. Because of the carnage produced by the flood, people might conclude that life is cheap and therefore treat it lightly. But God will not permit them to kill or even to eat anything with the lifeblood still in it, serving as a reminder of the sanctity of life.

[9:5]  ¹⁰ tn Again the text uses apposition to clarify what kind of blood is being discussed: “your blood, [that is] for your life.” See C. L. Dewar, “The Biblical Use of the Term ‘Blood,’” JTS 4 (1953): 204-8.

[9:5]  ¹¹ tn The word “punishment” is not in the Hebrew text, but is supplied in the translation for clarification. The verb דָּרָשׁ (darash) means “to require, to seek, to ask for, to exact.” Here it means that God will exact punishment for the taking of a life. See R. Mawdsley, “Capital Punishment in Gen. 9:6,” CentBib 18 (1975): 20-25.

[9:5]  ¹² tn Heb “from the hand of,” which means “out of the hand of” or “out of the power of” and is nearly identical in sense to the preposition מִן (min) alone.

[9:5]  ¹³ tn Heb “and from the hand of the man.” The article has a generic function, indicating the class, i.e., humankind.

[9:5]  ¹⁴ tn Heb “of the man.”

[9:5]  ¹⁵ tn Heb “from the hand of a man, his brother.” The point is that God will require the blood of someone who kills, since the person killed is a relative (“brother”) of the killer. The language reflects Noah’s situation (after the flood everyone would be part of Noah’s extended family), but also supports the concept of the brotherhood of humankind. According to the Genesis account the entire human race descended from Noah.

[9:6]  ¹⁶ tn Heb “the blood of man.”

[9:6]  ¹⁷ tn Heb “by man,” a generic term here for other human beings.

[9:6]  ¹⁸ sn See the notes on the words “humankind” and “likeness” in Gen 1:26, as well as J. Barr, “The Image of God in the Book of Genesis – A Study of Terminology,” BJRL 51 (1968/69): 11-26.

[9:6]  ¹⁹ tn Heb “he”; the referent (God) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[9:7]  ²⁰ sn The disjunctive clause (conjunction + pronominal subject + verb) here indicates a strong contrast to what has preceded. Against the backdrop of the warnings about taking life, God now instructs the people to produce life, using terms reminiscent of the mandate given to Adam (Gen 1:28).

[9:8]  ²¹ tn Heb “to Noah and to his sons with him, saying.”

[9:9]  ²² tn Heb “I, look, I confirm.” The particle הִנְנִי (hinni) used with the participle מֵקִים (meqim) gives the sense of immediacy or imminence, as if to say, “Look! I am now confirming.”

[9:9]  ²³ tn The three pronominal suffixes (translated “you,” “your,” and “you”) are masculine plural. As v. 8 indicates, Noah and his sons are addressed.

[9:10]  ²⁴ tn The verbal repetition is apparently for emphasis.

[9:11]  ²⁵ tn The verb וַהֲקִמֹתִי (vahaqimoti) is a perfect with the vav (ו) consecutive and should be translated with the English present tense, just as the participle at the beginning of the speech was (v. 9). Another option is to translate both forms with the English future tense (“I will confirm”).

[9:11]  ²⁶ tn Heb “all flesh.”

[9:11]  ²⁷ tn Heb “cut off.”

[9:11]  ²⁸ tn Heb “and all flesh will not be cut off again by the waters of the flood.”

[9:12]  ²⁹ tn Heb “sign.”

[9:12]  ³⁰ sn On the making of covenants in Genesis, see W. F. Albright, “The Hebrew Expression for ‘Making a Covenant’ in Pre-Israelite Documents,” BASOR 121 (1951): 21-22.

[9:12]  ³¹ tn Heb “between me and between you.”

[9:12]  ³² tn The words “a covenant” are supplied in the translation for clarification.

[9:12]  ³³ tn The Hebrew term עוֹלָם (’olam) means “ever, forever, lasting, perpetual.” The covenant would extend to subsequent generations.

[9:13]  ³⁴ tn The translation assumes that the perfect verbal form is used rhetorically, emphasizing the certainty of the action. Other translation options include “I have placed” (present perfect; cf. NIV, NRSV) and “I place” (instantaneous perfect; cf. NEB).

[9:13]  ³⁵ sn The Hebrew word קֶשֶׁת (qeshet) normally refers to a warrior’s bow. Some understand this to mean that God the warrior hangs up his battle bow at the end of the flood, indicating he is now at peace with humankind, but others question the legitimacy of this proposal. See C. Westermann, Genesis, 1:473, and G. J. Wenham, Genesis (WBC), 1:196.

[9:13]  ³⁶ tn The perfect verbal form with vav (ו) consecutive here has the same aspectual function as the preceding perfect of certitude.

[9:14]  ³⁷ tn The temporal indicator (וְהָיָה, vÿhayah, conjunction + the perfect verb form), often translated “it will be,” anticipates a future development.

[9:15]  ³⁸ tn Heb “which [is] between me and between you.”

[9:15]  ³⁹ tn Heb “all flesh.”

[9:15]  ⁴⁰ tn Heb “to destroy.”

[9:15]  ⁴¹ tn Heb “all flesh.”

[9:16]  ⁴² tn The translation assumes that the infinitive לִזְכֹּר (lizkor, “to remember”) here expresses the result of seeing the rainbow. Another option is to understand it as indicating purpose, in which case it could be translated, “I will look at it so that I may remember.”

[9:17]  ⁴³ tn Heb “all flesh.”

[9:18]  ⁴⁴ sn The concluding disjunctive clause is parenthetical. It anticipates the following story, which explains that the Canaanites, Ham’s descendants through Canaan, were cursed because they shared the same moral abandonment that their ancestor displayed. See A. van Selms, “The Canaanites in the Book of Genesis,” OTS 12 (1958): 182-213.

[9:19]  ⁴⁵ tn Heb “was scattered.” The verb פָּצָה (patsah, “to scatter” [Niphal, “to be scattered”]) figures prominently in story of the dispersion of humankind in chap. 11.

[9:20]  ⁴⁶ sn The epithet a man of the soil indicates that Noah was a farmer.

[9:20]  ⁴⁷ tn Or “Noah, a man of the soil, was the first to plant a vineyard”; Heb “and Noah, a man of the ground, began and he planted a vineyard.”

