Kisah Para Rasul 2:14

Peter’s Address on the Day of Pentecost

2:14 But Peter stood up ¹  with the eleven, raised his voice, and addressed them: “You men of Judea ²  and all you who live in Jerusalem, ³  know this ⁴  and listen carefully to what I say.

Kisah Para Rasul 2:38

2:38 Peter said to them, “Repent, and each one of you be baptized ⁵  in the name of Jesus Christ ⁶  for ⁷  the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. ⁸ 

Kisah Para Rasul 3:1-10

Peter and John Heal a Lame Man at the Temple

3:1 Now Peter and John were going up to the temple at the time ⁹  for prayer, ¹⁰  at three o’clock in the afternoon. ¹¹  3:2 And a man lame ¹²  from birth ¹³  was being carried up, who was placed at the temple gate called “the Beautiful Gate” every day ¹⁴  so he could beg for money ¹⁵  from those going into the temple courts. ¹⁶  3:3 When he saw Peter and John about to go into the temple courts, ¹⁷  he asked them for money. ¹⁸  3:4 Peter looked directly ¹⁹  at him (as did John) and said, “Look at us!” 3:5 So the lame man ²⁰  paid attention to them, expecting to receive something from them. 3:6 But Peter said, “I have no silver or gold, ²¹  but what I do have I give you. In the name ²²  of Jesus Christ ²³  the Nazarene, stand up and ²⁴  walk!” 3:7 Then ²⁵  Peter ²⁶  took hold ²⁷  of him by the right hand and raised him up, and at once the man’s ²⁸  feet and ankles were made strong. ²⁹  3:8 He ³⁰  jumped up, ³¹  stood and began walking around, and he entered the temple courts ³²  with them, walking and leaping and praising God. 3:9 All ³³  the people saw him walking and praising God, 3:10 and they recognized him as the man who used to sit and ask for donations ³⁴  at the Beautiful Gate of the temple, and they were filled with astonishment and amazement ³⁵  at what had happened to him.

Kisah Para Rasul 4:13

4:13 When they saw the boldness ³⁶  of Peter and John, and discovered ³⁷  that they were uneducated ³⁸  and ordinary ³⁹  men, they were amazed and recognized these men had been with Jesus.

Kisah Para Rasul 4:19

4:19 But Peter and John replied, ⁴⁰  “Whether it is right before God to obey ⁴¹  you rather than God, you decide,

Kisah Para Rasul 8:14-25

8:14 Now when the apostles in Jerusalem ⁴²  heard that Samaria had accepted the word ⁴³  of God, they sent ⁴⁴  Peter and John to them. 8:15 These two ⁴⁵  went down and prayed for them so that they would receive the Holy Spirit. 8:16 (For the Spirit ⁴⁶  had not yet come upon ⁴⁷  any of them, but they had only been baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.) ⁴⁸  8:17 Then Peter and John placed their hands on the Samaritans, ⁴⁹  and they received the Holy Spirit. ⁵⁰ 

8:18 Now Simon, when he saw that the Spirit ⁵¹  was given through the laying on of the apostles’ hands, offered them money, 8:19 saying, “Give me this power ⁵²  too, so that everyone I place my hands on may receive the Holy Spirit.” 8:20 But Peter said to him, “May your silver perish with you, ⁵³  because you thought you could acquire ⁵⁴  God’s gift with money! 8:21 You have no share or part ⁵⁵  in this matter ⁵⁶  because your heart is not right before God! 8:22 Therefore repent of this wickedness of yours, and pray to the Lord ⁵⁷  that he may perhaps forgive you for the intent of your heart. ⁵⁸  8:23 For I see that you are bitterly envious ⁵⁹  and in bondage to sin.” 8:24 But Simon replied, ⁶⁰  “You pray to the Lord for me so that nothing of what you have said may happen to ⁶¹  me.”

8:25 So after Peter and John ⁶²  had solemnly testified ⁶³  and spoken the word of the Lord, ⁶⁴  they started back to Jerusalem, proclaiming ⁶⁵  the good news to many Samaritan villages ⁶⁶  as they went. ⁶⁷ 

Kisah Para Rasul 9:32-43

Peter Heals Aeneas

9:32 Now ⁶⁸  as Peter was traveling around from place to place, ⁶⁹  he also came down to the saints who lived in Lydda. ⁷⁰  9:33 He found there a man named Aeneas who had been confined to a mattress for eight years because ⁷¹  he was paralyzed. 9:34 Peter ⁷²  said to him, “Aeneas, Jesus the Christ ⁷³  heals you. Get up and make your own bed!” ⁷⁴  And immediately he got up. 9:35 All ⁷⁵  those who lived in Lydda ⁷⁶  and Sharon ⁷⁷  saw him, and they ⁷⁸  turned ⁷⁹  to the Lord.

Peter Raises Dorcas

9:36 Now in Joppa ⁸⁰  there was a disciple named Tabitha (which in translation means ⁸¹  Dorcas). ⁸²  She was continually doing good deeds and acts of charity. ⁸³  9:37 At that time ⁸⁴  she became sick ⁸⁵  and died. When they had washed ⁸⁶  her body, ⁸⁷  they placed it in an upstairs room. 9:38 Because Lydda ⁸⁸  was near Joppa, when the disciples heard that Peter was there, they sent two men to him and urged him, “Come to us without delay.” ⁸⁹  9:39 So Peter got up and went with them, and ⁹⁰  when he arrived ⁹¹  they brought him to the upper room. All ⁹²  the widows stood beside him, crying and showing him ⁹³  the tunics ⁹⁴  and other clothing ⁹⁵  Dorcas used to make ⁹⁶  while she was with them. 9:40 But Peter sent them all outside, ⁹⁷  knelt down, ⁹⁸  and prayed. Turning ⁹⁹  to the body, he said, “Tabitha, get up.” Then she opened her eyes, and when she saw Peter, she sat up. ¹⁰⁰  9:41 He gave ¹⁰¹  her his hand and helped her get up. Then he called ¹⁰²  the saints and widows and presented her alive. 9:42 This became known throughout all ¹⁰³  Joppa, and many believed in the Lord. ¹⁰⁴  9:43 So ¹⁰⁵  Peter ¹⁰⁶  stayed many days in Joppa with a man named ¹⁰⁷  Simon, a tanner. ¹⁰⁸ 

Kisah Para Rasul 10:9-33

10:9 About noon ¹⁰⁹  the next day, while they were on their way and approaching ¹¹⁰  the city, Peter went up on the roof ¹¹¹  to pray. 10:10 He became hungry and wanted to eat, but while they were preparing the meal, a trance came over him. ¹¹²  10:11 He ¹¹³  saw heaven ¹¹⁴  opened ¹¹⁵  and an object something like a large sheet ¹¹⁶  descending, ¹¹⁷  being let down to earth ¹¹⁸  by its four corners. 10:12 In it ¹¹⁹  were all kinds of four-footed animals and reptiles ¹²⁰  of the earth and wild birds. ¹²¹  10:13 Then ¹²²  a voice said ¹²³  to him, “Get up, Peter; slaughter ¹²⁴  and eat!” 10:14 But Peter said, “Certainly not, Lord, for I have never eaten anything defiled and ritually unclean!” ¹²⁵  10:15 The voice ¹²⁶  spoke to him again, a second time, “What God has made clean, you must not consider ¹²⁷  ritually unclean!” ¹²⁸  10:16 This happened three times, and immediately the object was taken up into heaven. ¹²⁹ 

10:17 Now while Peter was puzzling over ¹³⁰  what the vision he had seen could signify, the men sent by Cornelius had learned where Simon’s house was ¹³¹  and approached ¹³²  the gate. 10:18 They ¹³³  called out to ask if Simon, known as Peter, ¹³⁴  was staying there as a guest. 10:19 While Peter was still thinking seriously about ¹³⁵  the vision, the Spirit said to him, “Look! Three men are looking for you. 10:20 But get up, ¹³⁶  go down, and accompany them without hesitation, ¹³⁷  because I have sent them.” 10:21 So Peter went down ¹³⁸  to the men and said, “Here I am, ¹³⁹  the person you’re looking for. Why have you come?” 10:22 They said, “Cornelius the centurion, ¹⁴⁰  a righteous ¹⁴¹  and God-fearing man, well spoken of by the whole Jewish nation, ¹⁴²  was directed by a holy angel to summon you to his house and to hear a message ¹⁴³  from you.” 10:23 So Peter ¹⁴⁴  invited them in and entertained them as guests.

On the next day he got up and set out ¹⁴⁵  with them, and some of the brothers from Joppa ¹⁴⁶  accompanied him. 10:24 The following day ¹⁴⁷  he entered Caesarea. ¹⁴⁸  Now Cornelius was waiting anxiously ¹⁴⁹  for them and had called together his relatives and close friends. 10:25 So when ¹⁵⁰  Peter came in, Cornelius met ¹⁵¹  him, fell ¹⁵²  at his feet, and worshiped ¹⁵³  him. 10:26 But Peter helped him up, ¹⁵⁴  saying, “Stand up. I too am a mere mortal.” ¹⁵⁵  10:27 Peter ¹⁵⁶  continued talking with him as he went in, and he found many people gathered together. ¹⁵⁷  10:28 He said to them, “You know that ¹⁵⁸  it is unlawful ¹⁵⁹  for a Jew ¹⁶⁰  to associate with or visit a Gentile, ¹⁶¹  yet God has shown me that I should call no person ¹⁶²  defiled or ritually unclean. ¹⁶³  10:29 Therefore when you sent for me, ¹⁶⁴  I came without any objection. Now may I ask why ¹⁶⁵  you sent for me?” 10:30 Cornelius ¹⁶⁶  replied, ¹⁶⁷  “Four days ago at this very hour, at three o’clock in the afternoon, ¹⁶⁸  I was praying in my house, and suddenly ¹⁶⁹  a man in shining clothing stood before me 10:31 and said, ‘Cornelius, your prayer has been heard and your acts of charity ¹⁷⁰  have been remembered before God. ¹⁷¹  10:32 Therefore send to Joppa and summon Simon, who is called Peter. This man is staying as a guest in the house of Simon the tanner, ¹⁷²  by the sea.’ 10:33 Therefore I sent for you at once, and you were kind enough to come. ¹⁷³  So now we are all here in the presence of God ¹⁷⁴  to listen ¹⁷⁵  to everything the Lord has commanded you to say to us.” ¹⁷⁶ 

Kisah Para Rasul 12:2-3

12:2 He had James, the brother of John, executed with a sword. ¹⁷⁷  12:3 When he saw that this pleased the Jews, ¹⁷⁸  he proceeded to arrest Peter too. (This took place during the feast of Unleavened Bread.) ¹⁷⁹ 

Kisah Para Rasul 15:7-11

15:7 After there had been much debate, ¹⁸⁰  Peter stood up and said to them, “Brothers, you know that some time ago ¹⁸¹  God chose ¹⁸²  me to preach to the Gentiles so they would hear the message ¹⁸³  of the gospel ¹⁸⁴  and believe. ¹⁸⁵  15:8 And God, who knows the heart, ¹⁸⁶  has testified ¹⁸⁷  to them by giving them the Holy Spirit just as he did to us, ¹⁸⁸  15:9 and he made no distinction ¹⁸⁹  between them and us, cleansing ¹⁹⁰  their hearts by faith. 15:10 So now why are you putting God to the test ¹⁹¹  by placing on the neck of the disciples a yoke ¹⁹²  that neither our ancestors ¹⁹³  nor we have been able to bear? 15:11 On the contrary, we believe that we are saved through ¹⁹⁴  the grace of the Lord Jesus, in the same way as they are.” ¹⁹⁵ 

Matius 4:18-22

The Call of the Disciples

4:18 As ¹⁹⁶  he was walking by the Sea of Galilee he saw two brothers, Simon (called Peter) and Andrew his brother, casting a net into the sea (for they were fishermen). ¹⁹⁷  4:19 He said to them, “Follow me, and I will turn you into fishers of people.” ¹⁹⁸  4:20 They ¹⁹⁹  left their nets immediately and followed him. ²⁰⁰  4:21 Going on from there he saw two other brothers, James the son of Zebedee and John his brother, in a boat ²⁰¹  with Zebedee their father, mending their nets. Then ²⁰²  he called them. 4:22 They ²⁰³  immediately left the boat and their father and followed him.

Matius 10:2-4

10:2 Now these are the names of the twelve apostles: ²⁰⁴  first, Simon ²⁰⁵  (called Peter), and Andrew his brother; James son of Zebedee and John his brother; 10:3 Philip and Bartholomew; ²⁰⁶  Thomas ²⁰⁷  and Matthew the tax collector; ²⁰⁸  James the son of Alphaeus, and Thaddaeus; ²⁰⁹  10:4 Simon the Zealot ²¹⁰  and Judas Iscariot, ²¹¹  who betrayed him. ²¹² 

Markus 3:16-18

3:16 He appointed twelve: ²¹³  To Simon ²¹⁴  he gave the name Peter; 3:17 to James and his brother John, the sons of Zebedee, ²¹⁵  he gave the name Boanerges (that is, “sons of thunder”); 3:18 and Andrew, Philip, Bartholomew, ²¹⁶  Matthew, Thomas, ²¹⁷  James the son of Alphaeus, Thaddaeus, ²¹⁸  Simon the Zealot, ²¹⁹ 

Markus 5:37

5:37 He did not let anyone follow him except Peter, James, ²²⁰  and John, the brother of James.

Markus 9:2

The Transfiguration

9:2 Six days later ²²¹  Jesus took with him Peter, James, and John and led them alone up a high mountain privately. And he was transfigured before them, ²²² 

Markus 14:33

14:33 He took Peter, James, ²²³  and John with him, and became very troubled and distressed.

Lukas 6:13-16

6:13 When ²²⁴  morning came, he called his disciples and chose twelve of them, whom he also named apostles: ²²⁵  6:14 Simon ²²⁶  (whom he named Peter), and his brother Andrew; and James, John, Philip, Bartholomew, ²²⁷  6:15 Matthew, Thomas, ²²⁸  James the son of Alphaeus, Simon who was called the Zealot, ²²⁹  6:16 Judas the son of James, and Judas Iscariot, ²³⁰  who became a traitor.

Yohanes 1:40-42

Andrew’s Declaration

1:40 Andrew, the brother of Simon Peter, was one of the two disciples who heard what John said ²³¹  and followed Jesus. ²³²  1:41 He first ²³³  found his own brother Simon and told him, “We have found the Messiah!” ²³⁴  (which is translated Christ). ²³⁵  1:42 Andrew brought Simon ²³⁶  to Jesus. Jesus looked at him and said, “You are Simon, the son of John. ²³⁷  You will be called Cephas” (which is translated Peter). ²³⁸ 

Yohanes 13:23-25

13:23 One of his disciples, the one Jesus loved, ²³⁹  was at the table ²⁴⁰  to the right of Jesus in a place of honor. ²⁴¹  13:24 So Simon Peter ²⁴²  gestured to this disciple ²⁴³  to ask Jesus ²⁴⁴  who it was he was referring to. ²⁴⁵  13:25 Then the disciple whom Jesus loved ²⁴⁶  leaned back against Jesus’ chest and asked him, “Lord, who is it?”

Yohanes 18:17

18:17 The girl ²⁴⁷  who was the doorkeeper said to Peter, “You’re not one of this man’s disciples too, are you?” ²⁴⁸  He replied, ²⁴⁹  “I am not.”

Yohanes 18:25-27

Peter’s Second and Third Denials

18:25 Meanwhile Simon Peter was standing in the courtyard ²⁵⁰  warming himself. They said to him, “You aren’t one of his disciples too, are you?” ²⁵¹  Peter ²⁵²  denied it: “I am not!” 18:26 One of the high priest’s slaves, ²⁵³  a relative of the man whose ear Peter had cut off, ²⁵⁴  said, “Did I not see you in the orchard ²⁵⁵  with him?” ²⁵⁶  18:27 Then Peter denied it again, and immediately a rooster crowed. ²⁵⁷ 

Yohanes 21:15-24

Peter’s Restoration

21:15 Then when they had finished breakfast, Jesus said to Simon Peter, “Simon, son of John, ²⁵⁸  do you love me more than these do?” ²⁵⁹  He replied, ²⁶⁰  “Yes, Lord, you know I love you.” ²⁶¹  Jesus ²⁶²  told him, “Feed my lambs.” 21:16 Jesus ²⁶³  said ²⁶⁴  a second time, “Simon, son of John, do you love me?” He replied, ²⁶⁵  “Yes, Lord, you know I love you.” Jesus ²⁶⁶  told him, “Shepherd my sheep.” 21:17 Jesus ²⁶⁷  said ²⁶⁸  a third time, “Simon, son of John, do you love me?” Peter was distressed ²⁶⁹  that Jesus ²⁷⁰  asked ²⁷¹  him a third time, “Do you love me?” and said, ²⁷²  “Lord, you know everything. You know that I love you.” Jesus ²⁷³  replied, ²⁷⁴  “Feed my sheep. 21:18 I tell you the solemn truth, ²⁷⁵  when you were young, you tied your clothes around you ²⁷⁶  and went wherever you wanted, but when you are old, you will stretch out your hands, and others will tie you up ²⁷⁷  and bring you where you do not want to go.” 21:19 (Now Jesus ²⁷⁸  said this to indicate clearly by what kind of death Peter ²⁷⁹  was going to glorify God.) ²⁸⁰  After he said this, Jesus told Peter, ²⁸¹  “Follow me.”

Peter and the Disciple Jesus Loved

21:20 Peter turned around and saw the disciple whom Jesus loved following them. ²⁸²  (This was the disciple ²⁸³  who had leaned back against Jesus’ ²⁸⁴  chest at the meal and asked, ²⁸⁵  “Lord, who is the one who is going to betray you?”) ²⁸⁶  21:21 So when Peter saw him, ²⁸⁷  he asked Jesus, “Lord, what about him?” 21:22 Jesus replied, ²⁸⁸  “If I want him to live ²⁸⁹  until I come back, ²⁹⁰  what concern is that of yours? You follow me!” 21:23 So the saying circulated ²⁹¹  among the brothers and sisters ²⁹²  that this disciple was not going to die. But Jesus did not say to him that he was not going to die, but rather, “If I want him to live ²⁹³  until I come back, ²⁹⁴  what concern is that of yours?”

A Final Note

21:24 This is the disciple who testifies about these things and has written these things, and we know that his testimony is true.