[9:21]  ⁴⁸ tn The Hebrew verb גָּלָה (galah) in the Hitpael verbal stem (וַיִּתְגַּל, vayyitggal) means “to uncover oneself” or “to be uncovered.” Noah became overheated because of the wine and uncovered himself in the tent.

[9:22]  ⁴⁹ sn For the second time (see v. 18) the text informs the reader of the relationship between Ham and Canaan. Genesis 10 will explain that Canaan was the ancestor of the Canaanite tribes living in the promised land.

[9:22]  ⁵⁰ tn Some would translate “had sexual relations with,” arguing that Ham committed a homosexual act with his drunken father for which he was cursed. However, the expression “see nakedness” usually refers to observation of another’s nakedness, not a sexual act (see Gen 42:9, 12 where “nakedness” is used metaphorically to convey the idea of “weakness” or “vulnerability”; Deut 23:14 where “nakedness” refers to excrement; Isa 47:3; Ezek 16:37; Lam 1:8). The following verse (v. 23) clearly indicates that visual observation, not a homosexual act, is in view here. In Lev 20:17 the expression “see nakedness” does appear to be a euphemism for sexual intercourse, but the context there, unlike that of Gen 9:22, clearly indicates that in that passage sexual contact is in view. The expression “see nakedness” does not in itself suggest a sexual connotation. Some relate Gen 9:22 to Lev 18:6-11, 15-19, where the expression “uncover [another’s] nakedness” (the Piel form of גָּלָה, galah) refers euphemistically to sexual intercourse. However, Gen 9:22 does not say Ham “uncovered” the nakedness of his father. According to the text, Noah uncovered himself; Ham merely saw his father naked. The point of the text is that Ham had no respect for his father. Rather than covering his father up, he told his brothers. Noah then gave an oracle that Ham’s descendants, who would be characterized by the same moral abandonment, would be cursed. Leviticus 18 describes that greater evil of the Canaanites (see vv. 24-28).

[9:22]  sn Saw the nakedness. It is hard for modern people to appreciate why seeing another’s nakedness was such an abomination, because nakedness is so prevalent today. In the ancient world, especially in a patriarchal society, seeing another’s nakedness was a major offense. (See the account in Herodotus, Histories 1.8-13, where a general saw the nakedness of his master’s wife, and one of the two had to be put to death.) Besides, Ham was not a little boy wandering into his father’s bedroom; he was over a hundred years old by this time. For fuller discussion see A. P. Ross, “The Curse of Canaan,” BSac 137 (1980): 223-40.

[9:23]  ⁵¹ tn The word translated “garment” has the Hebrew definite article on it. The article may simply indicate that the garment is definite and vivid in the mind of the narrator, but it could refer instead to Noah’s garment. Did Ham bring it out when he told his brothers?

[9:23]  ⁵² tn Heb “their faces [were turned] back.”

[9:24]  ⁵³ tn Heb “his wine,” used here by metonymy for the drunken stupor it produced.

[9:24]  ⁵⁴ tn Heb “he knew.”

[9:24]  ⁵⁵ tn The Hebrew verb עָשָׂה (’asah, “to do”) carries too general a sense to draw the conclusion that Ham had to have done more than look on his father’s nakedness and tell his brothers.

[9:25]  ⁵⁶ sn For more on the curse, see H. C. Brichto, The Problem of “Curse” in the Hebrew Bible (JBLMS), and J. Scharbert, TDOT 1:405-18.

[9:25]  ⁵⁷ sn Cursed be Canaan. The curse is pronounced on Canaan, not Ham. Noah sees a problem in Ham’s character, and on the basis of that he delivers a prophecy about the future descendants who will live in slavery to such things and then be controlled by others. (For more on the idea of slavery in general, see E. M. Yamauchi, “Slaves of God,” BETS 9 [1966]: 31-49). In a similar way Jacob pronounced oracles about his sons based on their revealed character (see Gen 49).

[9:25]  ⁵⁸ tn Heb “a servant of servants” (עֶבֶד עֲבָדִים, ’eved ’avadim), an example of the superlative genitive. It means Canaan will become the most abject of slaves.

[9:26]  ⁵⁹ tn Heb “blessed be.”

[9:26]  ⁶⁰ tn Heb “a slave to him”; the referent (Shem) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[9:27]  ⁶¹ tn Heb “may God enlarge Japheth.” The words “territory and numbers” are supplied in the translation for clarity.

[9:27]  sn There is a wordplay (paronomasia) on the name Japheth. The verb יַפְתְּ (yaft, “may he enlarge”) sounds like the name יֶפֶת (yefet, “Japheth”). The name itself suggested the idea. The blessing for Japheth extends beyond the son to the descendants. Their numbers and their territories will be enlarged, so much so that they will share in Shem’s territories. Again, in this oracle, Noah is looking beyond his immediate family to future generations. For a helpful study of this passage and the next chapter, see T. O. Figart, A Biblical Perspective on the Race Problem, 55-58.

[9:27]  ⁶² tn In this context the prefixed verbal form is a jussive (note the distinct jussive forms both before and after this in vv. 26 and 27).

[8:2]  ⁶³ tn Some (e.g., NIV) translate the preterite verb forms in this verse as past perfects (e.g., “had been closed”), for it seems likely that the sources of the water would have stopped before the waters receded.

[8:3]  ⁶⁴ tn The construction combines a Qal preterite from שׁוּב (shuv) with its infinitive absolute to indicate continuous action. The infinitive absolute from הָלָךְ (halakh) is included for emphasis: “the waters returned…going and returning.”

[8:3]  ⁶⁵ tn Heb “the waters.” The pronoun (“they”) has been employed in the translation for stylistic reasons.

[8:3]  ⁶⁶ tn The vav (ו) consecutive with the preterite here describes the consequence of the preceding action.

[8:1]  ⁶⁷ tn The Hebrew word translated “remembered” often carries the sense of acting in accordance with what is remembered, i.e., fulfilling covenant promises (see B. S. Childs, Memory and Tradition in Israel [SBT], especially p. 34).

[8:1]  ⁶⁸ tn Heb “to pass over.”

[2:7]  ⁶⁹ tn The words “the king says” are supplied in the translation for clarification. The speaker is the Lord’s chosen king.

[2:7]  ⁷⁰ tn Or “I will relate the decree. The Lord said to me” (in accordance with the Masoretic accentuation).