Yohanes 21:1

Jesus’ Appearance to the Disciples in Galilee

21:1 After this ²⁹⁵  Jesus revealed himself again to the disciples by the Sea of Tiberias. ²⁹⁶  Now this is how he did so. ²⁹⁷ 

Yohanes 1:1--5:21

The Prologue to the Gospel

1:1 In the beginning ²⁹⁸  was the Word, and the Word was with God, ²⁹⁹  and the Word was fully God. ³⁰⁰  1:2 The Word ³⁰¹  was with God in the beginning. 1:3 All things were created ³⁰²  by him, and apart from him not one thing was created ³⁰³  that has been created. ³⁰⁴  1:4 In him was life, ³⁰⁵  and the life was the light of mankind. ³⁰⁶  1:5 And the light shines on ³⁰⁷  in the darkness, ³⁰⁸  but ³⁰⁹  the darkness has not mastered it. ³¹⁰ 

1:6 A man came, sent from God, whose name was John. ³¹¹  1:7 He came as a witness ³¹²  to testify ³¹³  about the light, so that everyone ³¹⁴  might believe through him. 1:8 He himself was not the light, but he came to testify ³¹⁵  about the light. 1:9 The true light, who gives light to everyone, ³¹⁶  was coming into the world. ³¹⁷  1:10 He was in the world, and the world was created ³¹⁸  by him, but ³¹⁹  the world did not recognize ³²⁰  him. 1:11 He came to what was his own, ³²¹  but ³²²  his own people ³²³  did not receive him. ³²⁴  1:12 But to all who have received him – those who believe in his name ³²⁵  – he has given the right to become God’s children 1:13 – children not born ³²⁶  by human parents ³²⁷  or by human desire ³²⁸  or a husband’s ³²⁹  decision, ³³⁰  but by God.

1:14 Now ³³¹  the Word became flesh ³³²  and took up residence ³³³  among us. We ³³⁴  saw his glory – the glory of the one and only, ³³⁵  full of grace and truth, who came from the Father. 1:15 John ³³⁶  testified ³³⁷  about him and shouted out, ³³⁸  “This one was the one about whom I said, ‘He who comes after me is greater than I am, ³³⁹  because he existed before me.’” 1:16 For we have all received from his fullness one gracious gift after another. ³⁴⁰  1:17 For the law was given through Moses, but ³⁴¹  grace and truth came about through Jesus Christ. 1:18 No one has ever seen God. The only one, ³⁴²  himself God, who is in closest fellowship with ³⁴³  the Father, has made God ³⁴⁴  known. ³⁴⁵ 

The Testimony of John the Baptist

1:19 Now ³⁴⁶  this was ³⁴⁷  John’s ³⁴⁸  testimony ³⁴⁹  when the Jewish leaders ³⁵⁰  sent ³⁵¹  priests and Levites from Jerusalem ³⁵²  to ask him, “Who are you?” ³⁵³  1:20 He confessed – he did not deny but confessed – “I am not the Christ!” ³⁵⁴  1:21 So they asked him, “Then who are you? ³⁵⁵  Are you Elijah?” He said, “I am not!” ³⁵⁶  “Are you the Prophet?” ³⁵⁷  He answered, “No!” 1:22 Then they said to him, “Who are you? Tell us ³⁵⁸  so that we can give an answer to those who sent us. What do you say about yourself?”

1:23 John ³⁵⁹  said, “I am the voice of one shouting in the wilderness, ‘Make straight ³⁶⁰  the way for the Lord,’ ³⁶¹  as Isaiah the prophet said.” 1:24 (Now they had been sent from the Pharisees. ³⁶² ) ³⁶³  1:25 So they asked John, ³⁶⁴  “Why then are you baptizing if you are not the Christ, ³⁶⁵  nor Elijah, nor the Prophet?”

1:26 John answered them, ³⁶⁶  “I baptize with water. Among you stands one whom you do not recognize, ³⁶⁷  1:27 who is coming after me. I am not worthy ³⁶⁸  to untie the strap ³⁶⁹  of his sandal!” 1:28 These things happened in Bethany ³⁷⁰  across the Jordan River ³⁷¹  where John was baptizing.

1:29 On the next day John ³⁷²  saw Jesus coming toward him and said, “Look, the Lamb of God ³⁷³  who takes away the sin of the world! 1:30 This is the one about whom I said, ‘After me comes a man who is greater than I am, ³⁷⁴  because he existed before me.’ 1:31 I did not recognize ³⁷⁵  him, but I came baptizing with water so that he could be revealed to Israel.” ³⁷⁶ 

1:32 Then ³⁷⁷  John testified, ³⁷⁸  “I saw the Spirit descending like a dove ³⁷⁹  from heaven, ³⁸⁰  and it remained on him. ³⁸¹  1:33 And I did not recognize him, but the one who sent me to baptize with water said to me, ‘The one on whom you see the Spirit descending and remaining – this is the one who baptizes with the Holy Spirit.’ 1:34 I have both seen and testified that this man is the Chosen One of God.” ³⁸² 

1:35 Again the next day John ³⁸³  was standing there ³⁸⁴  with two of his disciples. 1:36 Gazing at Jesus as he walked by, he said, “Look, the Lamb of God!” ³⁸⁵  1:37 When John’s ³⁸⁶  two disciples heard him say this, ³⁸⁷  they followed Jesus. ³⁸⁸  1:38 Jesus turned around and saw them following and said to them, “What do you want?” ³⁸⁹  So they said to him, “Rabbi” (which is translated Teacher), ³⁹⁰  “where are you staying?” 1:39 Jesus ³⁹¹  answered, ³⁹²  “Come and you will see.” So they came and saw where he was staying, and they stayed with him that day. Now it was about four o’clock in the afternoon. ³⁹³ 

Andrew’s Declaration

1:40 Andrew, the brother of Simon Peter, was one of the two disciples who heard what John said ³⁹⁴  and followed Jesus. ³⁹⁵  1:41 He first ³⁹⁶  found his own brother Simon and told him, “We have found the Messiah!” ³⁹⁷  (which is translated Christ). ³⁹⁸  1:42 Andrew brought Simon ³⁹⁹  to Jesus. Jesus looked at him and said, “You are Simon, the son of John. ⁴⁰⁰  You will be called Cephas” (which is translated Peter). ⁴⁰¹ 

The Calling of More Disciples

1:43 On the next day Jesus ⁴⁰²  wanted to set out for Galilee. ⁴⁰³  He ⁴⁰⁴  found Philip and said ⁴⁰⁵  to him, “Follow me.” 1:44 (Now Philip was from Bethsaida, ⁴⁰⁶  the town of ⁴⁰⁷  Andrew and Peter.) 1:45 Philip found Nathanael ⁴⁰⁸  and told him, “We have found the one Moses wrote about in the law, and the prophets also ⁴⁰⁹  wrote about – Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph.” 1:46 Nathanael ⁴¹⁰  replied, ⁴¹¹  “Can anything good come out of Nazareth?” ⁴¹²  Philip replied, ⁴¹³  “Come and see.”

1:47 Jesus saw Nathanael coming toward him and exclaimed, ⁴¹⁴  “Look, a true Israelite in whom there is no deceit!” ⁴¹⁵  1:48 Nathanael asked him, “How do you know me?” Jesus replied, ⁴¹⁶  “Before Philip called you, when you were under the fig tree, ⁴¹⁷  I saw you.” 1:49 Nathanael answered him, “Rabbi, you are the Son of God; you are the king ⁴¹⁸  of Israel!” ⁴¹⁹  1:50 Jesus said to him, ⁴²⁰  “Because I told you that I saw you under the fig tree, do you believe? You will see greater things than these.” ⁴²¹  1:51 He continued, ⁴²²  “I tell all of you the solemn truth ⁴²³  – you will see heaven opened and the angels of God ascending and descending on the Son of Man.” ⁴²⁴ 

Turning Water into Wine

2:1 Now on the third day there was a wedding at Cana ⁴²⁵  in Galilee. ⁴²⁶  Jesus’ mother ⁴²⁷  was there, 2:2 and Jesus and his disciples were also invited to the wedding. ⁴²⁸  2:3 When the wine ran out, Jesus’ mother said to him, “They have no wine left.” ⁴²⁹  2:4 Jesus replied, ⁴³⁰  “Woman, ⁴³¹  why are you saying this to me? ⁴³²  My time ⁴³³  has not yet come.” 2:5 His mother told the servants, “Whatever he tells you, do it.” ⁴³⁴ 

2:6 Now there were six stone water jars there for Jewish ceremonial washing, ⁴³⁵  each holding twenty or thirty gallons. ⁴³⁶  2:7 Jesus told the servants, ⁴³⁷  “Fill the water jars with water.” So they filled them up to the very top. 2:8 Then he told them, “Now draw some out and take it to the head steward,” ⁴³⁸  and they did. 2:9 When ⁴³⁹  the head steward tasted the water that had been turned to wine, not knowing where it came from ⁴⁴⁰  (though the servants who had drawn the water knew), he ⁴⁴¹  called the bridegroom 2:10 and said to him, “Everyone ⁴⁴²  serves the good wine first, and then the cheaper ⁴⁴³  wine when the guests ⁴⁴⁴  are drunk. You have kept the good wine until now!” 2:11 Jesus did this as the first of his miraculous signs, ⁴⁴⁵  in Cana ⁴⁴⁶  of Galilee. In this way he revealed ⁴⁴⁷  his glory, and his disciples believed in him. ⁴⁴⁸ 

Cleansing the Temple

2:12 After this he went down to Capernaum ⁴⁴⁹  with his mother and brothers ⁴⁵⁰  and his disciples, and they stayed there a few days. 2:13 Now the Jewish feast of Passover ⁴⁵¹  was near, so Jesus went up to Jerusalem. ⁴⁵² 

2:14 ⁴⁵³ He found in the temple courts ⁴⁵⁴  those who were selling oxen and sheep and doves, and the money changers sitting at tables. ⁴⁵⁵  2:15 So he made a whip of cords ⁴⁵⁶  and drove them all out of the temple courts, ⁴⁵⁷  with the sheep and the oxen. He scattered the coins of the money changers ⁴⁵⁸  and overturned their tables. 2:16 To those who sold the doves he said, “Take these things away from here! Do not make ⁴⁵⁹  my Father’s house a marketplace!” ⁴⁶⁰  2:17 His disciples remembered that it was written, “Zeal ⁴⁶¹  for your house will devour me.” ⁴⁶² 

2:18 So then the Jewish leaders ⁴⁶³  responded, ⁴⁶⁴  “What sign can you show us, since you are doing these things?” ⁴⁶⁵  2:19 Jesus replied, ⁴⁶⁶  “Destroy ⁴⁶⁷  this temple and in three days I will raise it up again.” 2:20 Then the Jewish leaders ⁴⁶⁸  said to him, “This temple has been under construction ⁴⁶⁹  for forty-six years, ⁴⁷⁰  and are you going to raise it up in three days?” 2:21 But Jesus ⁴⁷¹  was speaking about the temple of his body. ⁴⁷²  2:22 So after he was raised from the dead, his disciples remembered that he had said this, and they believed the scripture ⁴⁷³  and the saying ⁴⁷⁴  that Jesus had spoken.

Jesus at the Passover Feast

2:23 Now while Jesus ⁴⁷⁵  was in Jerusalem ⁴⁷⁶  at the feast of the Passover, many people believed in his name because they saw the miraculous signs he was doing. ⁴⁷⁷  2:24 But Jesus would not entrust himself to them, because he knew all people. ⁴⁷⁸  2:25 He did not need anyone to testify about man, ⁴⁷⁹  for he knew what was in man. ⁴⁸⁰ 

Conversation with Nicodemus

3:1 Now a certain man, a Pharisee ⁴⁸¹  named Nicodemus, who was a member of the Jewish ruling council, ⁴⁸²  3:2 came to Jesus ⁴⁸³  at night ⁴⁸⁴  and said to him, “Rabbi, we know that you are a teacher who has come from God. For no one could perform the miraculous signs ⁴⁸⁵  that you do unless God is with him.” 3:3 Jesus replied, ⁴⁸⁶  “I tell you the solemn truth, ⁴⁸⁷  unless a person is born from above, ⁴⁸⁸  he cannot see the kingdom of God.” ⁴⁸⁹  3:4 Nicodemus said to him, “How can a man be born when he is old? He cannot enter his mother’s womb and be born a second time, can he?” ⁴⁹⁰ 

3:5 Jesus answered, “I tell you the solemn truth, ⁴⁹¹  unless a person is born of water and spirit, ⁴⁹²  he cannot enter the kingdom of God. 3:6 What is born of the flesh is flesh, ⁴⁹³  and what is born of the Spirit is spirit. 3:7 Do not be amazed that I said to you, ‘You must all ⁴⁹⁴  be born from above.’ ⁴⁹⁵  3:8 The wind ⁴⁹⁶  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.” ⁴⁹⁷ 

3:9 Nicodemus replied, ⁴⁹⁸  “How can these things be?” ⁴⁹⁹  3:10 Jesus answered, ⁵⁰⁰  “Are you the teacher of Israel and yet you don’t understand these things? ⁵⁰¹  3:11 I tell you the solemn truth, ⁵⁰²  we speak about what we know and testify about what we have seen, but ⁵⁰³  you people ⁵⁰⁴  do not accept our testimony. ⁵⁰⁵  3:12 If I have told you people ⁵⁰⁶  about earthly things and you don’t believe, how will you believe if I tell you about heavenly things? ⁵⁰⁷  3:13 No one ⁵⁰⁸  has ascended ⁵⁰⁹  into heaven except the one who descended from heaven – the Son of Man. ⁵¹⁰  3:14 Just as ⁵¹¹  Moses lifted up the serpent ⁵¹²  in the wilderness, ⁵¹³  so must the Son of Man be lifted up, ⁵¹⁴  3:15 so that everyone who believes in him may have eternal life.” ⁵¹⁵ 

3:16 For this is the way ⁵¹⁶  God loved the world: He gave his one and only ⁵¹⁷  Son, so that everyone who believes in him will not perish ⁵¹⁸  but have eternal life. ⁵¹⁹  3:17 For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, ⁵²⁰  but that the world should be saved through him. 3:18 The one who believes in him is not condemned. ⁵²¹  The one who does not believe has been condemned ⁵²²  already, because he has not believed in the name of the one and only ⁵²³  Son of God. 3:19 Now this is the basis for judging: ⁵²⁴  that the light has come into the world and people ⁵²⁵  loved the darkness rather than the light, because their deeds were evil. 3:20 For everyone who does evil deeds hates the light and does not come to the light, so that their deeds will not be exposed. 3:21 But the one who practices the truth comes to the light, so that it may be plainly evident that his deeds have been done in God. ⁵²⁶ 

Further Testimony About Jesus by John the Baptist

3:22 After this, ⁵²⁷  Jesus and his disciples came into Judean territory, and there he spent time with them and was baptizing. 3:23 John ⁵²⁸  was also baptizing at Aenon near Salim, ⁵²⁹  because water was plentiful there, and people were coming ⁵³⁰  to him ⁵³¹  and being baptized. 3:24 (For John had not yet been thrown into prison.) ⁵³² 

3:25 Now a dispute came about between some of John’s disciples and a certain Jew ⁵³³  concerning ceremonial washing. ⁵³⁴  3:26 So they came to John and said to him, “Rabbi, the one who was with you on the other side of the Jordan River, ⁵³⁵  about whom you testified – see, he is baptizing, and everyone is flocking to him!”

3:27 John replied, ⁵³⁶  “No one can receive anything unless it has been given to him from heaven. 3:28 You yourselves can testify that I said, ‘I am not the Christ,’ ⁵³⁷  but rather, ‘I have been sent before him.’ 3:29 The one who has the bride is the bridegroom. The friend of the bridegroom, who stands by and listens for him, rejoices greatly ⁵³⁸  when he hears the bridegroom’s voice. This then is my joy, and it is complete. ⁵³⁹  3:30 He must become more important while I become less important.” ⁵⁴⁰ 

3:31 The one who comes from above is superior to all. ⁵⁴¹  The one who is from the earth belongs to the earth and speaks about earthly things. ⁵⁴²  The one who comes from heaven ⁵⁴³  is superior to all. ⁵⁴⁴  3:32 He testifies about what he has seen and heard, but no one accepts his testimony. 3:33 The one who has accepted his testimony has confirmed clearly that God is truthful. ⁵⁴⁵  3:34 For the one whom God has sent ⁵⁴⁶  speaks the words of God, for he does not give the Spirit sparingly. ⁵⁴⁷  3:35 The Father loves the Son and has placed all things under his authority. ⁵⁴⁸  3:36 The one who believes in the Son has eternal life. The one who rejects ⁵⁴⁹  the Son will not see life, but God’s wrath ⁵⁵⁰  remains ⁵⁵¹  on him.

Departure From Judea

4:1 Now when Jesus ⁵⁵²  knew that the Pharisees ⁵⁵³  had heard that he ⁵⁵⁴  was winning ⁵⁵⁵  and baptizing more disciples than John 4:2 (although Jesus himself was not baptizing, but his disciples were), ⁵⁵⁶  4:3 he left Judea and set out once more for Galilee. ⁵⁵⁷ 

Conversation With a Samaritan Woman

4:4 But he had ⁵⁵⁸  to pass through Samaria. ⁵⁵⁹  4:5 Now he came to a Samaritan town ⁵⁶⁰  called Sychar, ⁵⁶¹  near the plot of land that Jacob had given to his son Joseph. ⁵⁶²  4:6 Jacob’s well was there, so Jesus, since he was tired from the journey, sat right down beside ⁵⁶³  the well. It was about noon. ⁵⁶⁴ 

4:7 A Samaritan woman ⁵⁶⁵  came to draw water. Jesus said to her, “Give me some water ⁵⁶⁶  to drink.” 4:8 (For his disciples had gone off into the town to buy supplies. ⁵⁶⁷ ) ⁵⁶⁸  4:9 So the Samaritan woman said to him, “How can you – a Jew ⁵⁶⁹  – ask me, a Samaritan woman, for water ⁵⁷⁰  to drink?” (For Jews use nothing in common ⁵⁷¹  with Samaritans.) ⁵⁷² 

4:10 Jesus answered ⁵⁷³  her, “If you had known ⁵⁷⁴  the gift of God and who it is who said to you, ‘Give me some water ⁵⁷⁵  to drink,’ you would have asked him, and he would have given you living water.” ⁵⁷⁶  4:11 “Sir,” ⁵⁷⁷  the woman ⁵⁷⁸  said to him, “you have no bucket and the well ⁵⁷⁹  is deep; where then do you get this ⁵⁸⁰  living water? ⁵⁸¹  4:12 Surely you’re not greater than our ancestor ⁵⁸²  Jacob, are you? For he gave us this well and drank from it himself, along with his sons and his livestock.” ⁵⁸³ 

4:13 Jesus replied, ⁵⁸⁴  “Everyone who drinks some of this water will be thirsty ⁵⁸⁵  again. 4:14 But whoever drinks some of the water that I will give him will never be thirsty again, ⁵⁸⁶  but the water that I will give him will become in him a fountain ⁵⁸⁷  of water springing up ⁵⁸⁸  to eternal life.” 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 ⁵⁸⁹  water.” ⁵⁹⁰  4:16 He ⁵⁹¹  said to her, “Go call your husband and come back here.” ⁵⁹²  4:17 The woman replied, ⁵⁹³  “I have no husband.” Jesus said to her, “Right you are when you said, ⁵⁹⁴  ‘I have no husband,’ ⁵⁹⁵  4:18 for you have had five husbands, and the man you are living with ⁵⁹⁶  now is not your husband. This you said truthfully!”