[2:7]  ⁷¹ sn ‘You are my son!’ The Davidic king was viewed as God’s “son” (see 2 Sam 7:14; Ps 89:26-27). The idiom reflects ancient Near Eastern adoption language associated with covenants of grant, by which a lord would reward a faithful subject by elevating him to special status, referred to as “sonship.” Like a son, the faithful subject received an “inheritance,” viewed as an unconditional, eternal gift. Such gifts usually took the form of land and/or an enduring dynasty. See M. Weinfeld, “The Covenant of Grant in the Old Testament and in the Ancient Near East,” JAOS 90 (1970): 184-203, for general discussion and some striking extra-biblical parallels.

[3:17]  ⁷² tn Grk “and behold.” The Greek word ἰδού (idou) has not been translated here.

[3:17]  ⁷³ tn Grk “behold, a voice from the cloud, saying.” This is an incomplete sentence in Greek which portrays intensity and emotion. The participle λέγουσα (legousa) was translated as a finite verb in keeping with English style.

[3:17]  ⁷⁴ tn Grk “my beloved Son,” or “my Son, the beloved [one].” The force of ἀγαπητός (agaphtos) is often “pertaining to one who is the only one of his or her class, but at the same time is particularly loved and cherished” (L&N 58.53; cf. also BDAG 7 s.v. 1).

[3:17]  sn The parallel accounts in Mark 1:11 and Luke 3:22 read “You are” rather than “This is,” portraying the remark as addressed personally to Jesus.

[3:17]  ⁷⁵ tn Grk “in whom.”

[3:17]  ⁷⁶ tn Or “with whom I am well pleased.”

[3:17]  sn The allusions in the remarks of the text recall Ps 2:7a; Isa 42:1 and either Isa 41:8 or, less likely, Gen 22:12,16. God is marking out Jesus as his chosen one (the meaning of “[in him I take] great delight”), but it may well be that this was a private experience that only Jesus and John saw and heard (cf. John 1:32-33).

[26:63]  ⁷⁷ tn Here καί (kai) has not been translated.

[26:63]  ⁷⁸ tn Or “Messiah”; both “Christ” (Greek) and “Messiah” (Hebrew and Aramaic) mean “one who has been anointed.”

[26:63]  sn See the note on Christ in 1:16.

[27:43]  ⁷⁹ sn An allusion to Ps 22:8.

[1:35]  ⁸⁰ tn Grk “And the angel said to her.” Here καί (kai) has not been translated because of differences between Greek and English style. The pronoun αὐτῇ (auth, “to her”) has not been included in the translation since it is redundant in contemporary English.

[1:35]  ⁸¹ sn The phrase will overshadow is a reference to God’s glorious presence at work (Exod 40:34-35; Ps 91:4).

[1:35]  ⁸² tn Or “the one born holy will be called the Son of God.” The wording of this phrase depends on whether the adjective is a predicate adjective, as in the text, or is an adjective modifying the participle serving as the subject. The absence of an article with the adjective speaks for a predicate position. Other less appealing options supply a verb for “holy”; thus “the one who is born will be holy”; or argue that both “holy” and “Son of God” are predicates, so “The one who is born will be called holy, the Son of God.”

[1:35]  ⁸³ tc A few mss (C* Θ Ë¹ 33 pc) add “by you” here. This looks like a scribal addition to bring symmetry to the first three clauses of the angel’s message (note the second person pronoun in the previous two clauses), and is too poorly supported to be seriously considered as authentic.

[1:35]  ⁸⁴ tn Or “Therefore the holy child to be born will be called the Son of God.” There are two ways to understand the Greek phrase τὸ γεννώμενον ἅγιον (to gennwmenon {agion) here. First, τὸ γεννώμενον could be considered a substantival participle with ἅγιον as an adjective in the second predicate position, thus making a complete sentence; this interpretation is reflected in the translation above. Second, τὸ ἅγιον could be considered a substantival adjective with γεννώμενον acting as an adjectival participle, thus making the phrase the subject of the verb κληθήσεται (klhqhsetai); this interpretation is reflected in the alternative reading. Treating the participle γεννώμενον as adjectival is a bit unnatural for the very reason that it forces one to understand ἅγιον as substantival; this introduces a new idea in the text with ἅγιον when an already new topic is being introduced with γεννώμενον. Semantically this would overload the new subject introduced at this point. For this reason the first interpretation is preferred.

[1:34]  ⁸⁵ tc ‡ What did John the Baptist declare about Jesus on this occasion? Did he say, “This is the Son of God” (οὗτός ἐστιν ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ θεοῦ, |outo" estin Jo Juio" tou qeou), or “This is the Chosen One of God” (οὗτός ἐστιν ὁ ἐκλεκτὸς τοῦ θεοῦ, outo" estin Jo eklekto" tou qeou)? The majority of the witnesses, impressive because of their diversity in age and locales, read “This is the Son of God” (so {Ì^66,75 A B C L Θ Ψ 0233^vid Ë^1,13 33 1241 aur c f l g bo as well as the majority of Byzantine minuscules and many others}). Most scholars take this to be sufficient evidence to regard the issue as settled without much of a need to reflect on internal evidence. On the other hand, one of the earliest mss for this verse, {Ì⁵} (3rd century), evidently read οὗτός ἐστιν ὁ ἐκλεκτὸς τοῦ θεοῦ. (There is a gap in the ms at the point of the disputed words; it is too large for υἱός especially if written, as it surely would have been, as a nomen sacrum [uMs]. The term ἐκλεκτός was not a nomen sacrum and would have therefore taken up much more space [eklektos]. Given these two variants, there is hardly any question as to what Ì⁵ read.) This papyrus has many affinities with א*, which here also has ὁ ἐκλεκτός. In addition to their combined testimony Ì^106vid b e ff^2* sy^s,c also support this reading. ̹⁰⁶ is particularly impressive, for it is a second third-century papyrus in support of ὁ ἐκλεκτός. A third reading combines these two: “the elect Son” (electus filius in ff^2c sa and a [with slight variation]). Although the evidence for ἐκλεκτός is not as impressive as that for υἱός, the reading is found in early Alexandrian and Western witnesses. Turning to the internal evidence, “the Chosen One” clearly comes out ahead. “Son of God” is a favorite expression of the author (cf. 1:49; 3:18; 5:25; 10:36; 11:4, 27; 19:7; 20:31); further, there are several other references to “his Son,” “the Son,” etc. Scribes would be naturally motivated to change ἐκλεκτός to υἱός since the latter is both a Johannine expression and is, on the surface, richer theologically in 1:34. On the other hand, there is not a sufficient reason for scribes to change υἱός to ἐκλεκτός. The term never occurs in John; even its verbal cognate (ἐκλέγω, eklegw) is never affirmed of Jesus in this Gospel. ἐκλεκτός clearly best explains the rise of υἱός. Further, the third reading (“Chosen Son of God”) is patently a conflation of the other two. It has all the earmarks of adding υἱός to ἐκλεκτός. Thus, ὁ υἱός τοῦ θεοῦ is almost certainly a motivated reading. As R. E. Brown notes (John [AB], 1:57), “On the basis of theological tendency…it is difficult to imagine that Christian scribes would change ‘the Son of God’ to ‘God’s chosen one,’ while a change in the opposite direction would be quite plausible. Harmonization with the Synoptic accounts of the baptism (‘You are [This is] my beloved Son’) would also explain the introduction of ‘the Son of God’ into John; the same phenomenon occurs in vi 69. Despite the weaker textual evidence, therefore, it seems best – with Lagrange, Barrett, Boismard, and others – to accept ‘God’s chosen one’ as original.”