4:19 The woman said to him, “Sir, I see ⁵⁹⁷  that you are a prophet. 4:20 Our fathers worshiped on this mountain, ⁵⁹⁸  and you people ⁵⁹⁹  say that the place where people must worship is in Jerusalem.” ⁶⁰⁰  4:21 Jesus said to her, “Believe me, woman, ⁶⁰¹  a time ⁶⁰²  is coming when you will worship ⁶⁰³  the Father neither on this mountain nor in Jerusalem. 4:22 You people ⁶⁰⁴  worship what you do not know. We worship what we know, because salvation is from the Jews. ⁶⁰⁵  4:23 But a time ⁶⁰⁶  is coming – and now is here ⁶⁰⁷  – when the true worshipers will worship the Father in spirit and truth, for the Father seeks ⁶⁰⁸  such people to be ⁶⁰⁹  his worshipers. ⁶¹⁰  4:24 God is spirit, ⁶¹¹  and the people who worship him must worship in spirit and truth.” 4:25 The woman said to him, “I know that Messiah is coming” (the one called Christ); ⁶¹²  “whenever he ⁶¹³  comes, he will tell ⁶¹⁴  us everything.” ⁶¹⁵  4:26 Jesus said to her, “I, the one speaking to you, am he.”

The Disciples Return

4:27 Now at that very moment his disciples came back. ⁶¹⁶  They were shocked ⁶¹⁷  because he was speaking ⁶¹⁸  with a woman. However, no one said, “What do you want?” ⁶¹⁹  or “Why are you speaking with her?” 4:28 Then the woman left her water jar, went off into the town and said to the people, ⁶²⁰  4:29 “Come, see a man who told me everything I ever did. Surely he can’t be the Messiah, ⁶²¹  can he?” ⁶²²  4:30 So ⁶²³  they left the town and began coming ⁶²⁴  to him.

Workers for the Harvest

4:31 Meanwhile the disciples were urging him, ⁶²⁵  “Rabbi, eat something.” ⁶²⁶  4:32 But he said to them, “I have food to eat that you know nothing about.” 4:33 So the disciples began to say ⁶²⁷  to one another, “No one brought him anything ⁶²⁸  to eat, did they?” ⁶²⁹  4:34 Jesus said to them, “My food is to do the will of the one who sent me ⁶³⁰  and to complete ⁶³¹  his work. ⁶³²  4:35 Don’t you say, ⁶³³  ‘There are four more months and then comes the harvest?’ I tell you, look up ⁶³⁴  and see that the fields are already white ⁶³⁵  for harvest! 4:36 The one who reaps receives pay ⁶³⁶  and gathers fruit for eternal life, so that the one who sows and the one who reaps can rejoice together. 4:37 For in this instance the saying is true, ⁶³⁷  ‘One sows and another reaps.’ 4:38 I sent you to reap what you did not work for; others have labored and you have entered into their labor.”

The Samaritans Respond

4:39 Now many Samaritans from that town believed in him because of the report of the woman who testified, ⁶³⁸  “He told me everything I ever did.” 4:40 So when the Samaritans came to him, they began asking ⁶³⁹  him to stay with them. ⁶⁴⁰  He stayed there two days, 4:41 and because of his word many more ⁶⁴¹  believed. 4:42 They said to the woman, “No longer do we believe because of your words, for we have heard for ourselves, and we know that this one ⁶⁴²  really is the Savior of the world.” ⁶⁴³ 

Onward to Galilee

4:43 After the two days he departed from there to Galilee. 4:44 (For Jesus himself had testified that a prophet has no honor in his own country.) ⁶⁴⁴  4:45 So when he came to Galilee, the Galileans welcomed him because they had seen all the things he had done in Jerusalem ⁶⁴⁵  at the feast ⁶⁴⁶  (for they themselves had gone to the feast). ⁶⁴⁷ 

Healing the Royal Official’s Son

4:46 Now he came again to Cana ⁶⁴⁸  in Galilee where he had made the water wine. ⁶⁴⁹  In ⁶⁵⁰  Capernaum ⁶⁵¹  there was a certain royal official ⁶⁵²  whose son was sick. 4:47 When he heard that Jesus had come back from Judea to Galilee, he went to him and begged him ⁶⁵³  to come down and heal his son, who was about to die. 4:48 So Jesus said to him, “Unless you people ⁶⁵⁴  see signs and wonders you will never believe!” ⁶⁵⁵  4:49 “Sir,” the official said to him, “come down before my child dies.” 4:50 Jesus told him, “Go home; ⁶⁵⁶  your son will live.” The man believed the word that Jesus spoke to him, and set off for home. ⁶⁵⁷ 

4:51 While he was on his way down, ⁶⁵⁸  his slaves ⁶⁵⁹  met him and told him that his son was going to live. 4:52 So he asked them the time ⁶⁶⁰  when his condition began to improve, ⁶⁶¹  and ⁶⁶²  they told him, “Yesterday at one o’clock in the afternoon ⁶⁶³  the fever left him.” 4:53 Then the father realized that it was the very time ⁶⁶⁴  Jesus had said to him, “Your son will live,” and he himself believed along with his entire household. 4:54 Jesus did this as his second miraculous sign ⁶⁶⁵  when he returned from Judea to Galilee.

Healing a Paralytic at the Pool of Bethesda

5:1 After this ⁶⁶⁶  there was a Jewish feast, ⁶⁶⁷  and Jesus went up to Jerusalem. ⁶⁶⁸  5:2 Now there is ⁶⁶⁹  in Jerusalem by the Sheep Gate ⁶⁷⁰  a pool called Bethzatha ⁶⁷¹  in Aramaic, ⁶⁷²  which has five covered walkways. ⁶⁷³  5:3 A great number of sick, blind, lame, and paralyzed people were lying in these walkways. 5:4 [[EMPTY]] ⁶⁷⁴  5:5 Now a man was there who had been disabled for thirty-eight years. ⁶⁷⁵  5:6 When Jesus saw him lying there and when he realized ⁶⁷⁶  that the man ⁶⁷⁷  had been disabled a long time already, he said to him, “Do you want to become well?” 5:7 The sick man answered him, “Sir, ⁶⁷⁸  I have no one to put me into the pool when the water is stirred up. While I am trying to get into the water, ⁶⁷⁹  someone else ⁶⁸⁰  goes down there ⁶⁸¹  before me.” 5:8 Jesus said to him, “Stand up! Pick up your mat ⁶⁸²  and walk.” 5:9 Immediately the man was healed, ⁶⁸³  and he picked up his mat ⁶⁸⁴  and started walking. (Now that day was a Sabbath.) ⁶⁸⁵ 

5:10 So the Jewish leaders ⁶⁸⁶  said to the man who had been healed, “It is the Sabbath, and you are not permitted to carry your mat.” ⁶⁸⁷  5:11 But he answered them, “The man who made me well said to me, ‘Pick up your mat ⁶⁸⁸  and walk.’” 5:12 They asked him, “Who is the man who said to you, ‘Pick up your mat ⁶⁸⁹  and walk’?” ⁶⁹⁰  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.

5:14 After this Jesus found him at the temple and said to him, “Look, you have become well. Don’t sin any more, ⁶⁹¹  lest anything worse happen to you.” 5:15 The man went away and informed the Jewish leaders ⁶⁹²  that Jesus was the one who had made him well.

Responding to Jewish Leaders

5:16 Now because Jesus was doing these things ⁶⁹³  on the Sabbath, the Jewish leaders ⁶⁹⁴  began persecuting ⁶⁹⁵  him. 5:17 So he ⁶⁹⁶  told ⁶⁹⁷  them, “My Father is working until now, and I too am working.” ⁶⁹⁸  5:18 For this reason the Jewish leaders ⁶⁹⁹  were trying even harder to kill him, because not only was he breaking the Sabbath, but he was also calling God his own Father, thus making himself equal with God.

5:19 So Jesus answered them, ⁷⁰⁰  “I tell you the solemn truth, ⁷⁰¹  the Son can do nothing on his own initiative, ⁷⁰²  but only what he sees the Father doing. For whatever the Father ⁷⁰³  does, the Son does likewise. ⁷⁰⁴  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. 5:21 For just as the Father raises the dead and gives them life, ⁷⁰⁵  so also the Son gives life to whomever he wishes. ⁷⁰⁶ 

Yohanes 5:2

5:2 Now there is ⁷⁰⁷  in Jerusalem by the Sheep Gate ⁷⁰⁸  a pool called Bethzatha ⁷⁰⁹  in Aramaic, ⁷¹⁰  which has five covered walkways. ⁷¹¹ 

Yohanes 1:1-13

The Prologue to the Gospel

1:1 In the beginning ⁷¹²  was the Word, and the Word was with God, ⁷¹³  and the Word was fully God. ⁷¹⁴  1:2 The Word ⁷¹⁵  was with God in the beginning. 1:3 All things were created ⁷¹⁶  by him, and apart from him not one thing was created ⁷¹⁷  that has been created. ⁷¹⁸  1:4 In him was life, ⁷¹⁹  and the life was the light of mankind. ⁷²⁰  1:5 And the light shines on ⁷²¹  in the darkness, ⁷²²  but ⁷²³  the darkness has not mastered it. ⁷²⁴ 

1:6 A man came, sent from God, whose name was John. ⁷²⁵  1:7 He came as a witness ⁷²⁶  to testify ⁷²⁷  about the light, so that everyone ⁷²⁸  might believe through him. 1:8 He himself was not the light, but he came to testify ⁷²⁹  about the light. 1:9 The true light, who gives light to everyone, ⁷³⁰  was coming into the world. ⁷³¹  1:10 He was in the world, and the world was created ⁷³²  by him, but ⁷³³  the world did not recognize ⁷³⁴  him. 1:11 He came to what was his own, ⁷³⁵  but ⁷³⁶  his own people ⁷³⁷  did not receive him. ⁷³⁸  1:12 But to all who have received him – those who believe in his name ⁷³⁹  – he has given the right to become God’s children 1:13 – children not born ⁷⁴⁰  by human parents ⁷⁴¹  or by human desire ⁷⁴²  or a husband’s ⁷⁴³  decision, ⁷⁴⁴  but by God.

Yohanes 1:3

1:3 All things were created ⁷⁴⁵  by him, and apart from him not one thing was created ⁷⁴⁶  that has been created. ⁷⁴⁷ 

Yohanes 1:1-14

The Prologue to the Gospel

1:1 In the beginning ⁷⁴⁸  was the Word, and the Word was with God, ⁷⁴⁹  and the Word was fully God. ⁷⁵⁰  1:2 The Word ⁷⁵¹  was with God in the beginning. 1:3 All things were created ⁷⁵²  by him, and apart from him not one thing was created ⁷⁵³  that has been created. ⁷⁵⁴  1:4 In him was life, ⁷⁵⁵  and the life was the light of mankind. ⁷⁵⁶  1:5 And the light shines on ⁷⁵⁷  in the darkness, ⁷⁵⁸  but ⁷⁵⁹  the darkness has not mastered it. ⁷⁶⁰ 

1:6 A man came, sent from God, whose name was John. ⁷⁶¹  1:7 He came as a witness ⁷⁶²  to testify ⁷⁶³  about the light, so that everyone ⁷⁶⁴  might believe through him. 1:8 He himself was not the light, but he came to testify ⁷⁶⁵  about the light. 1:9 The true light, who gives light to everyone, ⁷⁶⁶  was coming into the world. ⁷⁶⁷  1:10 He was in the world, and the world was created ⁷⁶⁸  by him, but ⁷⁶⁹  the world did not recognize ⁷⁷⁰  him. 1:11 He came to what was his own, ⁷⁷¹  but ⁷⁷²  his own people ⁷⁷³  did not receive him. ⁷⁷⁴  1:12 But to all who have received him – those who believe in his name ⁷⁷⁵  – he has given the right to become God’s children 1:13 – children not born ⁷⁷⁶  by human parents ⁷⁷⁷  or by human desire ⁷⁷⁸  or a husband’s ⁷⁷⁹  decision, ⁷⁸⁰  but by God.

1:14 Now ⁷⁸¹  the Word became flesh ⁷⁸²  and took up residence ⁷⁸³  among us. We ⁷⁸⁴  saw his glory – the glory of the one and only, ⁷⁸⁵  full of grace and truth, who came from the Father.

Wahyu 1:1-3

The Prologue

1:1 The revelation of Jesus Christ, ⁷⁸⁶  which God gave him to show his servants ⁷⁸⁷  what must happen very soon. ⁷⁸⁸  He made it clear ⁷⁸⁹  by sending his angel to his servant ⁷⁹⁰  John, 1:2 who then ⁷⁹¹  testified to everything that he saw concerning the word of God and the testimony about ⁷⁹²  Jesus Christ. 1:3 Blessed is the one who reads the words of this ⁷⁹³  prophecy aloud, ⁷⁹⁴  and blessed are ⁷⁹⁵  those who hear and obey ⁷⁹⁶  the things written in it, because the time is near! ⁷⁹⁷ 

[2:14]  ¹ tn Grk “standing up.” The participle σταθείς (staqei") has been translated as a finite verb due to requirements of contemporary English style.

[2:14]  ² tn Or “You Jewish men.” “Judea” is preferred here because it is paired with “Jerusalem,” a location. This suggests locality rather than ethnic background is the primary emphasis in the context. As for “men,” the Greek term here is ἀνήρ (anhr), which only exceptionally is used in a generic sense of both males and females. In this context, where “all” who live in Jerusalem are addressed, it is conceivable that this is a generic usage, although it can also be argued that Peter’s remarks were addressed primarily to the men present, even if women were there.

[2:14]  ³ map For location see Map5 B1; Map6 F3; Map7 E2; Map8 F2; Map10 B3; JP1 F4; JP2 F4; JP3 F4; JP4 F4.

[2:14]  ⁴ tn Grk “let this be known to you.” The passive construction has been translated as an active for stylistic reasons.

[2:38]  ⁵ tn The verb is a third person imperative, but the common translation “let each of you be baptized” obscures the imperative force in English, since it sounds more like a permissive (“each of you may be baptized”) to the average English reader.

[2:38]  ⁶ tn Or “Messiah”; both “Christ” (Greek) and “Messiah” (Hebrew and Aramaic) mean “one who has been anointed.”

[2:38]  sn In the name of Jesus Christ. Baptism in Messiah Jesus’ name shows how much authority he possesses.

[2:38]  ⁷ tn There is debate over the meaning of εἰς in the prepositional phrase εἰς ἄφεσιν τῶν ἁμαρτιῶν ὑμῶν (eis afesin twn Jamartiwn Jumwn, “for/because of/with reference to the forgiveness of your sins”). Although a causal sense has been argued, it is difficult to maintain here. ExSyn 369-71 discusses at least four other ways of dealing with the passage: (1) The baptism referred to here is physical only, and εἰς has the meaning of “for” or “unto.” Such a view suggests that salvation is based on works – an idea that runs counter to the theology of Acts, namely: (a) repentance often precedes baptism (cf. Acts 3:19; 26:20), and (b) salvation is entirely a gift of God, not procured via water baptism (Acts 10:43 [cf. v. 47]; 13:38-39, 48; 15:11; 16:30-31; 20:21; 26:18); (2) The baptism referred to here is spiritual only. Although such a view fits well with the theology of Acts, it does not fit well with the obvious meaning of “baptism” in Acts – especially in this text (cf. 2:41); (3) The text should be repunctuated in light of the shift from second person plural to third person singular back to second person plural again. The idea then would be, “Repent for/with reference to your sins, and let each one of you be baptized…” Such a view is an acceptable way of handling εἰς, but its subtlety and awkwardness count against it; (4) Finally, it is possible that to a first-century Jewish audience (as well as to Peter), the idea of baptism might incorporate both the spiritual reality and the physical symbol. That Peter connects both closely in his thinking is clear from other passages such as Acts 10:47 and 11:15-16. If this interpretation is correct, then Acts 2:38 is saying very little about the specific theological relationship between the symbol and the reality, only that historically they were viewed together. One must look in other places for a theological analysis. For further discussion see R. N. Longenecker, “Acts,” EBC 9:283-85; B. Witherington, Acts, 154-55; F. F. Bruce, The Acts of the Apostles: The Greek Text with Introduction and Commentary, 129-30; BDAG 290 s.v. εἰς 4.f.

[2:38]  ⁸ tn Here the genitive τοῦ ἁγίου πνεύματος (tou Jagiou pneumato") is a genitive of apposition; the gift consists of the Holy Spirit.

[3:1]  ⁹ tn Grk “hour.”

[3:1]  ¹⁰ sn Going up to the temple at the time for prayer. The earliest Christians, being of Jewish roots, were still participating in the institutions of Judaism at this point. Their faith in Christ did not make them non-Jewish in their practices.

[3:1]  ¹¹ tn Grk “at the ninth hour.” This is calculated from sunrise (Josephus, Ant. 14.4.3 [14.65]; Dan 9:21).

[3:2]  ¹² tn Or “crippled.”

[3:2]  ¹³ tn Grk “from his mother’s womb.”

[3:2]  ¹⁴ tn BDAG 437 s.v. ἡμέρα 2.c has “every day” for this phrase.

[3:2]  ¹⁵ tn Grk “alms.” The term “alms” is not in common use today, so what the man expected, “money,” is used in the translation instead. The idea is that of money given as a gift to someone who was poor. Giving alms was viewed as honorable in Judaism (Tob 1:3, 16; 12:8-9; m. Pe’ah 1:1). See also Luke 11:41; 12:33; Acts 9:36; 10:2, 4, 31; 24:17.

[3:2]  ¹⁶ tn Grk “the temple.” This is actually a reference to the courts surrounding the temple proper, and has been translated accordingly.

[3:2]  sn Into the temple courts. The exact location of this incident is debated. The ‘Beautiful Gate’ referred either to the Nicanor Gate (which led from the Court of the Gentiles into the Court of Women) or the Shushan Gate at the eastern wall.

[3:3]  ¹⁷ tn Grk “the temple.” This is actually a reference to the courts surrounding the temple proper, and has been translated accordingly.

[3:3]  sn See the note on the phrase the temple courts in the previous verse.

[3:3]  ¹⁸ tn Grk “alms.” See the note on the word “money” in the previous verse.

[3:4]  ¹⁹ tn Grk “Peter, looking directly at him, as did John, said.” The participle ἀτενίσας (atenisas) has been translated as a finite verb due to requirements of contemporary English style.

[3:5]  ²⁰ tn Grk “So he”; the referent (the lame man) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[3:6]  ²¹ tn Or “I have no money.” L&N 6.69 classifies the expression ἀργύριον καὶ χρυσίον (argurion kai crusion) as an idiom that is a generic expression for currency, thus “money.”

[3:6]  ²² sn In the name. Note the authority in the name of Jesus the Messiah. His presence and power are at work for the man. The reference to “the name” is not like a magical incantation, but is designed to indicate the agent who performs the healing. The theme is quite frequent in Acts (2:38 plus 21 other times).

[3:6]  ²³ tn Or “Messiah”; both “Christ” (Greek) and “Messiah” (Hebrew and Aramaic) mean “one who has been anointed.”

[3:6]  ²⁴ tc The words “stand up and” (ἔγειρε καί, egeire kai) are not in a few mss (א B D sa), but are included in A C E Ψ 095 33 1739 Ï lat sy mae bo. The external testimony is thus fairly evenly divided, with few but important representatives of the Alexandrian and Western texttypes supporting the shorter reading. Internally, the words look like a standard scribal emendation, and may have been motivated by other healing passages where Jesus gave a similar double command (cf. Matt 9:5; Mark 2:9, [11]; Luke 5:23; [6:8]; John 5:8). On the other hand, there is some motivation for deleting ἔγειρε καί here, namely, unlike Jesus’ healing miracles, Peter raises (ἤγειρεν, hgeiren) the man to his feet (v. 7) rather than the man rising on his own. In light of the scribal tendency to harmonize, especially in immediate context, the longer reading is slightly preferred.

[3:7]  ²⁵ tn Here καί (kai) has been translated as “Then” to reflect the sequence of events.

[3:7]  ²⁶ tn Grk “he”; the referent (Peter) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[3:7]  ²⁷ tn Grk “Peter taking hold of him…raised him up.” The participle πιάσας (piasas) has been translated as a finite verb due to requirements of contemporary English style.

[3:7]  ²⁸ tn Grk “his”; the referent (the man) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[3:7]  ²⁹ sn At once the man’s feet and ankles were made strong. Note that despite the past lameness, the man is immediately able to walk. The restoration of his ability to walk pictures the presence of a renewed walk, a fresh start at life; this was far more than money would have given him.

[3:8]  ³⁰ tn Grk “And he.” Because of the length and complexity of the Greek sentence, the conjunction καί (kai) has not been translated here. Instead a new English sentence is begun.

[3:8]  ³¹ tn Grk “Jumping up, he stood.” The participle ἐξαλλόμενος (exallomeno") has been translated as a finite verb due to requirements of contemporary English style. It is possible that the paralyzed man actually jumped off the ground, but more probably this term simply refers to the speed with which he stood up. See L&N 15.240.

[3:8]  ³² tn Grk “the temple.” This is actually a reference to the courts surrounding the temple proper, and has been translated accordingly.

[3:9]  ³³ tn Grk “And all.” Because of the difference between Greek style, which often begins sentences or clauses with “and,” and English style, which generally does not, καί (kai) has not been translated here.

[3:10]  ³⁴ tn Grk “alms,” but this term is not in common use today, so the closest modern equivalent, “donations,” is used instead. The idea is that of a donation to charity.

[3:10]  ³⁵ sn Amazement is a frequent response to miracles of Jesus or the apostles. These took the ancients by as much surprise as they would people today. But in terms of response to what God is doing, amazement does not equal faith (Luke 4:36; 5:9, 26; 7:16).

[4:13]  ³⁶ tn Or “courage.”

[4:13]  ³⁷ tn Or “and found out.”

[4:13]  ³⁸ sn Uneducated does not mean “illiterate,” that is, unable to read or write. Among Jews in NT times there was almost universal literacy, especially as the result of widespread synagogue schools. The term refers to the fact that Peter and John had no formal rabbinic training and thus, in the view of their accusers, were not qualified to expound the law or teach publicly. The objection is like Acts 2:7.

[4:13]  ³⁹ tn For the translation of ἰδιῶται (idiwtai) as “ordinary men” see L&N 27.26.

[4:19]  ⁴⁰ tn Grk “answered and said to them.”

[4:19]  ⁴¹ tn Grk “hear,” but the idea of “hear and obey” or simply “obey” is frequently contained in the Greek verb ἀκούω (akouw; see L&N 36.14).

[8:14]  ⁴² map For location see Map5 B1; Map6 F3; Map7 E2; Map8 F2; Map10 B3; JP1 F4; JP2 F4; JP3 F4; JP4 F4.

[8:14]  ⁴³ tn Or “message.”

[8:14]  ⁴⁴ sn They sent. The Jerusalem church with the apostles was overseeing the expansion of the church, as the distribution of the Spirit indicates in vv. 15-17.

[8:15]  ⁴⁵ tn Grk “who.” The relative pronoun was replaced by the phrase “these two” and a new sentence was begun in the translation at this point to improve the English style.

[8:16]  ⁴⁶ tn Grk “For he”; the referent (the Spirit) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[8:16]  ⁴⁷ tn Or “fallen on.”

[8:16]  ⁴⁸ sn This is a parenthetical note by the author.

[8:17]  ⁴⁹ tn Grk “on them”; the referent (the Samaritans) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[8:17]  ⁵⁰ sn They received the Holy Spirit. It is likely this special distribution of the Spirit took place because a key ethnic boundary was being crossed. Here are some of “those far off” of Acts 2:38-40.

[8:18]  ⁵¹ tc Most witnesses (Ì^45,74 A* C D E Ψ 33 1739 Ï latt sy bo) here read “the Holy Spirit” (τὸ πνεῦμα τὸ ἅγιον, to pneuma to {agion), while a few key mss have simply τὸ πνεῦμα (א A^c B sa mae). Although it is possible that some scribes omitted τὸ ἅγιον because of its perceived superfluity (note vv. 15, 17, 19), it is far more likely that others added the adjective out of pious motives.

[8:19]  ⁵² tn Or “ability”; Grk “authority.”

[8:20]  ⁵³ tn Grk “May your silver together with you be sent into destruction.” This is a strong curse. The gifts of God are sovereignly bestowed and cannot be purchased.

[8:20]  ⁵⁴ tn Or “obtain.”

[8:21]  ⁵⁵ tn The translation “share or part” is given by L&N 63.13.

[8:21]  ⁵⁶ tn Since the semantic range for λόγος (logos) is so broad, a number of different translations could be given for the prepositional phrase here. Something along the lines of “in this thing” would work well, but is too colloquial for the present translation.

[8:22]  ⁵⁷ tn Or “and implore the Lord.”

[8:22]  ⁵⁸ tn Grk “that if possible the intent of your heart may be forgiven you.” The passive construction is somewhat awkward in contemporary English and has thus been converted to an active construction in the translation.

[8:23]  ⁵⁹ tn Grk “in the gall of bitterness,” an idiom meaning to be particularly envious or resentful of someone. In this case Simon was jealous of the apostles’ power to bestow the Holy Spirit by the laying on of hands, and wanted that power for himself. The literal phrase does not convey this to the modern reader, and in fact some modern translations have simply rendered the phrase as involving bitterness, which misses the point of the envy on Simon’s part. See L&N 88.166. The OT images come from Deut 29:17-18 and Isa 58:6.

[8:24]  ⁶⁰ tn Grk “Simon answered and said.”

[8:24]  sn Given that Simon does not follow Peter’s call for repentance, many interpreters read this reply as flippant rather than sincere. But the exact nature of Simon’s reply is not entirely clear.

[8:24]  ⁶¹ tn Grk “may come upon.”

[8:25]  ⁶² tn Grk “after they”; the referents (Peter and John) have been specified in the translation for clarity.

[8:25]  ⁶³ tn The verb διαμαρτύρομαι (diamarturomai) can mean “warn,” and could be taken to refer specifically to the warning given to Simon in the preceding verses. However, a more general reference is more likely, referring to parting exhortations from Peter and John to the entire group of believers.

[8:25]  ⁶⁴ sn The word of the Lord is a technical expression in OT literature, often referring to a divine prophetic utterance (e.g., Gen 15:1, Isa 1:10, Jonah 1:1). In the NT it occurs 15 times: 3 times as ῥῆμα τοῦ κυρίου (rJhma tou kuriou; Luke 22:61, Acts 11:16, 1 Pet 1:25) and 12 times as λόγος τοῦ κυρίου (logo" tou kuriou; here and in Acts 13:44, 48, 49; 15:35, 36; 16:32; 19:10, 20; 1 Thess 1:8, 4:15; 2 Thess 3:1). As in the OT, this phrase focuses on the prophetic nature and divine origin of what has been said.

[8:25]  ⁶⁵ tn Grk “they were returning to Jerusalem and were proclaiming.” The first imperfect is taken ingressively and the second is viewed iteratively (“proclaiming…as they went”).

[8:25]  ⁶⁶ sn By proclaiming the good news to many Samaritan villages, the apostles now actively share in the broader ministry the Hellenists had started.

[8:25]  ⁶⁷ tn “As they went” is not in the Greek text, but is implied by the imperfect tense (see tn above).

[9:32]  ⁶⁸ tn Grk “Now it happened that.” The introductory phrase ἐγένετο (egeneto, “it happened that”), common in Luke (69 times) and Acts (54 times), is redundant in contemporary English and has not been translated.

[9:32]  ⁶⁹ tn Grk “As Peter was going through all [the places],” which is somewhat awkward in English. The meaning is best expressed by a phrase like “going around from place to place” or “traveling around from place to place.”

[9:32]  ⁷⁰ sn Lydda was a city northwest of Jerusalem on the way to Joppa. It was about 10.5 miles (17 km) southeast of Joppa.

[9:33]  ⁷¹ tn Since the participle κατακείμενον (katakeimenon), an adjectival participle modifying Αἰνέαν (Ainean), has been translated into English as a relative clause (“who had been confined to a mattress”), it would be awkward to follow with a second relative clause (Grk “who was paralyzed”). Furthermore, the relative pronoun here has virtually a causal force, giving the reason for confinement to the mattress, so it is best translated “because.”

[9:34]  ⁷² tn Grk “And Peter.” Because of the difference between Greek style, which often begins sentences or clauses with “and,” and English style, which generally does not, καί (kai) has not been translated here.

[9:34]  ⁷³ tc ‡ Several variants occur at this juncture. Some of the earliest and best witnesses (Ì⁷⁴ א B* C Ψ 33^vid Did^pt) read “Jesus Christ” (᾿Ιησοῦς Χριστός, Ihsou" Cristo"); others ([A] 36 1175 it) have “the Lord Jesus Christ” (ὁ κύριος ᾿Ιησοῦς Χριστός, Jo kurio" Ihsou" Cristo"); a few read simply ὁ Χριστός (614 1241 1505); the majority of mss (B² E 1739 Ï Did^pt) have “Jesus the Christ” ( ᾿Ιησοῦς ὁ Χριστός). Although the pedigree of this last reading is relatively weak, it draws strength from the fact that (a) the other readings are much more natural and thus more predictable, and (b) there are several variants for this text. It seems hardly likely that scribes would intentionally change a more common expression into a title that is used nowhere else in the NT (although 1 John 2:22; 5:1 come close with “Jesus is the Christ”), nor would they unintentionally change a frequently used designation into an unusual one. Thus, in spite of the external evidence (which is nevertheless sufficient to argue for authenticity), ᾿Ιησοῦς ὁ Χριστός is the reading that best explains the rise of the others.

[9:34]  tn Or “Messiah”; both “Christ” (Greek) and “Messiah” (Hebrew and Aramaic) mean “one who has been anointed.”

[9:34]  ⁷⁴ tn The translation “make your own bed” for στρῶσον σεαυτῷ (strwson seautw) is given by BDAG 949 s.v. στρωννύω 1. Naturally this involves some adaptation, since a pallet or mat would not be ‘made up’ in the sense that a modern bed would be. The idea may be closer to “straighten” or “rearrange,” and the NIV’s “take care of your mat” attempts to reflect this, although this too probably conveys a slightly different idea to the modern English reader.

[9:35]  ⁷⁵ tn Grk “And all.” Because of the difference between Greek style, which often begins sentences or clauses with “and,” and English style, which generally does not, καί (kai) has not been translated here.

[9:35]  ⁷⁶ sn Lydda was a city northwest of Jerusalem on the way to Joppa.

[9:35]  ⁷⁷ sn Sharon refers to the plain of Sharon, a region along the coast of Palestine.

[9:35]  ⁷⁸ tn Repetition of the pronoun “they” as subject of ἐπέστρεψαν (epestreyan) is not strictly necessary in English, but emphasizes slightly the resultative nature of the final clause: They turned to the Lord as a result of seeing Aeneas after he was healed.

[9:35]  ⁷⁹ sn They turned. To “turn” is a good summary term for the response to the gospel.

[9:36]  ⁸⁰ sn Joppa was a seaport on the Philistine coast, in the same location as modern Jaffa. “Though Joppa never became a major seaport, it was of some importance as a logistical base and an outlet to the Mediterranean” (A. F. Rainey, ISBE 2:1118-19).

[9:36]  ⁸¹ tn Grk “which being translated is called.” In English this would normally be expressed “which is translated as” or “which in translation means.” The second option is given by L&N 33.145.

[9:36]  ⁸² sn This is a parenthetical note by the author. Dorcas is the Greek translation of the Aramaic name Tabitha. Dorcas in Greek means “gazelle” or “deer.”

[9:36]  ⁸³ tn Or “and helping the poor.” Grk “She was full of good deeds and acts of charity which she was continually doing.” Since it is somewhat redundant in English to say “she was full of good deeds…which she was continually doing,” the translation has been simplified to “she was continually doing good deeds and acts of charity.” The imperfect verb ἐποίει (epoiei) has been translated as a progressive imperfect (“was continually doing”).

[9:37]  ⁸⁴ tn Grk “It happened that in those days.” The introductory phrase ἐγένετο (egeneto, “it happened that”), common in Luke (69 times) and Acts (54 times), is redundant in contemporary English and has not been translated.

[9:37]  ⁸⁵ tn Grk “becoming sick, she died.” The participle ἀσθενήσασαν (asqenhsasan) has been translated as a finite verb due to requirements of contemporary English style.

[9:37]  ⁸⁶ tn The participle λούσαντες (lousante") is taken temporally.

[9:37]  ⁸⁷ tn Grk “washed her,” but the reference is to her corpse.

[9:38]  ⁸⁸ sn Lydda was a city northwest of Jerusalem on the way to Joppa.

[9:38]  ⁸⁹ tn Grk “Do not delay to come to us.” It is somewhat smoother to say in English, “Come to us without delay.”

[9:39]  ⁹⁰ tn Grk “who.” The relative clause makes for awkward English style here, so the following clause was made coordinate with the conjunction “and” supplied in place of the Greek relative pronoun.

[9:39]  ⁹¹ tn The participle παραγενόμενον (paragenomenon) is taken temporally.

[9:39]  ⁹² tn Grk “and all.” Because of the length of the Greek sentence, the conjunction καί (kai) has not been translated here. Instead a new English sentence is begun.

[9:39]  ⁹³ tn The word “him” is not in the Greek text, but is implied. Direct objects were often omitted in Greek when clear from the context, but must be supplied for the modern English reader.

[9:39]  ⁹⁴ tn Or “shirts” (a long garment worn under the cloak next to the skin). The name for this garment (χιτών, citwn) presents some difficulty in translation. Most modern readers would not understand what a ‘tunic’ was any more than they would be familiar with a ‘chiton.’ On the other hand attempts to find a modern equivalent are also a problem: “shirt” conveys the idea of a much shorter garment that covers only the upper body, and “undergarment” (given the styles of modern underwear) is more misleading still. “Tunic” was therefore employed, but with a note to explain its nature.

[9:39]  ⁹⁵ tn Grk “and garments,” referring here to other types of clothing besides the tunics just mentioned.

[9:39]  ⁹⁶ tn The verb ἐποίει (epoiei) has been translated as a customary imperfect.

[9:40]  ⁹⁷ tn Grk “Peter, sending them all outside, knelt down.” The participle ἐκβαλών (ekbalwn) has been translated as a finite verb due to requirements of contemporary English style.

[9:40]  ⁹⁸ tn Grk “and kneeling down,” but καί (kai) has not been translated since English normally uses a coordinating conjunction only between the last two elements in a series of three or more. Instead the “and” is placed before the verb προσηύξατο (proshuxato, “and prayed”). The participle θείς (qeis) is taken as a participle of attendant circumstance.

[9:40]  ⁹⁹ tn Grk “and turning.” Because of the length of the Greek sentence, the conjunction καί (kai) has not been translated here. Instead a new English sentence is begun.

[9:40]  ¹⁰⁰ sn She sat up. This event is told much like Luke 8:49-56 and Mark 5:35-43. Peter’s ministry mirrored that of Jesus.

[9:41]  ¹⁰¹ tn Grk “Giving her his hand, he helped her.” The participle δούς (dous) has been translated as a finite verb due to requirements of contemporary English style.

[9:41]  ¹⁰² tn Grk “Then calling the saints…he presented her.” The participle φωνήσας (fwnhsa") has been translated as a finite verb due to requirements of contemporary English style; it could also be taken temporally (“After he called”).

[9:42]  ¹⁰³ tn Or “known all over.” BDAG 511 s.v. κατά A.1.c. has “became known throughout all Joppa” for γνωστὸν γενέσθαι καθ᾿ ὅλης ᾿Ιόππης (gnwston genesqai kaq’ {olh" Iopph").

[9:42]  ¹⁰⁴ sn This became known…many believed in the Lord. This is a “sign” miracle that pictures how the Lord can give life.

[9:43]  ¹⁰⁵ tn Grk “So it happened that.” The introductory phrase ἐγένετο (egeneto, “it happened that”), common in Luke (69 times) and Acts (54 times), is redundant in contemporary English and has not been translated.

[9:43]  ¹⁰⁶ tn Grk “he”; the referent (Peter) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[9:43]  ¹⁰⁷ tn Grk “with a certain Simon.”

[9:43]  ¹⁰⁸ tn Or “with a certain Simon Berseus.” Although most modern English translations treat βυρσεῖ (bursei) as Simon’s profession (“Simon the tanner”), it is possible that the word is actually Simon’s surname (“Simon Berseus” or “Simon Tanner”). BDAG 185 s.v. βυρσεύς regards it as a surname. See also MM 118.

[10:9]  ¹⁰⁹ tn Grk “about the sixth hour.”

[10:9]  ¹¹⁰ tn The participles ὁδοιπορούντων (Jodoiporountwn, “while they were on their way”) and ἐγγιζόντων (engizontwn, “approaching”) have been translated as temporal participles.

[10:9]  ¹¹¹ sn Went up on the roof. Most of the roofs in the NT were flat roofs made of pounded dirt, sometimes mixed with lime or stones, supported by heavy wooden beams. They generally had an easy means of access, either a sturdy wooden ladder or stone stairway, sometimes on the outside of the house.

[10:10]  ¹¹² tn The traditional translation, “he fell into a trance,” is somewhat idiomatic; it is based on the textual variant ἐπέπεσεν (epepesen, “he fell”) found in the Byzantine text but almost certainly not original.

[10:11]  ¹¹³ tn Grk “And he.” Because of the length of the Greek sentence, the conjunction καί (kai) has not been translated here. Instead a new English sentence is begun.

[10:11]  ¹¹⁴ tn Or “the sky” (the same Greek word means both “heaven” and “sky”).

[10:11]  ¹¹⁵ tn On the heavens “opening,” see Matt 3:16; Luke 3:21; Rev 19:11 (cf. BDAG 84 s.v. ἀνοίγω 2). This is the language of a vision or a revelatory act of God.

[10:11]  ¹¹⁶ tn Or “a large linen cloth” (the term was used for the sail of a ship; BDAG 693 s.v. ὀθόνη).

[10:11]  ¹¹⁷ tn Or “coming down.”

[10:11]  ¹¹⁸ tn Or “to the ground.”

[10:12]  ¹¹⁹ tn Grk “in which.” The relative pronoun was replaced by the pronoun “it,” and a new sentence was begun in the translation at this point to improve the English style.