[1:49]  ⁸⁶ tn Although βασιλεύς (basileus) lacks the article it is definite due to contextual and syntactical considerations. See ExSyn 263.

[1:49]  ⁸⁷ sn Nathanael’s confession – You are the Son of God; you are the King of Israel – is best understood as a confession of Jesus’ messiahship. It has strong allusions to Ps 2:6-7, a well-known messianic psalm. What Nathanael’s exact understanding was at this point is hard to determine, but “son of God” was a designation for the Davidic king in the OT, and Nathanael parallels it with King of Israel here.

[3:16]  ⁸⁸ tn Or “this is how much”; or “in this way.” The Greek adverb οὕτως (Joutws) can refer (1) to the degree to which God loved the world, that is, to such an extent or so much that he gave his own Son (see R. E. Brown, John [AB], 1:133-34; D. A. Carson, John, 204) or (2) simply to the manner in which God loved the world, i.e., by sending his own son (see R. H. Gundry and R. W. Howell, “The Sense and Syntax of John 3:14-17 with Special Reference to the Use of Οὕτως…ὥστε in John 3:16,” NovT 41 [1999]: 24-39). Though the term more frequently refers to the manner in which something is done (see BDAG 741-42 s.v. οὕτω/οὕτως), the following clause involving ὥστε (Jwste) plus the indicative (which stresses actual, but [usually] unexpected result) emphasizes the greatness of the gift God has given. With this in mind, then, it is likely (3) that John is emphasizing both the degree to which God loved the world as well as the manner in which He chose to express that love. This is in keeping with John’s style of using double entendre or double meaning. Thus, the focus of the Greek construction here is on the nature of God's love, addressing its mode, intensity, and extent.

[3:16]  ⁸⁹ tn Although this word is often translated “only begotten,” such a translation is misleading, since in English it appears to express a metaphysical relationship. The word in Greek was used of an only child (a son [Luke 7:12, 9:38] or a daughter [Luke 8:42]). It was also used of something unique (only one of its kind) such as the mythological Phoenix (1 Clement 25:2). From here it passes easily to a description of Isaac (Heb 11:17 and Josephus, Ant. 1.13.1 [1.222]) who was not Abraham’s only son, but was one-of-a-kind because he was the child of the promise. Thus the word means “one-of-a-kind” and is reserved for Jesus in the Johannine literature of the NT. While all Christians are children of God (τέκνα θεοῦ, tekna qeou), Jesus is God’s Son in a unique, one-of-a-kind sense. The word is used in this way in all its uses in the Gospel of John (1:14, 1:18, 3:16, and 3:18).

[3:16]  ⁹⁰ tn In John the word ἀπόλλυμι (apollumi) can mean either (1) to be lost (2) to perish or be destroyed, depending on the context.

[3:16]  ⁹¹ sn The alternatives presented are only two (again, it is typical of Johannine thought for this to be presented in terms of polar opposites): perish or have eternal life.

[3:17]  ⁹² sn That is, “to judge the world to be guilty and liable to punishment.”

[3:18]  ⁹³ tn Grk “judged.”

[3:18]  ⁹⁴ tn Grk “judged.”

[3:18]  ⁹⁵ tn See the note on the term “one and only” in 3:16.

[3:35]  ⁹⁶ tn Grk “has given all things into his hand” (an idiom).

[3:36]  ⁹⁷ tn Or “refuses to believe,” or “disobeys.”

[3:36]  ⁹⁸ tn Or “anger because of evil,” or “punishment.”

[3:36]  ⁹⁹ tn Or “resides.”

[5:25]  ¹⁰⁰ tn Grk “Truly, truly, I say to you.”

[5:25]  ¹⁰¹ tn Grk “an hour.”

[10:30]  ¹⁰² tn Grk “I and the Father.” The order has been reversed to reflect English style.

[10:30]  ¹⁰³ tn The phrase ἕν ἐσμεν ({en esmen) is a significant assertion with trinitarian implications. ἕν is neuter, not masculine, so the assertion is not that Jesus and the Father are one person, but one “thing.” Identity of the two persons is not what is asserted, but essential unity (unity of essence).

[10:36]  ¹⁰⁴ tn Or “dedicated.”

[20:28]  ¹⁰⁵ tn Grk “answered and said to him.”

[20:28]  ¹⁰⁶ sn Should Thomas’ exclamation be understood as two subjects with the rest of the sentence omitted (“My Lord and my God has truly risen from the dead”), as predicate nominatives (“You are my Lord and my God”), or as vocatives (“My Lord and my God!”)? Probably the most likely is something between the second and third alternatives. It seems that the second is slightly more likely here, because the context appears confessional. Thomas’ statement, while it may have been an exclamation, does in fact confess the faith which he had previously lacked, and Jesus responds to Thomas’ statement in the following verse as if it were a confession. With the proclamation by Thomas here, it is difficult to see how any more profound analysis of Jesus’ person could be given. It echoes 1:1 and 1:14 together: The Word was God, and the Word became flesh (Jesus of Nazareth). The Fourth Gospel opened with many other titles for Jesus: the Lamb of God (1:29, 36); the Son of God (1:34, 49); Rabbi (1:38); Messiah (1:41); the King of Israel (1:49); the Son of Man (1:51). Now the climax is reached with the proclamation by Thomas, “My Lord and my God,” and the reader has come full circle from 1:1, where the author had introduced him to who Jesus was, to 20:28, where the last of the disciples has come to the full realization of who Jesus was. What Jesus had predicted in John 8:28 had come to pass: “When you lift up the Son of Man, then you will know that I am he” (Grk “I am”). By being lifted up in crucifixion (which led in turn to his death, resurrection, and exaltation with the Father) Jesus has revealed his true identity as both Lord (κύριος [kurios], used by the LXX to translate Yahweh) and God (θεός [qeos], used by the LXX to translate Elohim).