[10:12]  ¹²⁰ tn Or “snakes.” Grk “creeping things.” According to L&N 4.51, in most biblical contexts the term (due to the influence of Hebrew classifications such as Gen 1:25-26, 30) included small four-footed animals like rats, mice, frogs, toads, salamanders, and lizards. In this context, however, where “creeping things” are contrasted with “four-footed animals,” the English word “reptiles,” which primarily but not exclusively designates snakes, is probably more appropriate. See also Gen 6:20, as well as the law making such creatures unclean food in Lev 11:2-47.

[10:12]  ¹²¹ tn Grk “the birds of the sky” or “the birds of the heaven”; the Greek word οὐρανός (ouranos) may be translated either “sky” or “heaven,” depending on the context. The idiomatic expression “birds of the sky” refers to wild birds as opposed to domesticated fowl (cf. BDAG 809 s.v. πετεινόν).

[10:13]  ¹²² tn Grk “And there came.” The introductory phrase ἐγένετο (egeneto, “it happened that”), common in Luke (69 times) and Acts (54 times), is redundant in contemporary English and has not been translated.

[10:13]  ¹²³ tn Grk “a voice to him”; the word “said” is not in the Greek text but is implied.

[10:13]  ¹²⁴ tn Or “kill.” Traditionally θῦσον (quson) is translated “kill,” but in the case of animals intended for food, “slaughter” is more appropriate.

[10:14]  ¹²⁵ tn Possibly there is a subtle distinction in meaning between κοινός (koinos) and ἀκάθαρτος (akaqarto") here, but according to L&N 53.39 it is difficult to determine precise differences in meaning based on existing contexts.

[10:14]  sn Peter insisted he would not violate the law by eating anything defiled and ritually unclean. These food laws were one of the practices that distinguished Jews from their Gentile neighbors. The practice made table fellowship with Gentiles awkward. For an example of Jewish attitudes to this, see Dan 1:8-16; 1 Macc 1:41-64; Letter of Aristeas 142; Tacitus, History 5.5.

[10:15]  ¹²⁶ tn Grk “And the voice.” Because of the difference between Greek style, which often begins sentences or clauses with “and,” and English style, which generally does not, καί (kai) has not been translated here.

[10:15]  ¹²⁷ tn Or “declare.”

[10:15]  ¹²⁸ sn For the significance of this vision see Mark 7:14-23; Rom 14:14; Eph 2:11-22. God directed this change in practice.

[10:16]  ¹²⁹ tn Or “into the sky” (the same Greek word means both “heaven” and “sky”).

[10:17]  ¹³⁰ tn Or “was greatly confused over.” The term means to be perplexed or at a loss (BDAG 235 s.v. διαπορέω).

[10:17]  ¹³¹ tn Grk “having learned.” The participle διερωτήσαντες (dierwthsante") has been translated as a finite verb due to requirements of contemporary English style.

[10:17]  ¹³² tn BDAG 418 s.v. ἐφίστημι 1 has “ἐπί τι approach or stand by someth. (Sir 41:24) Ac 10:17.”

[10:17]  sn As Peter puzzled over the meaning of the vision, the messengers from Cornelius approached the gate. God’s direction here had a sense of explanatory timing.

[10:18]  ¹³³ tn Grk “and.” Because of the length of the Greek sentence, the conjunction καί (kai) has not been translated here. Instead a new English sentence is begun by supplying the pronoun “they” as the subject of the following verb.

[10:18]  ¹³⁴ tn Grk “Simon, the one called Peter.” This qualification was necessary because the owner of the house was also named Simon (Acts 9:43).

[10:19]  ¹³⁵ tn The translation “think seriously about” for διενθυμέομαι (dienqumeomai) is given in L&N 30.2. Peter was “pondering” the vision (BDAG 244 s.v.).

[10:20]  ¹³⁶ tn Grk “But getting up, go down.” The participle ἀναστάς (anastas) has been translated as a finite verb due to requirements of contemporary English style.

[10:20]  ¹³⁷ tn The term means “without doubting” or “without deliberation.” It is a term of conscience and discernment. In effect, Peter is to listen to them rather than hesitate (BDAG 231 s.v. διακρίνω 6).

[10:21]  ¹³⁸ tn Grk “Peter going down to the men, said.” The participle καταβάς (katabas) has been translated as a finite verb due to requirements of contemporary English style.

[10:21]  ¹³⁹ tn Grk “Behold, it is I whom you seek,” or “Behold, I am the one you seek.” “Here I am” is used to translate ἰδοὺ ἐγώ εἰμι (idou egw eimi).

[10:22]  ¹⁴⁰ sn See the note on the word centurion in 10:1.

[10:22]  ¹⁴¹ tn Or “just.”

[10:22]  ¹⁴² tn The phrase τοῦ ἔθνους τῶν ᾿Ιουδαίων (tou eqnou" twn Ioudaiwn) is virtually a technical term for the Jewish nation (1 Macc 10:25; 11:30, 33; Josephus, Ant. 14.10.22 [14.248]). “All the Jewish people,” while another possible translation of the Greek phrase, does not convey the technical sense of a reference to the nation in English.

[10:22]  sn The long introduction of Cornelius by his messengers is an attempt to commend this Gentile to his Jewish counterpart, which would normally be important to do in the culture of the time.

[10:22]  ¹⁴³ tn Grk “hear words.”

[10:23]  ¹⁴⁴ tn Grk “he”; the referent (Peter) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[10:23]  sn When Peter entertained them as guests, he performed a culturally significant act denoting acceptance.

[10:23]  ¹⁴⁵ tn Or “went forth.”

[10:23]  ¹⁴⁶ sn Some of the brothers from Joppa. As v. 45 makes clear, there were Jewish Christians in this group of witnesses.

[10:24]  ¹⁴⁷ tn Grk “On the next day,” but since this phrase has already occurred in v. 23, it would be redundant in English to use it again here.

[10:24]  ¹⁴⁸ sn Caesarea was a city on the coast of Palestine south of Mount Carmel (not Caesarea Philippi).

[10:24]  map For location see Map2 C1; Map4 B3; Map5 F2; Map7 A1; JP1 F4; JP2 F4; JP3 F4; JP4 F4.

[10:24]  ¹⁴⁹ tn Normally προσδοκάω (prosdokaw) means “to wait with apprehension or anxiety for something,” often with the implication of impending danger or trouble (L&N 25.228), but in this context the anxiety Cornelius would have felt came from the importance of the forthcoming message as announced by the angel.

[10:25]  ¹⁵⁰ tn Grk “So it happened that when.” The introductory phrase ἐγένετο (egeneto, “it happened that”), common in Luke (69 times) and Acts (54 times), is redundant in contemporary English and has not been translated.

[10:25]  ¹⁵¹ tn Grk “meeting him.” The participle συναντήσας (sunanthsa") has been translated as a finite verb due to requirements of contemporary English style.

[10:25]  ¹⁵² tn Grk “falling at his feet, worshiped.” The participle πεσών (peswn) has been translated as a finite verb due to requirements of contemporary English style.

[10:25]  ¹⁵³ sn When Cornelius worshiped Peter, it showed his piety and his respect for Peter, but it was an act based on ignorance, as Peter’s remark in v. 26 indicates.

[10:26]  ¹⁵⁴ tn BDAG 271 s.v. ἐγείρω 3 has “raise, help to rise….Stretched out Ac 10:26.”

[10:26]  ¹⁵⁵ tn Although it is certainly true that Peter was a “man,” here ἄνθρωπος (anqrwpo") has been translated as “mere mortal” because the emphasis in context is not on Peter’s maleness, but his humanity. Contrary to what Cornelius thought, Peter was not a god or an angelic being, but a mere mortal.

[10:27]  ¹⁵⁶ tn Grk “And he”; the referent (Peter) has been specified in the translation for clarity. Because of the difference between Greek style, which often begins sentences or clauses with “and,” and English style, which generally does not, καί (kai) has not been translated here.

[10:27]  ¹⁵⁷ tn Or “many people assembled.”

[10:28]  ¹⁵⁸ tn Here ὡς (Jws) is used like ὅτι (Joti) to introduce indirect discourse (cf. BDAG 1105 s.v. ὡς 5).

[10:28]  ¹⁵⁹ tn This term is used of wanton or callously lawless acts (BDAG 24 s.v. ἀθέμιτος).

[10:28]  ¹⁶⁰ tn Grk “a Jewish man” (ἀνδρὶ ᾿Ιουδαίῳ, andri Ioudaiw).

[10:28]  ¹⁶¹ tn Grk “a foreigner,” but in this context, “a non-Jew,” that is, a Gentile. This term speaks of intimate association (BDAG 556 s.v. κολλάω 2.b.α). On this Jewish view, see John 18:28, where a visit to a Gentile residence makes a Jewish person unclean.

[10:28]  ¹⁶² tn This is a generic use of ἄνθρωπος (anqrwpo").

[10:28]  ¹⁶³ tn Possibly there is a subtle distinction in meaning between κοινός (koinos) and ἀκάθαρτος (akaqartos) here, but according to L&N 53.39 it is difficult to determine precise differences in meaning based on existing contexts.

[10:28]  sn God has shown me…unclean. Peter sees the significance of his vision as not about food, but about open fellowship between Jewish Christians and Gentiles.

[10:29]  ¹⁶⁴ tn Grk “Therefore when I was sent for.” The passive participle μεταπεμφθείς (metapemfqei") has been taken temporally and converted to an active construction which is less awkward in English.

[10:29]  ¹⁶⁵ tn Grk “ask for what reason.”

[10:30]  ¹⁶⁶ tn Grk “And Cornelius.” Because of the difference between Greek style, which often begins sentences or clauses with “and,” and English style, which generally does not, καί (kai) has not been translated here.

[10:30]  ¹⁶⁷ tn Grk “said.”

[10:30]  ¹⁶⁸ tn Grk “at the ninth hour.” Again, this is the hour of afternoon prayer.

[10:30]  ¹⁶⁹ tn Grk “and behold.” The interjection ἰδού (idou) is difficult at times to translate into English. Here it has been translated as “suddenly” to convey the force of Cornelius’ account of the angel’s appearance.

[10:31]  ¹⁷⁰ tn Or “your gifts to the needy.”

[10:31]  ¹⁷¹ sn This statement is a paraphrase rather than an exact quotation of Acts 10:4.

[10:32]  ¹⁷² tn Or “with a certain Simon Berseus.” Although most modern English translations treat βυρσεῖ (bursei) as Simon’s profession (“Simon the tanner”), it is possible that the word is actually Simon’s surname (“Simon Berseus” or “Simon Tanner”). BDAG 185 s.v. βυρσεύς regards it as a surname.

[10:33]  ¹⁷³ tn Grk “you have done well by coming.” The idiom καλῶς ποιεῖν (kalw" poiein) is translated “be kind enough to do someth.” by BDAG 505-6 s.v. καλῶς 4.a. The participle παραγενόμενος (paragenomeno") has been translated as an English infinitive due to the nature of the English idiom (“kind enough to” + infinitive).

[10:33]  ¹⁷⁴ tn The translation “we are here in the presence of God” for ἐνώπιον τοῦ θεοῦ πάρεσμεν (enwpion tou qeou paresmen) is given by BDAG 773 s.v. πάρειμι 1.a.

[10:33]  ¹⁷⁵ tn Or “to hear everything.”

[10:33]  ¹⁷⁶ tn The words “to say to us” are not in the Greek text, but are implied. Cornelius knows Peter is God’s representative, bringing God’s message.

[12:2]  ¹⁷⁷ sn The expression executed with a sword probably refers to a beheading. James was the first known apostolic martyr (Eusebius, Eccl. Hist. 2.9.1-3). On James, not the Lord’s brother, see Luke 5:10; 6:14. This death ended a short period of peace noted in Acts 9:31 after the persecution mentioned in 8:1-3.

[12:3]  ¹⁷⁸ tn This could be a reference to the Jewish people (so CEV) or to the Jewish leaders (so NLT). The statement in v. 4 that Herod intended to bring Peter “out to the people” (i.e., for a public trial) may suggest the former is somewhat more likely.

[12:3]  ¹⁷⁹ sn This is a parenthetical note by the author.

[15:7]  ¹⁸⁰ tn Or “discussion.” This term is repeated from v. 2.

[15:7]  ¹⁸¹ tn Or “long ago” (an idiom, literally “from ancient days”). According to L&N 67.26, “this reference to Peter having been chosen by God sometime before to bring the gospel to the Gentiles can hardly be regarded as a reference to ancient times, though some persons understand this to mean that God’s decision was made at the beginning of time. The usage of ἀφ᾿ ἡμερῶν ἀρχαίων is probably designed to emphasize the established nature of God’s decision for Peter to take the gospel to the Gentiles beginning with the centurion Cornelius. The fact that this was relatively early in the development of the church may also serve to explain the use of the idiom.”

[15:7]  ¹⁸² sn God chose. The theme of God’s sovereign choice is an important point, because 1st century Jews believed Israel’s unique position and customs were a reflection of God’s choice.

[15:7]  ¹⁸³ tn Or “word.”

[15:7]  ¹⁸⁴ tn Or “of the good news.”

[15:7]  ¹⁸⁵ tn Grk “God chose among you from my mouth the Gentiles to hear the message of the gospel and to believe.” The sense of this sentence in Greek is difficult to render in English. The Greek verb ἐκλέγομαι (eklegomai, “choose”) normally takes a person or thing as a direct object; in this verse the verb has neither clearly stated. The translation understands the phrase “from my mouth,” referring to Peter, as a description of both who God chose and the task to be done. This coupled with the following statement about Gentiles hearing the message of the gospel leads to the more dynamic rendering in the translation.

[15:8]  ¹⁸⁶ sn The expression who knows the heart means “who knows what people think.”

[15:8]  ¹⁸⁷ tn Or “has borne witness.”

[15:8]  ¹⁸⁸ sn By giving them…just as he did to us. The allusion is to the events of Acts 10-11, esp. 10:44-48 and Peter’s remarks in 11:15-18.

[15:9]  ¹⁸⁹ tn BDAG 231 s.v. διακρίνω 1.b lists this passage under the meaning “to conclude that there is a difference, make a distinction, differentiate.”

[15:9]  ¹⁹⁰ tn Or “purifying.”

[15:10]  ¹⁹¹ tn According to BDAG 793 s.v. πειράζω 2.c, “In Ac 15:10 the πειράζειν τὸν θεόν consists in the fact that after God’s will has been clearly made known through granting of the Spirit to the Gentiles (v. 8), some doubt and make trial to see whether God’s will really becomes operative.” All testing of God in Luke is negative: Luke 4:2; 11:16.

[15:10]  ¹⁹² sn A yoke is a wooden bar or frame that joins two animals like oxen or horses so that they can pull a wagon, plow, etc. together. Here it is used figuratively of the restriction that some in the early church wanted to place on Gentile converts to Christianity of observing the law of Moses and having males circumcised. The yoke is a decidedly negative image: Matt 23:4, but cf. Matt 11:29-30.

[15:10]  ¹⁹³ tn Or “forefathers”; Grk “fathers.”

[15:11]  ¹⁹⁴ tn Or “by.”

[15:11]  ¹⁹⁵ tn Or “Jesus, just as they are.” BDAG 1016-17 s.v. τρόπος 1 translates καθ᾿ ὃν τρόπον (kaq’ Jon tropon) here as “in the same way as.”

[15:11]  sn In the same way as they are. Here is an interesting reversal of the argument. Jews are saved by grace (without law), as Gentiles are.

[4:18]  ¹⁹⁶ tn Here δέ (de) has not been translated.

[4:18]  ¹⁹⁷ tn The two phrases in this verse placed in parentheses are explanatory comments by the author, parenthetical in nature.

[4:19]  ¹⁹⁸ tn The Greek term ἄνθρωπος (anqrwpos) is used here in a generic sense, referring to both men and women, thus “people.”

[4:19]  sn The kind of fishing envisioned was net – not line – fishing (cf. v. 18; cf. also BDAG 55 s.v. ἀμφιβάλλω, ἀμφίβληστρον) which involved a circular net that had heavy weights around its perimeter. The occupation of fisherman was labor-intensive. The imagery of using a lure and a line (and waiting for the fish to strike) is thus foreign to this text. Rather, the imagery of a fisherman involved much strain, long hours, and often little results. Jesus’ point may have been one or more of the following: the strenuousness of evangelism, the work ethic that it required, persistence and dedication to the task (often in spite of minimal results), the infinite value of the new “catch” (viz., people), and perhaps an eschatological theme of snatching people from judgment (cf. W. L. Lane, Mark [NICNT], 67). If this last motif is in view, then catching people is the opposite of catching fish: The fish would be caught, killed, cooked, and eaten; people would be caught so as to remove them from eternal destruction and to give them new life.

[4:20]  ¹⁹⁹ tn Here δέ (de) has not been translated.

[4:20]  ²⁰⁰ sn The expression followed him pictures discipleship, which means that to learn from Jesus is to follow him as the guiding priority of one’s life.

[4:21]  ²⁰¹ tn Or “their boat.” The phrase ἐν τῷ πλοίῳ (en tw ploiw) can either refer to a generic boat, some boat (as it seems to do here); or it can refer to “their” boat, implying possession. Mark assumes a certain preunderstanding on the part of his readers about the first four disciples and hence the translation “their boat” is justified (cf. also v. 20 in which the “hired men” indicates that Zebedee’s family owned the boats), while Matthew does not.

[4:21]  ²⁰² tn Here καί (kai) has been translated as “then” to indicate the implied sequence of events within the narrative.

[4:22]  ²⁰³ tn Here δέ (de) has not been translated.

[10:2]  ²⁰⁴ sn The term apostles is rare in the gospels, found only here, Mark 3:14, and six more times in Luke (6:13; 9:10; 11:49; 17:5; 22:14; 24:10).

[10:2]  ²⁰⁵ sn In the various lists of the twelve, Simon (that is, Peter) is always mentioned first (see also Mark 3:16-19; Luke 6:13-16; Acts 1:13) and the first four are always the same, though not in the same order after Peter.

[10:3]  ²⁰⁶ sn Bartholomew (meaning “son of Tolmai” in Aramaic) could be another name for Nathanael mentioned in John 1:45.

[10:3]  ²⁰⁷ sn This is the “doubting Thomas” of John 20:24-29.

[10:3]  ²⁰⁸ sn See the note on tax collectors in 5:46.

[10:3]  ²⁰⁹ tc Witnesses differ on the identification of the last disciple mentioned in v. 3: He is called Λεββαῖος (Lebbaio", “Lebbaeus”) in D, Judas Zelotes in it, and not present in sy^s. The Byzantine text, along with a few others (C^[*^],2 L W Θ Ë¹ 33 Ï), conflates earlier readings by calling him “Lebbaeus, who was called Thaddaeus,” while codex 13 pc conflate by way of transposition (“Thaddaeus, who was called Lebbaeus”). But excellent witnesses of the earliest texttypes (א B ˹³ 892 pc lat co) call him merely Θαδδαῖος (Qaddaio", “Thaddaeus”), a reading which, because of this support, is most likely correct.

[10:4]  ²¹⁰ tn Grk “the Cananean,” but according to both BDAG 507 s.v. Καναναῖος and L&N 11.88, this term has no relation at all to the geographical terms for Cana or Canaan, but is derived from the Aramaic term for “enthusiast, zealot” (see Luke 6:15; Acts 1:13), possibly because of an earlier affiliation with the party of the Zealots. He may not have been technically a member of the particular Jewish nationalistic party known as “Zealots” (since according to some scholars this party had not been organized at that time), but simply someone who was zealous for Jewish independence from Rome, in which case the term would refer to his temperament.

[10:4]  ²¹¹ sn There is some debate about what the name Iscariot means. It probably alludes to a region in Judea and thus might make Judas the only non-Galilean in the group. Several explanations for the name Iscariot have been proposed, but it is probably transliterated Hebrew with the meaning “man of Kerioth” (there are at least two villages that had that name). For further discussion see D. L. Bock, Luke (BECNT), 1:546; also D. A. Carson, John, 304.

[10:4]  ²¹² tn Grk “who even betrayed him.”

[3:16]  ²¹³ tc The phrase “he appointed twelve” is lacking in the majority of manuscripts (A C² D L Θ Ë¹ 33 2427 Ï lat sy bo). Some important witnesses include the phrase (א B C* Δ 565 579 pc), but perhaps the best explanation for the omission of the clause in the majority of witnesses is haplography in combination with homoioarcton: The first word of the clause in question is καί (kai), and the first word after the clause in question is also καί. And the first two letters of the second word, in each instance, are επ (ep). Early scribes most likely jumped accidentally from the first καί to the second, omitting the intervening material. Thus the clause was most likely in the original text. (See 3:14 above for a related textual problem.)

[3:16]  ²¹⁴ sn In the various lists of the twelve, Simon (that is, Peter) is always mentioned first (see also Matt 10:1-4; Luke 6:13-16; Acts 1:13) and the first four are always the same, though not in the same order after Peter.

[3:17]  ²¹⁵ tn Grk “to James, the son of Zebedee, and John, the brother of James.”

[3:18]  ²¹⁶ sn Bartholomew (meaning “son of Tolmai” in Aramaic) could be another name for Nathanael mentioned in John 1:45.

[3:18]  ²¹⁷ sn This is the “doubting Thomas” of John 20:24-29.

[3:18]  ²¹⁸ tc This disciple is called Λεββαῖον (Lebbaion, “Lebbaeus”) in D it; see the discussion of the parallel text in Matt 10:3 where conflation occurs among other witnesses as well.

[3:18]  ²¹⁹ tn Grk “the Cananean,” but according to both BDAG 507 s.v. Καναναῖος and L&N 11.88, this term has no relation at all to the geographical terms for Cana or Canaan, but is derived from the Aramaic term for “enthusiast, zealot” (see Luke 6:15; Acts 1:13), possibly because of an earlier affiliation with the party of the Zealots. He may not have been technically a member of the particular Jewish nationalistic party known as “Zealots” (since according to some scholars this party had not been organized at that time), but simply someone who was zealous for Jewish independence from Rome, in which case the term would refer to his temperament.

[5:37]  ²²⁰ tn Grk “and James,” but καί (kai) has not been translated since English normally uses a coordinating conjunction only between the last two elements in a series of three or more.

[9:2]  ²²¹ tn Grk “And after six days.”

[9:2]  ²²² sn In 1st century Judaism and in the NT, there was the belief that the righteous get new, glorified bodies in order to enter heaven (1 Cor 15:42-49; 2 Cor 5:1-10). This transformation means the righteous will share the glory of God. One recalls the way Moses shared the Lord’s glory after his visit to the mountain in Exod 34. So the disciples saw Jesus transfigured, and they were getting a sneak preview of the great glory that Jesus would have (only his glory is more inherent to him as one who shares in the rule of the kingdom).

[14:33]  ²²³ tn Grk “and James,” but καί (kai) has not been translated since English normally uses a coordinating conjunction only between the last two elements in a series of three or more.

[6:13]  ²²⁴ tn Grk “And when.” Here καί (kai) has not been translated because of differences between Greek and English style.

[6:13]  ²²⁵ sn The term apostles is rare in the gospels, found only in Matt 10:2, possibly in Mark 3:14, and six more times in Luke (here plus 9:10; 11:49; 17:5; 22:14; 24:10).

[6:14]  ²²⁶ sn In the various lists of the twelve, Simon (that is, Peter) is always mentioned first (Matt 10:1-4; Mark 3:16-19; Acts 1:13) and the first four are always the same, though not in the same order after Peter.

[6:14]  ²²⁷ sn Bartholomew (meaning “son of Tolmai” in Aramaic) could be another name for Nathanael mentioned in John 1:45.

[6:15]  ²²⁸ sn This is the “doubting Thomas” of John 20:24-29.

[6:15]  ²²⁹ sn The designation Zealot means that Simon was a political nationalist before coming to follow Jesus. He may not have been technically a member of the particular Jewish nationalistic party known as “Zealots” (since according to some scholars this party had not been organized at that time), but simply someone who was zealous for Jewish independence from Rome, in which case the descriptive term applied to Simon means something like “Simon the patriot” (see L&N 25.77 and especially 11.88).

[6:16]  ²³⁰ sn There is some debate about what the name Iscariot means. It probably alludes to a region in Judea and thus might make Judas the only non-Galilean in the group. Several explanations for the name Iscariot have been proposed, but it is probably transliterated Hebrew with the meaning “man of Kerioth” (there are at least two villages that had that name). For further discussion see D. L. Bock, Luke (BECNT), 1:546; also D. A. Carson, John, 304.

[1:40]  ²³¹ tn Grk “who heard from John.”

[1:40]  ²³² tn Grk “him”; the referent (Jesus) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[1:41]  ²³³ tc Most witnesses (א* L W^s Ï) read πρῶτος (prwtos) here instead of πρῶτον (prwton). The former reading would be a predicate adjective and suggest that Andrew “was the first” person to proselytize another regarding Jesus. The reading preferred, however, is the neuter πρῶτον, used as an adverb (BDAG 893 s.v. πρῶτος 1.a.β.), and it suggests that the first thing that Andrew did was to proselytize Peter. The evidence for this reading is early and weighty: Ì^66,75 א² A B Θ Ψ 083 Ë^1,13 892 al lat.

[1:41]  ²³⁴ sn Naturally part of Andrew’s concept of the Messiah would have been learned from John the Baptist (v. 40). However, there were a number of different messianic expectations in 1st century Palestine (see the note on “Who are you?” in v. 19), and it would be wrong to assume that what Andrew meant here is the same thing the author means in the purpose statement at the end of the Fourth Gospel, 20:31. The issue here is not whether the disciples’ initial faith in Jesus as Messiah was genuine or not, but whether their concept of who Jesus was grew and developed progressively as they spent time following him, until finally after his resurrection it is affirmed in the climactic statement of John’s Gospel, the affirmation of Thomas in 20:28.

[1:41]  ²³⁵ tn Both Greek “Christ” and Hebrew and Aramaic “Messiah” mean “the one who has been anointed.”

[1:41]  sn This is a parenthetical note by the author. See the note on Christ in 1:20.

[1:42]  ²³⁶ tn Grk “He brought him”; both referents (Andrew, Simon) have been specified in the translation for clarity.

[1:42]  ²³⁷ tc The reading “Simon, son of John” is well attested in Ì^66,75,106 א B* L 33 pc it co. The majority of mss (A B² Ψ Ë^1,13 Ï) read “Simon, the son of Jonah” here instead, but that is perhaps an assimilation to Matt 16:17.

[1:42]  ²³⁸ sn This is a parenthetical note by the author. The change of name from Simon to Cephas is indicative of the future role he will play. Only John among the gospel writers gives the Greek transliteration (Κηφᾶς, Khfas) of Simon’s new name, Qéphâ (which is Galilean Aramaic). Neither Πέτρος (Petros) in Greek nor Qéphâ in Aramaic is a normal proper name; it is more like a nickname.

[13:23]  ²³⁹ sn Here for the first time the one Jesus loved, the ‘beloved disciple,’ is introduced. This individual also is mentioned in 19:26, 20:2, 21:7, and 21:20. Some have suggested that this disciple is to be identified with Lazarus, since the Fourth Gospel specifically states that Jesus loved him (11:3, 5, 36). From the terminology alone this is a possibility; the author is certainly capable of using language in this way to indicate connections. But there is nothing else to indicate that Lazarus was present at the last supper; Mark 14:17 seems to indicate it was only the twelve who were with Jesus at this time, and there is no indication in the Fourth Gospel to the contrary. Nor does it appear that Lazarus ever stood so close to Jesus as the later references in chaps. 19, 20 and 21 seem to indicate. When this is coupled with the omission of all references to John son of Zebedee from the Fourth Gospel, it seems far more likely that the references to the beloved disciple should be understood as references to him.

[13:23]  ²⁴⁰ tn Grk “was reclining.” This reflects the normal 1st century practice of eating a meal in a semi-reclining position.

[13:23]  ²⁴¹ tn Grk “was reclining in the bosom (or “lap”) of Jesus” (according to both L&N 17.25 and BDAG 65 s.v. ἀνάκειμαι 2 an idiom for taking the place of honor at a meal, but note the similar expression in John 1:18). Whether this position or the position to the left of Jesus should be regarded as the position of second highest honor (next to the host, in this case Jesus, who was in the position of highest honor) is debated. F. Prat, “Les places d’honneur chez les Juifs contemporains du Christ” (RSR 15 [1925]: 512-22), who argued that the table arrangement was that of the Roman triclinium (a U-shaped table with Jesus and two other disciples at the bottom of the U), considered the position to the left of Jesus to be the one of second highest honor. Thus the present translation renders this “a position of honor” without specifying which one (since both of the two disciples to the right and to the left of Jesus would be in positions of honor). Other translations differ as to how they handle the phrase ἐν τῷ κόλπῳ τοῦ ᾿Ιησοῦ (en tw kolpw tou Ihsou; “leaning on Jesus’ bosom,” KJV; “lying close to the breast of Jesus,” RSV; “reclining on Jesus’ breast,” NASB; “reclining next to him,” NIV, NRSV) but the symbolic significance of the beloved disciple’s position seems clear. He is close to Jesus and in an honored position. The phrase as an idiom for a place of honor at a feast is attested in the Epistles of Pliny (the Younger) 4.22.4, an approximate contemporary of Paul.

[13:23]  sn Note that the same expression translated in a place of honor here (Grk “in the bosom of”) is used to indicate Jesus’ relationship with the Father in 1:18.

[13:24]  ²⁴² sn It is not clear where Simon Peter was seated. If he were on Jesus’ other side, it is difficult to see why he would not have asked the question himself. It would also have been difficult to beckon to the beloved disciple, on Jesus’ right, from such a position. So apparently Peter was seated somewhere else. It is entirely possible that Judas was seated to Jesus’ left. Matt 26:25 seems to indicate that Jesus could speak to him without being overheard by the rest of the group. Judas is evidently in a position where Jesus can hand him the morsel of food (13:26).

[13:24]  ²⁴³ tn Grk “to this one”; the referent (the beloved disciple) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[13:24]  ²⁴⁴ tn Grk “him”; the referent (Jesus) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[13:24]  ²⁴⁵ sn That is, who would betray him (v. 21).

[13:25]  ²⁴⁶ tn Grk “he”; the referent (the disciple Jesus loved) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[18:17]  ²⁴⁷ tn Grk “slave girl.” Since the descriptive term “slave girl” was introduced in the translation in the previous verse, it would be redundant to repeat the full expression here.

[18:17]  ²⁴⁸ tn Questions prefaced with μή (mh) in Greek anticipate a negative answer. This can sometimes be indicated by using a “tag” at the end in English (here the tag is “are you?”).

[18:17]  ²⁴⁹ tn Grk “He said.”

[18:25]  ²⁵⁰ tn The words “in the courtyard” are not in the Greek text. They are supplied for the benefit of the modern reader, to link this scene to the preceding one in John 18:15-18.

[18:25]  ²⁵¹ tn Questions prefaced with μή (mh) in Greek anticipate a negative answer. This can sometimes be indicated by using a “tag” at the end in English (here the tag is “are you?”).

[18:25]  ²⁵² tn Grk “That one denied it and said”; the referent of the pronoun (Peter) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[18:26]  ²⁵³ tn See the note on the word “slaves” in 4:51.

[18:26]  ²⁵⁴ sn This incident is recounted in v. 10.

[18:26]  ²⁵⁵ tn Or “garden.”

[18:26]  ²⁵⁶ tn This question, prefaced with οὐκ (ouk) in Greek, anticipates a positive answer.

[18:27]  ²⁵⁷ tn It seems most likely that this refers to a real rooster crowing, although a number of scholars have suggested that “cockcrow” is a technical term referring to the trumpet call which ended the third watch of the night (from midnight to 3 a.m.). This would then be a reference to the Roman gallicinium (ἀλεκτοροφωνία, alektorofwnia; the term is used in Mark 13:35 and is found in some mss [Ì^37vid,45 ˹] in Matt 26:34) which would have been sounded at 3 a.m.; in this case Jesus would have prophesied a precise time by which the denials would have taken place. For more details see J. H. Bernard, St. John (ICC), 2:604. However, in light of the fact that Mark mentions the rooster crowing twice (Mark 14:72) and in Luke 22:60 the words are reversed (ἐφώνησεν ἀλέκτωρ, efwnhsen alektwr), it is more probable that a real rooster is in view. In any event natural cockcrow would have occurred at approximately 3 a.m. in Palestine at this time of year (March-April) anyway.

[18:27]  sn No indication is given of Peter’s emotional state at this third denial (as in Matt 26:74 and Mark 14:71) or that he remembered that Jesus had foretold the denials (Matt 26:75, Mark 14:72 and Luke 22:61), or the bitter remorse Peter felt afterward (Matt 26:75, Mark 14:72, and Luke 22:62).

[21:15]  ²⁵⁸ tc The majority of mss (A C² Θ Ψ Ë^1,13 33 Ï sy) read “Simon, the son of Jonah” here and in vv. 16 and 17, but these are perhaps assimilations to Matt 16:17. The reading “Simon, son of John” is better attested, being found in א¹ (א* only has “Simon” without mention of his father) B C* D L W lat co.

[21:15]  ²⁵⁹ tn To whom (or what) does “these” (τούτων, toutwn) refer? Three possibilities are suggested: (1) τούτων should be understood as neuter, “these things,” referring to the boats, nets, and fishing gear nearby. In light of Peter’s statement in 21:3, “I am going fishing,” some have understood Peter to have renounced his commission in light of his denials of Jesus. Jesus, as he restores Peter and forgives him for his denials, is asking Peter if he really loves his previous vocation more than he loves Jesus. Three things may be said in evaluation of this view: (a) it is not at all necessary to understand Peter’s statement in 21:3 as a renouncement of his discipleship, as this view of the meaning of τούτων would imply; (b) it would probably be more likely that the verb would be repeated in such a construction (see 7:31 for an example where the verb is repeated); and (c) as R. E. Brown has observed (John [AB], 2:1103) by Johannine standards the choice being offered to Peter between material things and the risen Jesus would seem rather ridiculous, especially after the disciples had realized whom it was they were dealing with (the Lord, see v. 12). (2) τούτων refers to the other disciples, meaning “Do you love me more than you love these other disciples?” The same objection mentioned as (c) under (1) would apply here: Could the author, in light of the realization of who Jesus is which has come to the disciples after the resurrection, and which he has just mentioned in 21:12, seriously present Peter as being offered a choice between the other disciples and the risen Jesus? This leaves option (3), that τούτων refers to the other disciples, meaning “Do you love me more than these other disciples do?” It seems likely that there is some irony here: Peter had boasted in 13:37, “I will lay down my life for you,” and the synoptics present Peter as boasting even more explicitly of his loyalty to Jesus (“Even if they all fall away, I will not,” Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29). Thus the semantic force of what Jesus asks Peter here amounts to something like “Now, after you have denied me three times, as I told you you would, can you still affirm that you love me more than these other disciples do?” The addition of the auxiliary verb “do” in the translation is used to suggest to the English reader the third interpretation, which is the preferred one.

[21:15]  ²⁶⁰ tn Grk “He said to him.”

[21:15]  ²⁶¹ tn Is there a significant difference in meaning between the two words for love used in the passage, ἀγαπάω and φιλέω (agapaw and filew)? Aside from Origen, who saw a distinction in the meaning of the two words, most of the Greek Fathers like Chrysostom and Cyril of Alexandria, saw no real difference of meaning. Neither did Augustine nor the translators of the Itala (Old Latin). This was also the view of the Reformation Greek scholars Erasmus and Grotius. The suggestion that a distinction in meaning should be seen comes primarily from a number of British scholars of the 19th century, especially Trench, Westcott, and Plummer. It has been picked up by others such as Spicq, Lenski, and Hendriksen. But most modern scholars decline to see a real difference in the meaning of the two words in this context, among them Bernard, Moffatt, Bonsirven, Bultmann, Barrett, Brown, Morris, Haenchen, and Beasley-Murray. There are three significant reasons for seeing no real difference in the meaning of ἀγαπάω and φιλέω in these verses: (1) the author has a habit of introducing slight stylistic variations in repeated material without any significant difference in meaning (compare, for example, 3:3 with 3:5, and 7:34 with 13:33). An examination of the uses of ἀγαπάω and φιλέω in the Fourth Gospel seems to indicate a general interchangeability between the two. Both terms are used of God’s love for man (3:16, 16:27); of the Father’s love for the Son (3:35, 5:20); of Jesus’ love for men (11:5, 11:3); of the love of men for men (13:34, 15:19); and of the love of men for Jesus (8:42, 16:27). (2) If (as seems probable) the original conversation took place in Aramaic (or possibly Hebrew), there would not have been any difference expressed because both Aramaic and Hebrew have only one basic word for love. In the LXX both ἀγαπάω and φιλέω are used to translate the same Hebrew word for love, although ἀγαπάω is more frequent. It is significant that in the Syriac version of the NT only one verb is used to translate vv. 15-17 (Syriac is very similar linguistically to Palestinian Aramaic). (3) Peter’s answers to the questions asked with ἀγαπάω are ‘yes’ even though he answers using the verb φιλέω. If he is being asked to love Jesus on a higher or more spiritual level his answers give no indication of this, and one would be forced to say (in order to maintain a consistent distinction between the two verbs) that Jesus finally concedes defeat and accepts only the lower form of love which is all that Peter is capable of offering. Thus it seems best to regard the interchange between ἀγαπάω and φιλέω in these verses as a minor stylistic variation of the author, consistent with his use of minor variations in repeated material elsewhere, and not indicative of any real difference in meaning. Thus no attempt has been made to distinguish between the two Greek words in the translation.

[21:15]  ²⁶² tn Grk “He”; the referent (Jesus) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[21:16]  ²⁶³ tn Grk “He”; the referent (Jesus) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[21:16]  ²⁶⁴ tn Grk “said again.” The word “again” (when used in connection with the phrase “a second time”) is redundant and has not been translated.

[21:16]  ²⁶⁵ tn Grk “He said to him.”

[21:16]  ²⁶⁶ tn Grk “He”; the referent (Jesus) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[21:17]  ²⁶⁷ tn Grk “He”; the referent (Jesus) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[21:17]  ²⁶⁸ tn Grk “said to him.” The words “to him” are clear from the context and slightly redundant in English.