[20:31]  ¹⁰⁷ tn Grk “these things.”

[20:31]  ¹⁰⁸ tn Grk “are written.”

[20:31]  ¹⁰⁹ tc ‡ A difficult textual variant is present at this point in the Greek text. Some mss (Ì^66vid א* B Θ 0250 pc) read the present subjunctive πιστεύητε (pisteuhte) after ἵνα (Jina; thus NEB text, “that you may hold the faith”) while others (א² A C D L W Ψ Ë^1,13 33 Ï) read the aorist subjunctive πιστεύσητε (pisteushte) after ἵνα (cf. NEB margin, “that you may come to believe”). As reflected by the renderings of the NEB text and margin, it is often assumed that the present tense would suggest ongoing belief (i.e., the Fourth Gospel primarily addressed those who already believed, and was intended to strengthen their faith), while the aorist tense would speak of coming to faith (i.e., John’s Gospel was primarily evangelistic in nature). Both textual variants enjoy significant ms support, although the present subjunctive has somewhat superior witnesses on its behalf. On internal grounds it is hard to decide which is more likely the original. Many resolve this issue on the basis of a reconstruction of the overall purpose of the Gospel, viz., whether it is addressed to unbelievers or believers. However, since elsewhere in the Gospel of John (1) the present tense can refer to both initial faith and continuation in the faith and (2) the aorist tense simply refrains from commenting on the issue, it is highly unlikely that the distinction here would be determinative for the purpose of the Fourth Gospel. The question of purpose cannot be resolved by choosing one textual variant over the other in 20:31, but must be decided on other factors. Nevertheless, if a choice has to be made, the present subjunctive is the preferred reading. NA²⁷ puts the aorist’s sigma in brackets, thus representing both readings virtually equally (so TCGNT 220).

[20:31]  ¹¹⁰ tn Or “Jesus is the Messiah” (Both Greek “Christ” and Hebrew and Aramaic “Messiah” mean “one who has been anointed”).

[20:31]  sn See the note on Christ in 1:20.

[20:31]  ¹¹¹ sn John 20:31. A major question concerning this verse, the purpose statement of the Gospel of John, is whether the author is writing primarily for an audience of unbelievers, with purely evangelistic emphasis, or whether he envisions an audience of believers, whom he wants to strengthen in their faith. Several points are important in this discussion: (1) in the immediate context (20:30), the other signs spoken of by the author were performed in the presence of disciples; (2) in the case of the first of the signs, at Cana, the author makes a point of the effect the miracle had on the disciples (2:11); (3) if the primary thrust of the Gospel is toward unbelievers, it is difficult to see why so much material in chaps. 13-17 (the last meal and Farewell Discourse, concluding with Jesus’ prayer for the disciples), which deals almost exclusively with the disciples, is included; (4) the disciples themselves were repeatedly said to have believed in Jesus throughout the Gospel, beginning with 2:11, yet they still needed to believe after the resurrection (if Thomas’ experience in 20:27-28 is any indication); and (5) the Gospel appears to be written with the assumption that the readers are familiar with the basic story (or perhaps with one or more of the synoptic gospel accounts, although this is less clear). Thus no account of the birth of Jesus is given at all, and although he is identified as being from Nazareth, the words of the Pharisees and chief priests to Nicodemus (7:52) are almost certainly to be taken as ironic, assuming the reader knows where Jesus was really from. Likewise, when Mary is identified in 11:2 as the one who anointed Jesus’ feet with oil, it is apparently assumed that the readers are familiar with the story, since the incident involved is not mentioned in the Fourth Gospel until 12:3. These observations must be set over against the clear statement of purpose in the present verse, 20:31, which seems to have significant evangelistic emphasis. In addition to this there is the repeated emphasis on witness throughout the Fourth Gospel (cf. the witness of John the Baptist in 1:7, 8, 15, 32, and 34, along with 5:33; the Samaritan woman in 4:39; Jesus’ own witness, along with that of the Father who sent him, in 8:14, 18, and 18:37; the disciples themselves in 15:27; and finally the testimony of the author himself in 19:35 and 21:24). In light of all this evidence it seems best to say that the author wrote with a dual purpose: (1) to witness to unbelievers concerning Jesus, in order that they come to believe in him and have eternal life; and (2) to strengthen the faith of believers, by deepening and expanding their understanding of who Jesus is.

[3:13]  ¹¹² tc ‡ The repetition of ὁ θεός (Jo qeos, “God”) before the names of Isaac and Jacob is found in Ì⁷⁴ א C (A D without article) 36 104 1175 pc lat. The omission of the second and third ὁ θεός is supported by B E Ψ 33 1739 Ï pc. The other time that Exod 3:6 is quoted in Acts (7:32) the best witnesses also lack the repeated ὁ θεός, but the three other times this OT passage is quoted in the NT the full form, with the thrice-mentioned θεός, is used (Matt 22:32; Mark 12:26; Luke 20:37). Scribes would be prone to conform the wording here to the LXX; the longer reading is thus most likely not authentic. NA²⁷ has the words in brackets, indicating doubts as to their authenticity.

[3:13]  ¹¹³ tn Or “ancestors”; Grk “fathers.”

[3:13]  sn The reference to the God of the patriarchs is a reminder that God is the God of the nation and of promises. The phrase God of our forefathers is from the Hebrew scriptures (Exod 3:6, 15-16; 4:5; see also the Jewish prayer known as “The Eighteen Benedictions”). Once again, event has led to explanation, or what is called the “sign and speech” pattern.

[3:13]  ¹¹⁴ sn Has glorified. Jesus is alive, raised and active, as the healing illustrates so dramatically how God honors him.

[3:13]  ¹¹⁵ sn His servant. The term servant has messianic connotations given the context of the promise, the note of suffering, and the titles and functions noted in vv. 14-15.

[3:13]  ¹¹⁶ tn Or “denied,” “disowned.”

[3:13]  ¹¹⁷ tn This genitive absolute construction could be understood as temporal (“when he had decided”) or concessive (“although he had decided”).

[8:37]  ¹¹⁸ tc A few later mss (E 36 323 453 945 1739 1891 pc) add, with minor variations, 8:37 “He said to him, ‘If you believe with your whole heart, you may.’ He replied, ‘I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.’” Verse 37 is lacking in {Ì^45,74 א A B C 33 614 vg sy^p,h co}. It is clearly not a part of the original text of Acts. The variant is significant in showing how some in the early church viewed a confession of faith. The present translation follows NA²⁷ in omitting the verse number, a procedure also followed by a number of other modern translations.

[9:20]  ¹¹⁹ sn See the note on synagogue in 6:9.

[9:20]  ¹²⁰ tn The ὅτι (Joti) is understood to introduce direct (“This man is the Son of God”) rather than indirect discourse (“that this man is the Son of God”) because the pronoun οὗτος (Jouto") combined with the present tense verb ἐστιν (estin) suggests the contents of what was proclaimed are a direct (albeit summarized) quotation.

[9:20]  sn This is the only use of the title Son of God in Acts. The book prefers to allow a variety of descriptions to present Jesus.

[9:1]  ¹²¹ tn Or “Saul, making dire threats.”

[9:1]  ¹²² tn The expression “breathing out threats and murder” is an idiomatic expression for “making threats to murder” (see L&N 33.293). Although the two terms “threats” and “murder” are syntactically coordinate, the second is semantically subordinate to the first. In other words, the content of the threats is to murder the disciples.

[1:9]  ¹²³ tn Or “heard about it”; Grk “heard.” There is no direct object stated in the Greek (direct objects were frequently omitted in Greek when clear from the context). A direct object is expected by an English reader, however, so most translations supply one. Here, however, it is not entirely clear what the author “heard”: a number of translations supply “it” (so KJV, NASB, NRSV; NAB “this”), but this could refer back either to (1) “your love in the Spirit” at the end of v. 8, or (2) “your faith in Christ Jesus and the love that you have for all the saints” (v. 4). In light of this uncertainty, other translations supply “about you” (TEV, NIV, CEV, NLT). This is preferred by the present translation since, while it does not resolve the ambiguity entirely, it does make it less easy for the English reader to limit the reference only to “your love in the Spirit” at the end of v. 8.

[1:9]  ¹²⁴ tn The term “God” does not appear in the Greek text, but the following reference to “the knowledge of his will” makes it clear that “God” is in view as the object of the “praying and asking,” and should therefore be included in the English translation for clarity.

[1:9]  ¹²⁵ tn The ἵνα (Jina) clause has been translated as substantival, indicating the content of the prayer and asking. The idea of purpose may also be present in this clause.

[4:4]  ¹²⁶ tn Grk “the fullness of time” (an idiom for the totality of a period of time, with the implication of proper completion; see L&N 67.69).

[1:13]  ¹²⁷ tn Here αὐτοῦ (autou) has been translated as a subjective genitive (“he loves”).

[1:14]  ¹²⁸ tc διὰ τοῦ αἵματος αὐτοῦ (dia tou {aimato" autou, “through his blood”) is read at this juncture by several minuscule mss (614 630 1505 2464 al) as well as a few, mostly secondary, versional and patristic witnesses. But the reading was prompted by the parallel in Eph 1:7 where the wording is solid. If these words had been in the original of Colossians, why would scribes omit them here but not in Eph 1:7? Further, the testimony on behalf of the shorter reading is quite overwhelming: {א A B C D F G Ψ 075 0150 6 33 1739 1881 Ï latt co as well as several other versions and fathers}. The conviction that “through his blood” is not authentic in Col 1:14 is as strong as the conviction that these words are authentic in Eph 1:7.

[1:15]  ¹²⁹ sn This passage has been typeset as poetry because many scholars regard this passage as poetic or hymnic. These terms are used broadly to refer to the genre of writing, not to the content. There are two broad criteria for determining if a passage is poetic or hymnic: “(a) stylistic: a certain rhythmical lilt when the passages are read aloud, the presence of parallelismus membrorum (i.e., an arrangement into couplets), the semblance of some metre, and the presence of rhetorical devices such as alliteration, chiasmus, and antithesis; and (b) linguistic: an unusual vocabulary, particularly the presence of theological terms, which is different from the surrounding context” (P. T. O’Brien, Philippians [NIGTC], 188-89). Classifying a passage as hymnic or poetic is important because understanding this genre can provide keys to interpretation. However, not all scholars agree that the above criteria are present in this passage, so the decision to typeset it as poetry should be viewed as a tentative decision about its genre.

[1:15]  ¹³⁰ tn The Greek term πρωτότοκος (prwtotokos) could refer either to first in order of time, such as a first born child, or it could refer to one who is preeminent in rank. M. J. Harris, Colossians and Philemon (EGGNT), 43, expresses the meaning of the word well: “The ‘firstborn’ was either the eldest child in a family or a person of preeminent rank. The use of this term to describe the Davidic king in Ps 88:28 LXX (=Ps 89:27 EVV), ‘I will also appoint him my firstborn (πρωτότοκον), the most exalted of the kings of the earth,’ indicates that it can denote supremacy in rank as well as priority in time. But whether the πρωτό- element in the word denotes time, rank, or both, the significance of the -τοκος element as indicating birth or origin (from τίκτω, give birth to) has been virtually lost except in ref. to lit. birth.” In Col 1:15 the emphasis is on the priority of Jesus’ rank as over and above creation (cf. 1:16 and the “for” clause referring to Jesus as Creator).

[1:15]  ¹³¹ tn The genitive construction πάσης κτίσεως (pash" ktisew") is a genitive of subordination and is therefore translated as “over all creation.” See ExSyn 103-4.

[1:1]  ¹³² tn Grk “Paul.” The word “from” is not in the Greek text, but has been supplied to indicate the sender of the letter.

[1:10]  ¹³³ tn The infinitive περιπατῆσαι (peripathsai, “to walk, to live, to live one’s life”) is best taken as an infinitive of purpose related to “praying” (προσευχόμενοι, proseucomenoi) and “asking” (αἰτούμενοι, aitoumenoi) in v. 9 and is thus translated as “that you may live.”