[21:17]  ²⁶⁹ tn Or “was sad.”

[21:17]  ²⁷⁰ tn Grk “he”; the referent (Jesus) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[21:17]  ²⁷¹ tn Grk “said to.”

[21:17]  ²⁷² tn Grk “and said to him.” The words “to him” are clear from the context and slightly redundant in English.

[21:17]  ²⁷³ tc ‡ Most witnesses, especially later ones (A Θ Ψ Ë¹³ Ï), read ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς (Jo Ihsou", “Jesus”) here, while B C have ᾿Ιησοῦς without the article and א D W ˹ 33 565 al lat lack both. Because of the rapid verbal exchange in this pericope, “Jesus” is virtually required for clarity, providing a temptation to scribes to add the name. Further, the name normally occurs with the article. Although it is possible that B C accidentally omitted the article with the name, it is just as likely that they added the simple name to the text for clarity’s sake, while other witnesses added the article as well. The omission of ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς thus seems most likely to be authentic. NA²⁷ includes the words in brackets, indicating some doubts as to their authenticity.

[21:17]  tn Grk “he”; the referent (Jesus) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[21:17]  ²⁷⁴ tn Grk “Jesus said to him.”

[21:18]  ²⁷⁵ tn Grk “Truly, truly, I say to you.”

[21:18]  ²⁷⁶ tn Or “you girded yourself.”

[21:18]  ²⁷⁷ tn Grk “others will gird you.”

[21:19]  ²⁷⁸ tn Grk “he”; the referent (Jesus) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[21:19]  ²⁷⁹ tn Grk “he”; the referent (Peter) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[21:19]  ²⁸⁰ sn This is a parenthetical note by the author. The phrase by what kind of death Peter was going to glorify God almost certainly indicates martyrdom (cf. 1 Pet 4:16), and it may not predict anything more than that. But the parallelism of this phrase to similar phrases in John 12:33 and 18:32 which describe Jesus’ own death by crucifixion have led many to suggest that the picture Jesus is portraying for Peter looks not just at martyrdom but at death by crucifixion. This seems to be confirmed by the phrase you will stretch out your hands in the preceding verse. There is some evidence that the early church understood this and similar phrases (one of them in Isa 65:2) to refer to crucifixion (for a detailed discussion of the evidence see L. Morris, John [NICNT], 876, n. 52). Some have objected that if this phrase does indeed refer to crucifixion, the order within v. 18 is wrong, because the stretching out of the hands in crucifixion precedes the binding and leading where one does not wish to go. R. E. Brown (John [AB], 2:1108) sees this as a deliberate reversal of the normal order (hysteron proteron) intended to emphasize the stretching out of the hands. Another possible explanation for the unusual order is the Roman practice in crucifixions of tying the condemned prisoner’s arms to the crossbeam (patibulum) and forcing him to carry it to the place of execution (W. Bauer as cited by O. Cullmann in Peter: Disciple, Apostle, Martyr [LHD], 88).

[21:19]  ²⁸¹ tn Grk “After he said this, he said to him”; the referents (first Jesus, second Peter) have been specified in the translation for clarity.

[21:20]  ²⁸² tn The word “them” is not in the Greek text but is implied. Direct objects were often omitted in Greek when clear from the context.

[21:20]  ²⁸³ tn The words “This was the disciple” are not in the Greek text, but are supplied for clarity.

[21:20]  ²⁸⁴ tn Grk “his”; the referent (Jesus) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[21:20]  ²⁸⁵ tn Grk “and said.”

[21:20]  ²⁸⁶ sn This is a parenthetical note by the author.

[21:21]  ²⁸⁷ tn Grk “saw this one.”

[21:22]  ²⁸⁸ tn Grk “Jesus said to him.”

[21:22]  ²⁸⁹ tn Grk “to stay” or “to remain”; but since longevity is the issue in the context, “to live” conveys the idea more clearly.

[21:22]  ²⁹⁰ tn The word “back” is supplied to clarify the meaning.

[21:23]  ²⁹¹ tn Grk “went out.”

[21:23]  ²⁹² tn Grk “the brothers,” but here the term refers to more than just the immediate disciples of Jesus (as it does in 20:17). Here, as R. E. Brown notes (John [AB], 2:1110), it refers to Christians of the Johannine community (which would include both men and women).

[21:23]  ²⁹³ tn Grk “to stay” or “to remain”; but since longevity is the issue in the context, “to live” conveys the idea more clearly.

[21:23]  ²⁹⁴ tn The word “back” is supplied to clarify the meaning.

[21:1]  ²⁹⁵ tn The time reference indicated by μετὰ ταῦτα (meta tauta) is indefinite, in comparison with the specific “after eight days” (μεθ᾿ ἡμέρας ὀκτώ, meq’ Jhmera" oktw) between the two postresurrection appearances of Jesus in 20:26.

[21:1]  ²⁹⁶ sn The Sea of Tiberias is another name for the Sea of Galilee (see 6:1).

[21:1]  ²⁹⁷ tn Grk “how he revealed himself.”

[1:1]  ²⁹⁸ sn In the beginning. The search for the basic “stuff” out of which things are made was the earliest one in Greek philosophy. It was attended by the related question of “What is the process by which the secondary things came out of the primary one (or ones)?,” or in Aristotelian terminology, “What is the ‘beginning’ (same Greek word as beginning, John 1:1) and what is the origin of the things that are made?” In the New Testament the word usually has a temporal sense, but even BDAG 138 s.v. ἀρχή 3 lists a major category of meaning as “the first cause.” For John, the words “In the beginning” are most likely a conscious allusion to the opening words of Genesis – “In the beginning.” Other concepts which occur prominently in Gen 1 are also found in John’s prologue: “life” (1:4) “light” (1:4) and “darkness” (1:5). Gen 1 describes the first (physical) creation; John 1 describes the new (spiritual) creation. But this is not to play off a false dichotomy between “physical” and “spiritual”; the first creation was both physical and spiritual. The new creation is really a re-creation, of the spiritual (first) but also the physical. (In spite of the common understanding of John’s “spiritual” emphasis, the “physical” re-creation should not be overlooked; this occurs in John 2 with the changing of water into wine, in John 11 with the resurrection of Lazarus, and the emphasis of John 20-21 on the aftermath of Jesus’ own resurrection.)

[1:1]  ²⁹⁹ tn The preposition πρός (pros) implies not just proximity, but intimate personal relationship. M. Dods stated, “Πρός …means more than μετά or παρά, and is regularly employed in expressing the presence of one person with another” (“The Gospel of St. John,” The Expositor’s Greek Testament, 1:684). See also Mark 6:3, Matt 13:56, Mark 9:19, Gal 1:18, 2 John 12.

[1:1]  ³⁰⁰ tn Or “and what God was the Word was.” Colwell’s Rule is often invoked to support the translation of θεός (qeos) as definite (“God”) rather than indefinite (“a god”) here. However, Colwell’s Rule merely permits, but does not demand, that a predicate nominative ahead of an equative verb be translated as definite rather than indefinite. Furthermore, Colwell’s Rule did not deal with a third possibility, that the anarthrous predicate noun may have more of a qualitative nuance when placed ahead of the verb. A definite meaning for the term is reflected in the traditional rendering “the word was God.” From a technical standpoint, though, it is preferable to see a qualitative aspect to anarthrous θεός in John 1:1c (ExSyn 266-69). Translations like the NEB, REB, and Moffatt are helpful in capturing the sense in John 1:1c, that the Word was fully deity in essence (just as much God as God the Father). However, in contemporary English “the Word was divine” (Moffatt) does not quite catch the meaning since “divine” as a descriptive term is not used in contemporary English exclusively of God. The translation “what God was the Word was” is perhaps the most nuanced rendering, conveying that everything God was in essence, the Word was too. This points to unity of essence between the Father and the Son without equating the persons. However, in surveying a number of native speakers of English, some of whom had formal theological training and some of whom did not, the editors concluded that the fine distinctions indicated by “what God was the Word was” would not be understood by many contemporary readers. Thus the translation “the Word was fully God” was chosen because it is more likely to convey the meaning to the average English reader that the Logos (which “became flesh and took up residence among us” in John 1:14 and is thereafter identified in the Fourth Gospel as Jesus) is one in essence with God the Father. The previous phrase, “the Word was with God,” shows that the Logos is distinct in person from God the Father.

[1:1]  sn And the Word was fully God. John’s theology consistently drives toward the conclusion that Jesus, the incarnate Word, is just as much God as God the Father. This can be seen, for example, in texts like John 10:30 (“The Father and I are one”), 17:11 (“so that they may be one just as we are one”), and 8:58 (“before Abraham came into existence, I am”). The construction in John 1:1c does not equate the Word with the person of God (this is ruled out by 1:1b, “the Word was with God”); rather it affirms that the Word and God are one in essence.

[1:2]  ³⁰¹ tn Grk “He”; the referent (the Word) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[1:3]  ³⁰² tn Or “made”; Grk “came into existence.”

[1:3]  ³⁰³ tn Or “made”; Grk “nothing came into existence.”

[1:3]  ³⁰⁴ 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.”

[1:4]  ³⁰⁵ tn John uses ζωή (zwh) 37 times: 17 times it occurs with αἰώνιος (aiwnios), and in the remaining occurrences outside the prologue it is clear from context that “eternal” life is meant. The two uses in 1:4, if they do not refer to “eternal” life, would be the only exceptions. (Also 1 John uses ζωή 13 times, always of “eternal” life.)

[1:4]  sn An allusion to Ps 36:9, which gives significant OT background: “For with you is the fountain of life; In your light we see light.” In later Judaism, Bar 4:2 expresses a similar idea. Life, especially eternal life, will become one of the major themes of John’s Gospel.

[1:4]  ³⁰⁶ tn Or “humanity”; Grk “of men” (but ἄνθρωπος [anqrwpo"] is used in a generic sense here, not restricted to males only, thus “mankind,” “humanity”).

[1:5]  ³⁰⁷ tn To this point the author has used past tenses (imperfects, aorists); now he switches to a present. The light continually shines (thus the translation, “shines on”). Even as the author writes, it is shining. The present here most likely has gnomic force (though it is possible to take it as a historical present); it expresses the timeless truth that the light of the world (cf. 8:12, 9:5, 12:46) never ceases to shine.

[1:5]  sn The light shines on. The question of whether John has in mind here the preincarnate Christ or the incarnate Christ is probably too specific. The incarnation is not really introduced until v. 9, but here the point is more general: It is of the very nature of light, that it shines.

[1:5]  ³⁰⁸ sn The author now introduces what will become a major theme of John’s Gospel: the opposition of light and darkness. The antithesis is a natural one, widespread in antiquity. Gen 1 gives considerable emphasis to it in the account of the creation, and so do the writings of Qumran. It is the major theme of one of the most important extra-biblical documents found at Qumran, the so-called War Scroll, properly titled The War of the Sons of Light with the Sons of Darkness. Connections between John and Qumran are still an area of scholarly debate and a consensus has not yet emerged. See T. A. Hoffman, “1 John and the Qumran Scrolls,” BTB 8 (1978): 117-25.

[1:5]  ³⁰⁹ tn Grk “and,” but the context clearly indicates a contrast, so this has been translated as an adversative use of καί (kai).

[1:5]  ³¹⁰ tn Or “comprehended it,” or “overcome it.” The verb κατέλαβεν (katelaben) is not easy to translate. “To seize” or “to grasp” is possible, but this also permits “to grasp with the mind” in the sense of “to comprehend” (esp. in the middle voice). This is probably another Johannine double meaning – one does not usually think of darkness as trying to “understand” light. For it to mean this, “darkness” must be understood as meaning “certain people,” or perhaps “humanity” at large, darkened in understanding. But in John’s usage, darkness is not normally used of people or a group of people. Rather it usually signifies the evil environment or ‘sphere’ in which people find themselves: “They loved darkness rather than light” (John 3:19). Those who follow Jesus do not walk in darkness (8:12). They are to walk while they have light, lest the darkness “overtake/overcome” them (12:35, same verb as here). For John, with his set of symbols and imagery, darkness is not something which seeks to “understand (comprehend)” the light, but represents the forces of evil which seek to “overcome (conquer)” it. The English verb “to master” may be used in both sorts of contexts, as “he mastered his lesson” and “he mastered his opponent.”

[1:6]  ³¹¹ sn John refers to John the Baptist.

[1:7]  ³¹² tn Grk “came for a testimony.”

[1:7]  sn Witness is also one of the major themes of John’s Gospel. The Greek verb μαρτυρέω (marturew) occurs 33 times (compare to once in Matthew, once in Luke, 0 in Mark) and the noun μαρτυρία (marturia) 14 times (0 in Matthew, once in Luke, 3 times in Mark).

[1:7]  ³¹³ tn Or “to bear witness.”

[1:7]  ³¹⁴ tn Grk “all.”

[1:8]  ³¹⁵ tn Or “to bear witness.”

[1:9]  ³¹⁶ tn Grk “every man” (but in a generic sense, “every person,” or “every human being”).

[1:9]  ³¹⁷ tn Or “He was the true light, who gives light to everyone who comes into the world.” The participle ἐρχόμενον (ercomenon) may be either (1) neuter nominative, agreeing with τὸ φῶς (to fw"), or (2) masculine accusative, agreeing with ἄνθρωπον (anqrwpon). Option (1) results in a periphrastic imperfect with ἦν (hn), ἦν τὸ φῶς… ἐρχόμενον, referring to the incarnation. Option (2) would have the participle modifying ἄνθρωπον and referring to the true light as enlightening “every man who comes into the world.” Option (2) has some rabbinic parallels: The phrase “all who come into the world” is a fairly common expression for “every man” (cf. Leviticus Rabbah 31.6). But (1) must be preferred here, because: (a) In the next verse the light is in the world; it is logical for v. 9 to speak of its entering the world; (b) in other passages Jesus is described as “coming into the world” (6:14, 9:39, 11:27, 16:28) and in 12:46 Jesus says: ἐγὼ φῶς εἰς τὸν κόσμον ἐλήλυθα (egw fw" ei" ton kosmon elhluqa); (c) use of a periphrastic participle with the imperfect tense is typical Johannine style: 1:28, 2:6, 3:23, 10:40, 11:1, 13:23, 18:18 and 25. In every one of these except 13:23 the finite verb is first and separated by one or more intervening words from the participle.

[1:9]  sn In v. 9 the world (κόσμος, kosmos) is mentioned for the first time. This is another important theme word for John. Generally, the world as a Johannine concept does not refer to the totality of creation (the universe), although there are exceptions at 11:9. 17:5, 24, 21:25, but to the world of human beings and human affairs. Even in 1:10 the world created through the Logos is a world capable of knowing (or reprehensibly not knowing) its Creator. Sometimes the world is further qualified as this world (ὁ κόσμος οὗτος, Jo kosmos Joutos) as in 8:23, 9:39, 11:9, 12:25, 31; 13:1, 16:11, 18:36. This is not merely equivalent to the rabbinic phrase “this present age” (ὁ αἰών οὗτος, Jo aiwn Joutos) and contrasted with “the world to come.” For John it is also contrasted to a world other than this one, already existing; this is the lower world, corresponding to which there is a world above (see especially 8:23, 18:36). Jesus appears not only as the Messiah by means of whom an eschatological future is anticipated (as in the synoptic gospels) but also as an envoy from the heavenly world to this world.

[1:10]  ³¹⁸ tn Or “was made”; Grk “came into existence.”

[1:10]  ³¹⁹ tn Grk “and,” but in context this is an adversative use of καί (kai) and is thus translated “but.”

[1:10]  ³²⁰ tn Or “know.”

[1:11]  ³²¹ tn Grk “to his own things.”

[1:11]  ³²² tn Grk “and,” but in context this is an adversative use of καί (kai) and is thus translated “but.”

[1:11]  ³²³ tn “People” is not in the Greek text but is implied.

[1:11]  ³²⁴ sn His own people did not receive him. There is a subtle irony here: When the λόγος (logos) came into the world, he came to his own (τὰ ἴδια, ta idia, literally “his own things”) and his own people (οἱ ἴδιοι, Joi idioi), who should have known and received him, but they did not. This time John does not say that “his own” did not know him, but that they did not receive him (παρέλαβον, parelabon). The idea is one not of mere recognition, but of acceptance and welcome.

[1:12]  ³²⁵ tn On the use of the πιστεύω + εἰς (pisteuw + ei") construction in John: The verb πιστεύω occurs 98 times in John (compared to 11 times in Matthew, 14 times in Mark [including the longer ending], and 9 times in Luke). One of the unsolved mysteries is why the corresponding noun form πίστις (pistis) is never used at all. Many have held the noun was in use in some pre-Gnostic sects and this rendered it suspect for John. It might also be that for John, faith was an activity, something that men do (cf. W. Turner, “Believing and Everlasting Life – A Johannine Inquiry,” ExpTim 64 [1952/53]: 50-52). John uses πιστεύω in 4 major ways: (1) of believing facts, reports, etc., 12 times; (2) of believing people (or the scriptures), 19 times; (3) of believing “in” Christ” (πιστεύω + εἰς + acc.), 36 times; (4) used absolutely without any person or object specified, 30 times (the one remaining passage is 2:24, where Jesus refused to “trust” himself to certain individuals). Of these, the most significant is the use of πιστεύω with εἰς + accusative. It is not unlike the Pauline ἐν Χριστῷ (en Cristw) formula. Some have argued that this points to a Hebrew (more likely Aramaic) original behind the Fourth Gospel. But it probably indicates something else, as C. H. Dodd observed: “πιστεύειν with the dative so inevitably connoted simple credence, in the sense of an intellectual judgment, that the moral element of personal trust or reliance inherent in the Hebrew or Aramaic phrase – an element integral to the primitive Christian conception of faith in Christ – needed to be otherwise expressed” (The Interpretation of the Fourth Gospel, 183).

[1:13]  ³²⁶ tn The Greek term translated “born” here also involves conception.

[1:13]  ³²⁷ tn Grk “of blood(s).” The plural αἱμάτων (Jaimatwn) has seemed a problem to many interpreters. At least some sources in antiquity imply that blood was thought of as being important in the development of the fetus during its time in the womb: thus Wis 7:1: “in the womb of a mother I was molded into flesh, within the period of 10 months, compacted with blood, from the seed of a man and the pleasure of marriage.” In John 1:13, the plural αἱμάτων may imply the action of both parents. It may also refer to the “genetic” contribution of both parents, and so be equivalent to “human descent” (see BDAG 26 s.v. αἷμα 1.a). E. C. Hoskyns thinks John could not have used the singular here because Christians are in fact ‘begotten’ by the blood of Christ (The Fourth Gospel, 143), although the context would seem to make it clear that the blood in question is something other than the blood of Christ.

[1:13]  ³²⁸ tn Or “of the will of the flesh.” The phrase οὐδὲ ἐκ θελήματος σαρκός (oude ek qelhmato" sarko") is more clearly a reference to sexual desire, but it should be noted that σάρξ (sarx) in John does not convey the evil sense common in Pauline usage. For John it refers to the physical nature in its weakness rather than in its sinfulness. There is no clearer confirmation of this than the immediately following verse, where the λόγος (logos) became σάρξ.