[1:10]  ¹³⁴ tn BDAG 129 s.v. ἀρεσκεία states that ἀρεσκείαν (areskeian) refers to a “desire to please εἰς πᾶσαν ἀ. to please (the Lord) in all respects Col 1:10.”

[1:1]  ¹³⁵ tn Grk “Paul.” The word “from” is not in the Greek text, but has been supplied to indicate the sender of the letter.

[1:3]  ¹³⁶ tn Or “made”; Grk “came into existence.”

[1:3]  ¹³⁷ tn Or “made”; Grk “nothing came into existence.”

[1:3]  ¹³⁸ tc There is a major punctuation problem here: Should this relative clause go with v. 3 or v. 4? The earliest mss have no punctuation (Ì^66,75* א* A B Δ al). Many of the later mss which do have punctuation place it before the phrase, thus putting it with v. 4 (Ì^75c C D L W^s 050* pc). NA²⁵ placed the phrase in v. 3; NA²⁶ moved the words to the beginning of v. 4. In a detailed article K. Aland defended the change (“Eine Untersuchung zu Johannes 1, 3-4. Über die Bedeutung eines Punktes,” ZNW 59 [1968]: 174-209). He sought to prove that the attribution of ὃ γέγονεν (}o gegonen) to v. 3 began to be carried out in the 4th century in the Greek church. This came out of the Arian controversy, and was intended as a safeguard for doctrine. The change was unknown in the West. Aland is probably correct in affirming that the phrase was attached to v. 4 by the Gnostics and the Eastern Church; only when the Arians began to use the phrase was it attached to v. 3. But this does not rule out the possibility that, by moving the words from v. 4 to v. 3, one is restoring the original reading. Understanding the words as part of v. 3 is natural and adds to the emphasis which is built up there, while it also gives a terse, forceful statement in v. 4. On the other hand, taking the phrase ὃ γέγονεν with v. 4 gives a complicated expression: C. K. Barrett says that both ways of understanding v. 4 with ὃ γέγονεν included “are almost impossibly clumsy” (St. John, 157): “That which came into being – in it the Word was life”; “That which came into being – in the Word was its life.” The following stylistic points should be noted in the solution of this problem: (1) John frequently starts sentences with ἐν (en); (2) he repeats frequently (“nothing was created that has been created”); (3) 5:26 and 6:53 both give a sense similar to v. 4 if it is understood without the phrase; (4) it makes far better Johannine sense to say that in the Word was life than to say that the created universe (what was made, ὃ γέγονεν) was life in him. In conclusion, the phrase is best taken with v. 3. Schnackenburg, Barrett, Carson, Haenchen, Morris, KJV, and NIV concur (against Brown, Beasley-Murray, and NEB). The arguments of R. Schnackenburg, St. John, 1:239-40, are particularly persuasive.

[1:3]  tn Or “made”; Grk “that has come into existence.”

[3:8]  ¹³⁹ tn The same Greek word, πνεύματος (pneumatos), may be translated “wind” or “spirit.”

[3:8]  ¹⁴⁰ sn Again, the physical illustrates the spiritual, although the force is heightened by the word-play here on wind-spirit (see the note on wind at the beginning of this verse). By the end of the verse, however, the final usage of πνεύματος (pneumatos) refers to the Holy Spirit.

[3:23]  ¹⁴¹ sn John refers to John the Baptist.

[3:23]  ¹⁴² tn The precise locations of Αἰνών (Ainwn) and Σαλείμ (Saleim) are unknown. Three possibilities are suggested: (1) In Perea, which is in Transjordan (cf. 1:28). Perea is just across the river from Judea. (2) In the northern Jordan Valley, on the west bank some 8 miles [13 km] south of Scythopolis. But with the Jordan River so close, the reference to abundant water (3:23) seems superfluous. (3) Thus Samaria has been suggested. 4 miles (6.6 km) east of Shechem is a town called Salim, and 8 miles (13 km) northeast of Salim lies modern Ainun. In the general vicinity are many springs. Because of the meanings of the names (Αἰνών = “springs” in Aramaic and Σαλείμ = Salem, “peace”) some have attempted to allegorize here that John the Baptist is near salvation. Obviously there is no need for this. It is far more probable that the author has in mind real places, even if their locations cannot be determined with certainty.

[3:23]  ¹⁴³ tn Or “people were continually coming.”

[3:23]  ¹⁴⁴ tn The words “to him” are not in the Greek text, but are implied.

[4:9]  ¹⁴⁵ tn Or “a Judean.” Here BDAG 478 s.v. ᾿Ιουδαίος 2.a states, “Judean (with respect to birth, nationality, or cult).” The same term occurs in the plural later in this verse. In one sense “Judean” would work very well in the translation here, since the contrast is between residents of the two geographical regions. However, since in the context of this chapter the discussion soon becomes a religious rather than a territorial one (cf. vv. 19-26), the translation “Jew” has been retained here and in v. 22.

[4:9]  ¹⁴⁶ tn “Water” is supplied as the understood direct object of the infinitive πεῖν (pein).

[4:9]  ¹⁴⁷ tn D. Daube (“Jesus and the Samaritan Woman: the Meaning of συγχράομαι [Jn 4:7ff],” JBL 69 [1950]: 137-47) suggests this meaning.

[4:9]  sn The background to the statement use nothing in common is the general assumption among Jews that the Samaritans were ritually impure or unclean. Thus a Jew who used a drinking vessel after a Samaritan had touched it would become ceremonially unclean.

[4:9]  ¹⁴⁸ sn This is a parenthetical note by the author.

[4:10]  ¹⁴⁹ tn Grk “answered and said to her.”

[4:10]  ¹⁵⁰ tn Or “if you knew.”

[4:10]  ¹⁵¹ tn The phrase “some water” is supplied as the understood direct object of the infinitive πεῖν (pein).

[4:10]  ¹⁵² tn This is a second class conditional sentence in Greek.

[4:10]  sn The word translated living is used in Greek of flowing water, which leads to the woman’s misunderstanding in the following verse. She thought Jesus was referring to some unknown source of drinkable water.

[4:15]  ¹⁵³ tn Grk “or come here to draw.”

[4:15]  ¹⁵⁴ tn The direct object of the infinitive ἀντλεῖν (antlein) is understood in Greek but supplied for clarity in the English translation.

[4:1]  ¹⁵⁵ tc Several early and important witnesses, along with the majority of later ones (Ì^66c,75 A B C L W^s Ψ 083 ˹³ 33 Ï sa), have κύριος (kurio", “Lord”) here instead of ᾿Ιησοῦς (Ihsou", “Jesus”). As significant as this external support is, the internal evidence seems to be on the side of ᾿Ιησοῦς. “Jesus” is mentioned two more times in the first two verses of chapter four in a way that is stylistically awkward (so much so that the translation has substituted the pronoun for the first one; see tn note below). This seems to be sufficient reason to motivate scribes to change the wording to κύριος. Further, the reading ᾿Ιησοῦς is not without decent support, though admittedly not as strong as that for κύριος (Ì^66* א D Θ 086 ˹ 565 1241 al lat bo). On the other hand, this Gospel speaks of Jesus as Lord in the evangelist’s narrative descriptions elsewhere only in 11:2; 20:18, 20; 21:12; and probably 6:23, preferring ᾿Ιησοῦς most of the time. This fact could be used to argue that scribes, acquainted with John’s style, changed κύριος to ᾿Ιησοῦς. But the immediate context generally is weighed more heavily than an author’s style. It is possible that neither word was in the original text and scribes supplied what they thought most appropriate (see TCGNT 176). But without ms evidence to this effect coupled with the harder reading ᾿Ιησοῦς, this conjecture must remain doubtful. All in all, it is best to regard ᾿Ιησοῦς as the original reading here.

[4:1]  ¹⁵⁶ sn See the note on Pharisees in 1:24.

[4:1]  ¹⁵⁷ tn Grk “Jesus”; the repetition of the proper name is somewhat redundant in English (see the beginning of the verse) and so the pronoun (“he”) has been substituted here.

[4:1]  ¹⁵⁸ tn Grk “was making.”

[5:1]  ¹⁵⁹ sn The temporal indicator After this is not specific, so it is uncertain how long after the incidents at Cana this occurred.

[5:1]  ¹⁶⁰ tc The textual variants ἑορτή or ἡ ἑορτή (Jeorth or Jh Jeorth, “a feast” or “the feast”) may not appear significant at first, but to read ἑορτή with the article would almost certainly demand a reference to the Jewish Passover. The article is found in א C L Δ Ψ Ë¹ 33 892 1424 pm, but is lacking in {Ì^66,75 A B D T W^s Θ Ë¹³ 565 579 700 1241 pm}. Overall, the shorter reading has somewhat better support. Internally, the known proclivity of scribes to make the text more explicit argues compellingly for the shorter reading. Thus, the verse refers to a feast other than the Passover. The incidental note in 5:3, that the sick were lying outside in the porticoes of the pool, makes Passover an unlikely time because it fell toward the end of winter and the weather would not have been warm. L. Morris (John [NICNT], 299, n. 6) thinks it impossible to identify the feast with certainty.

[5:1]  sn A Jewish feast. Jews were obligated to go up to Jerusalem for 3 major annual feasts: Passover, Pentecost, and Tabernacles. If the first is probably ruled out because of the time of year, the last is not as likely because it forms the central setting for chap. 7 (where there are many indications in the context that Tabernacles is the feast in view.) This leaves the feast of Pentecost, which at some point prior to this time in Jewish tradition (as reflected in Jewish intertestamental literature and later post-Christian rabbinic writings) became identified with the giving of the law to Moses on Mount Sinai. Such an association might explain Jesus’ reference to Moses in 5:45-46. This is uncertain, however. The only really important fact for the author is that the healing was done on a Sabbath. This is what provoked the controversy with the Jewish authorities recorded in 5:16-47.

[5:1]  ¹⁶¹ map For location see Map5 B1; Map6 F3; Map7 E2; Map8 F2; Map10 B3; JP1 F4; JP2 F4; JP3 F4; JP4 F4.

[5:5]  ¹⁶² tn Grk “who had had thirty-eight years in his disability.”

[5:10]  ¹⁶³ tn Or “the Jewish authorities”; Grk “the Jews.” In NT usage the term ᾿Ιουδαῖοι (Ioudaioi) may refer to the entire Jewish people, the residents of Jerusalem and surrounding territory, the authorities in Jerusalem, or merely those who were hostile to Jesus. Here the author refers to the Jewish authorities or leaders in Jerusalem. (For further information see R. G. Bratcher, “‘The Jews’ in the Gospel of John,” BT 26 [1975]: 401-9).

[5:10]  ¹⁶⁴ tn Or “pallet,” “mattress,” “cot,” or “stretcher.” See the note on “mat” in v. 8.

[5:11]  ¹⁶⁵ tn Or “pallet,” “mattress,” “cot,” or “stretcher.” See the note on “mat” in v. 8.

[5:12]  ¹⁶⁶ tc While a number of mss, especially the later ones (A^c C³ D Θ Ψ Ë^1,13 33 Ï latt sy), include the words τον κραβ(β)ατ(τ)ον σου (ton krab(b)at(t)on sou, “your mat”) here, the earliest and best (Ì^66,75 א B C* L) do not. Nevertheless, in the translation, it is necessary to supply the words due to the demands of English style, which does not typically allow for understood or implied direct objects as Greek does.

[5:12]  ¹⁶⁷ tn Grk “Pick up and walk”; the object (the mat) is implied but not repeated.

[2:18]  ¹⁶⁸ tn Here καί (kai) has not been translated due to differences between Greek and English style.

[2:18]  ¹⁶⁹ tn The phrase “the following” after “write” is supplied to clarify that what follows is the content of what is to be written.

[2:18]  ¹⁷⁰ tn Grk “These things says [the One]…” See the note on the phrase “this is the solemn pronouncement of” in 2:1.

[2:18]  sn The expression This is the solemn pronouncement of reflects an OT idiom. See the note on this phrase in 2:1.

[2:18]  ¹⁷¹ tn Grk “a flame of fire.” The Greek term πυρός (puros) has been translated as an attributive genitive.

[2:18]  ¹⁷² tn The precise meaning of the term translated “polished bronze” (χαλκολιβάνῳ, calkolibanw), which appears no where else in Greek literature outside of the book of Revelation (see 1:15), is uncertain. Without question it is some sort of metal. BDAG 1076 s.v. χαλκολίβανον suggests “fine brass/bronze.” L&N 2.57 takes the word to refer to particularly valuable or fine bronze, but notes that the emphasis here and in Rev 1:15 is more on the lustrous quality of the metal.