[1:13]  ³²⁹ tn Or “man’s.”

[1:13]  ³³⁰ tn The third phrase, οὐδὲ ἐκ θελήματος ἀνδρός (oude ek qelhmato" andros), means much the same as the second one. The word here (ἀνηρ, anhr) is often used for a husband, resulting in the translation “or a husband’s decision,” or more generally, “or of any human volition whatsoever.” L. Morris may be right when he sees here an emphasis directed at the Jewish pride in race and patriarchal ancestry, although such a specific reference is difficult to prove (John [NICNT], 101).

[1:14]  ³³¹ tn Here καί (kai) has been translated as “now” to indicate the transition to a new topic, the incarnation of the Word. Greek style often begins sentences or clauses with “and,” but English style generally does not.

[1:14]  ³³² tn This looks at the Word incarnate in humility and weakness; the word σάρξ (sarx) does not carry overtones of sinfulness here as it frequently does in Pauline usage. See also John 3:6.

[1:14]  ³³³ tn Grk “and tabernacled.”

[1:14]  sn The Greek word translated took up residence (σκηνόω, skhnow) alludes to the OT tabernacle, where the Shekinah, the visible glory of God’s presence, resided. The author is suggesting that this glory can now be seen in Jesus (note the following verse). The verb used here may imply that the Shekinah glory that once was found in the tabernacle has taken up residence in the person of Jesus. Cf. also John 2:19-21. The Word became flesh. This verse constitutes the most concise statement of the incarnation in the New Testament. John 1:1 makes it clear that the Logos was fully God, but 1:14 makes it clear that he was also fully human. A Docetic interpretation is completely ruled out. Here for the first time the Logos of 1:1 is identified as Jesus of Nazareth – the two are one and the same. Thus this is the last time the word logos is used in the Fourth Gospel to refer to the second person of the Trinity. From here on it is Jesus of Nazareth who is the focus of John’s Gospel.

[1:14]  ³³⁴ tn Grk “and we saw.”

[1:14]  ³³⁵ tn Or “of the unique one.” 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 Clem. 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, 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).

[1:15]  ³³⁶ sn John refers to John the Baptist.

[1:15]  ³³⁷ tn Or “bore witness.”

[1:15]  ³³⁸ tn Grk “and shouted out saying.” The participle λέγων (legwn) is redundant is English and has not been translated.

[1:15]  ³³⁹ tn Or “has a higher rank than I.”

[1:16]  ³⁴⁰ tn Grk “for from his fullness we have all received, and grace upon grace.” The meaning of the phrase χάριν ἀντὶ χάριτος (carin anti carito") could be: (1) love (grace) under the New Covenant in place of love (grace) under the Sinai Covenant, thus replacement; (2) grace “on top of” grace, thus accumulation; (3) grace corresponding to grace, thus correspondence. The most commonly held view is (2) in one sense or another, and this is probably the best explanation. This sense is supported by a fairly well-known use in Philo, Posterity 43 (145). Morna D. Hooker suggested that Exod 33:13 provides the background for this expression: “Now therefore, I pray you, if I have found χάρις (LXX) in your sight, let me know your ways, that I may know you, so that I may find χάρις (LXX) in your sight.” Hooker proposed that it is this idea of favor given to one who has already received favor which lies behind 1:16, and this seems very probable as a good explanation of the meaning of the phrase (“The Johannine Prologue and the Messianic Secret,” NTS 21 [1974/75]: 53).

[1:16]  sn Earlier commentators (including Origen and Luther) took the words For we have all received from his fullness one gracious gift after another to be John the Baptist’s. Most modern commentators take them as the words of the author.

[1:17]  ³⁴¹ tn “But” is not in the Greek text, but has been supplied to indicate the implied contrast between the Mosaic law and grace through Jesus Christ. John 1:17 seems to indicate clearly that the Old Covenant (Sinai) was being contrasted with the New. In Jewish sources the Law was regarded as a gift from God (Josephus, Ant. 3.8.10 [3.223]; Pirqe Avot 1.1; Sifre Deut 31:4 §305). Further information can be found in T. F. Glasson, Moses in the Fourth Gospel (SBT).

[1:18]  ³⁴² tc The textual problem μονογενὴς θεός (monogenh" qeo", “the only God”) versus ὁ μονογενὴς υἱός (Jo monogenh" Juio", “the only son”) is a notoriously difficult one. Only one letter would have differentiated the readings in the mss, since both words would have been contracted as nomina sacra: thus qMs or uMs. Externally, there are several variants, but they can be grouped essentially by whether they read θεός or υἱός. The majority of mss, especially the later ones (A C³ Θ Ψ Ë^1,13 Ï lat), read ὁ μονογενὴς υἱός. Ì⁷⁵ א¹ 33 pc have ὁ μονογενὴς θεός, while the anarthrous μονογενὴς θεός is found in Ì⁶⁶ א* B C* L pc. The articular θεός is almost certainly a scribal emendation to the anarthrous θεός, for θεός without the article is a much harder reading. The external evidence thus strongly supports μονογενὴς θεός. Internally, although υἱός fits the immediate context more readily, θεός is much more difficult. As well, θεός also explains the origin of the other reading (υἱός), because it is difficult to see why a scribe who found υἱός in the text he was copying would alter it to θεός. Scribes would naturally change the wording to υἱός however, since μονογενὴς υἱός is a uniquely Johannine christological title (cf. John 3:16, 18; 1 John 4:9). But θεός as the older and more difficult reading is preferred. As for translation, it makes the most sense to see the word θεός as in apposition to μονογενής, and the participle ὁ ὤν (Jo wn) as in apposition to θεός, giving in effect three descriptions of Jesus rather than only two. (B. D. Ehrman, The Orthodox Corruption of Scripture, 81, suggests that it is nearly impossible and completely unattested in the NT for an adjective followed immediately by a noun that agrees in gender, number, and case, to be a substantival adjective: “when is an adjective ever used substantivally when it immediately precedes a noun of the same inflection?” This, however, is an overstatement. First, as Ehrman admits, μονογενής in John 1:14 is substantival. And since it is an established usage for the adjective in this context, one might well expect that the author would continue to use the adjective substantivally four verses later. Indeed, μονογενής is already moving toward a crystallized substantival adjective in the NT [cf. Luke 9:38; Heb 11:17]; in patristic Greek, the process continued [cf. PGL 881 s.v. 7]. Second, there are several instances in the NT in which a substantival adjective is followed by a noun with which it has complete concord: cf., e.g., Rom 1:30; Gal 3:9; 1 Tim 1:9; 2 Pet 2:5.) The modern translations which best express this are the NEB (margin) and TEV. Several things should be noted: μονογενής alone, without υἱός, can mean “only son,” “unique son,” “unique one,” etc. (see 1:14). Furthermore, θεός is anarthrous. As such it carries qualitative force much like it does in 1:1c, where θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος (qeo" hn Jo logo") means “the Word was fully God” or “the Word was fully of the essence of deity.” Finally, ὁ ὤν occurs in Rev 1:4, 8; 4:8, 11:17; and 16:5, but even more significantly in the LXX of Exod 3:14. Putting all of this together leads to the translation given in the text.

[1:18]  tn Or “The unique one.” For the meaning of μονογενής (monogenh") see the note on “one and only” in 1:14.

[1:18]  ³⁴³ tn Grk “in the bosom of” (an idiom for closeness or nearness; cf. L&N 34.18; BDAG 556 s.v. κόλπος 1).

[1:18]  ³⁴⁴ tn Grk “him”; the referent (God) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[1:18]  ³⁴⁵ sn Has made God known. In this final verse of the prologue, the climactic and ultimate statement of the earthly career of the Logos, Jesus of Nazareth, is reached. The unique One (John 1:14), the One who has taken on human form and nature by becoming incarnate (became flesh, 1:14), who is himself fully God (the Word was God, 1:1c) and is to be identified with the ever-living One of the Old Testament revelation (Exod 3:14), who is in intimate relationship with the Father, this One and no other has fully revealed what God is like. As Jesus said to Philip in John 14:9, “The one who has seen me has seen the Father.”

[1:19]  ³⁴⁶ tn Here καί (kai) has been translated as “now” to indicate the transition to a new topic. Greek style often begins sentences or clauses with “and,” but English style generally does not.

[1:19]  ³⁴⁷ tn Grk “is.”

[1:19]  ³⁴⁸ sn John’s refers to John the Baptist.

[1:19]  ³⁴⁹ tn Or “witness.”

[1:19]  sn John the Baptist’s testimony seems to take place over 3 days: day 1, John’s testimony about his own role is largely negative (1:19-28); day 2, John gives positive testimony about who Jesus is (1:29-34); day 3, John sends his own disciples to follow Jesus (1:35-40).

[1:19]  ³⁵⁰ tn Or “the Jewish authorities”; Grk “the Jews.” In NT usage the term ᾿Iουδαῖοι (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 authorities or leaders in Jerusalem. (For further information see R. G. Bratcher, “‘The Jews’ in the Gospel of John,” BT 26 [1975]: 401-9.)

[1:19]  ³⁵¹ tc ‡ Several important witnesses have πρὸς αὐτόν (pro" auton, “to him”) either here (B C* 33 892^c al it) or after “Levites” (Ì^{66c vid} A Θ Ψ Ë¹³ 579 al lat), while the earliest mss as well as the majority of mss (Ì^66*,75 א C³ L W^s ˹ Ï) lack the phrase. On the one hand, πρὸς αὐτόν could be perceived as redundant since αὐτόν is used again later in the verse, thus prompting scribes to omit the phrase. On the other hand, both the variation in placement of πρὸς αὐτόν and the fact that this phrase rather than the latter αὐτόν is lacking in certain witnesses (cf. John 11:44; 14:7; 18:31), suggests that scribes felt that the sentence needed the phrase to make the sense clearer. Although a decision is difficult, the shorter reading is slightly preferred. NA²⁷ has πρὸς αὐτόν in brackets, indicating doubt as to the phrase’s authenticity.

[1:19]  ³⁵² map For location see Map5 B1; Map6 F3; Map7 E2; Map8 F2; Map10 B3; JP1 F4; JP2 F4; JP3 F4; JP4 F4.

[1:19]  ³⁵³ sn “Who are you?” No uniform Jewish expectation of a single eschatological figure existed in the 1st century. A majority expected the Messiah. But some pseudepigraphic books describe God’s intervention without mentioning the anointed Davidic king; in parts of 1 Enoch, for example, the figure of the Son of Man, not the Messiah, embodies the expectations of the author. Essenes at Qumran seem to have expected three figures: a prophet, a priestly messiah, and a royal messiah. In baptizing, John the Baptist was performing an eschatological action. It also seems to have been part of his proclamation (John 1:23, 26-27). Crowds were beginning to follow him. He was operating in an area not too far from the Essene center on the Dead Sea. No wonder the authorities were curious about who he was.

[1:20]  ³⁵⁴ tn Or “the Messiah” (Both Greek “Christ” and Hebrew and Aramaic “Messiah” mean “one who has been anointed”).

[1:20]  sn “I am not the Christ.” A 3rd century work, the pseudo-Clementine Recognitions (1.54 and 1.60 in the Latin text; the statement is not as clear in the Syriac version) records that John’s followers proclaimed him to be the Messiah. There is no clear evidence that they did so in the 1st century, however – but Luke 3:15 indicates some wondered. Concerning the Christ, the term χριστός (cristos) was originally an adjective (“anointed”), developing in LXX into a substantive (“an anointed one”), then developing still further into a technical generic term (“the anointed one”). In the intertestamental period it developed further into a technical term referring to the hoped-for anointed one, that is, a specific individual. In the NT the development starts there (technical-specific), is so used in the gospels, and then develops in Paul to mean virtually Jesus’ last name.

[1:21]  ³⁵⁵ tn Grk “What then?” (an idiom).

[1:21]  ³⁵⁶ sn According to the 1st century rabbinic interpretation of 2 Kgs 2:11, Elijah was still alive. In Mal 4:5 it is said that Elijah would be the precursor of Messiah. How does one reconcile John the Baptist’s denial here (“I am not”) with Jesus’ statements in Matt 11:14 (see also Mark 9:13 and Matt 17:12) that John the Baptist was Elijah? Some have attempted to remove the difficulty by a reconstruction of the text in the Gospel of John which makes the Baptist say that he was Elijah. However, external support for such emendations is lacking. According to Gregory the Great, John was not Elijah, but exercised toward Jesus the function of Elijah by preparing his way. But this avoids the real difficulty, since in John’s Gospel the question of the Jewish authorities to the Baptist concerns precisely his function. It has also been suggested that the author of the Gospel here preserves a historically correct reminiscence – that John the Baptist did not think of himself as Elijah, although Jesus said otherwise. Mark 6:14-16 and Mark 8:28 indicate the people and Herod both distinguished between John and Elijah – probably because he did not see himself as Elijah. But Jesus’ remarks in Matt 11:14, Mark 9:13, and Matt 17:12 indicate that John did perform the function of Elijah – John did for Jesus what Elijah was to have done for the coming of the Lord. C. F. D. Moule pointed out that it is too simple to see a straight contradiction between John’s account and that of the synoptic gospels: “We have to ask by whom the identification is made, and by whom refused. The synoptic gospels represent Jesus as identifying, or comparing, the Baptist with Elijah, while John represents the Baptist as rejecting the identification when it is offered him by his interviewers. Now these two, so far from being incompatible, are psychologically complementary. The Baptist humbly rejects the exalted title, but Jesus, on the contrary, bestows it on him. Why should not the two both be correct?” (The Phenomenon of the New Testament [SBT], 70).

[1:21]  ³⁵⁷ sn The Prophet is a reference to the “prophet like Moses” of Deut 18:15, by this time an eschatological figure in popular belief. Acts 3:22 identifies Jesus as this prophet.

[1:22]  ³⁵⁸ tn The words “Tell us” are not in the Greek but are implied.

[1:23]  ³⁵⁹ tn Grk “He”; the referent (John the Baptist) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[1:23]  ³⁶⁰ sn This call to “make straight” is probably an allusion to preparation through repentance.

[1:23]  ³⁶¹ sn A quotation from Isa 40:3.

[1:24]  ³⁶² sn Pharisees were members of one of the most important and influential religious and political parties of Judaism in the time of Jesus. There were more Pharisees than Sadducees (according to Josephus, Ant. 17.2.4 [17.42] there were more than 6,000 Pharisees at about this time). Pharisees differed with Sadducees on certain doctrines and patterns of behavior. The Pharisees were strict and zealous adherents to the laws of the OT and to numerous additional traditions such as angels and bodily resurrection.

[1:24]  ³⁶³ sn This is a parenthetical note by the author.

[1:25]  ³⁶⁴ tn Grk “And they asked him, and said to him”; the referent (John) has been specified in the translation for clarity, and the phrase has been simplified in the translation to “So they asked John.”

[1:25]  ³⁶⁵ tn Or “the Messiah” (Both Greek “Christ” and Hebrew and Aramaic “Messiah” mean “one who has been anointed”).

[1:25]  sn See the note on Christ in 1:20.

[1:26]  ³⁶⁶ tn Grk “answered them, saying.” The participle λέγων (legwn) is redundant in contemporary English and has not been translated.

[1:26]  ³⁶⁷ tn Or “know.”

[1:27]  ³⁶⁸ tn Grk “of whom I am not worthy.”

[1:27]  sn The humility of John is evident in the statement I am not worthy. This was considered one of the least worthy tasks of a slave, and John did not consider himself worthy to do even that for the one to come, despite the fact he himself was a prophet.

[1:27]  ³⁶⁹ tn The term refers to the leather strap or thong used to bind a sandal. This is often viewed as a collective singular and translated as a plural, “the straps of his sandals,” but it may be more emphatic to retain the singular here.

[1:28]  ³⁷⁰ tc Many witnesses ([א²] C² K T Ψ^c 083 Ë^1,13 33 pm sa Or) read Βηθαβαρᾷ (Bhqabara, “Bethabara”) instead of Βηθανίᾳ (Bhqania, “Bethany”). But the reading Βηθανίᾳ is strongly supported by {Ì^66,75 A B C* L W^s Δ Θ Ψ* 565 579 700 1241 1424 pm latt bo as well as several fathers}. Since there is no known Bethany “beyond the Jordan,” it is likely that the name would have been changed to a more etymologically edifying one (Origen mistakenly thought the name Bethabara meant “house of preparation” and for this reason was appropriate in this context; see TCGNT 171 for discussion). On the other hand, both since Origen’s understanding of the Semitic etymology of Bethabara was incorrect, and because Bethany was at least a well-known location in Palestine, mentioned in the Gospels about a dozen times, one has to wonder whether scribes replaced Βηθαβαρᾷ with Βηθανίᾳ. However, if Origen’s understanding of the etymology of the name was representative, scribes may have altered the text in the direction of Bethabara. And even if most scribes were unfamiliar with what the name might signify, that a reading which did not contradict the Gospels’ statements of a Bethany near Jerusalem was already at hand may have been sufficient reason for them to adopt Bethabara. Further, in light of the very strong testimony for Βηθανίᾳ, this reading should be regarded as authentic.

[1:28]  ³⁷¹ tn “River” is not in the Greek text but is supplied for clarity.

[1:29]  ³⁷² tn Grk “he”; the referent (John) has been supplied in the translation for clarity.

[1:29]  ³⁷³ sn Gen 22:8 is an important passage in the background of the title Lamb of God as applied to Jesus. In Jewish thought this was held to be a supremely important sacrifice. G. Vermès stated: “For the Palestinian Jew, all lamb sacrifice, and especially the Passover lamb and the Tamid offering, was a memorial of the Akedah with its effects of deliverance, forgiveness of sin and messianic salvation” (Scripture and Tradition in Judaism [StPB], 225).

[1:30]  ³⁷⁴ tn Or “has a higher rank than I.”

[1:31]  ³⁷⁵ tn Or “know.”

[1:31]  ³⁷⁶ sn John the Baptist, who has been so reluctant to elaborate his own role, now more than willingly gives his testimony about Jesus. For the author, the emphasis is totally on John the Baptist as a witness to Jesus. No attention is given to the Baptist’s call to national repentance and very little to his baptizing. Everything is focused on what he has to say about Jesus: so that he could be revealed to Israel.

[1:32]  ³⁷⁷ tn Here καί (kai) has been translated as “then” to indicate the implied sequence of events in the narrative. Greek style often begins sentences or clauses with “and,” but English style generally does not.

[1:32]  ³⁷⁸ tn Grk “testified, saying.” The participle λέγων (legwn) is redundant in contemporary English and has not been translated.

[1:32]  ³⁷⁹ sn The phrase like a dove is a descriptive comparison. The Spirit is not a dove, but descended like one in some sort of bodily representation.

[1:32]  ³⁸⁰ tn Or “from the sky.” The Greek word οὐρανός (ouranos) may be translated “sky” or “heaven,” depending on the context.

[1:32]  ³⁸¹ sn John says the Spirit remained on Jesus. The Greek verb μένω (menw) is a favorite Johannine word, used 40 times in the Gospel and 27 times in the Epistles (67 together) against 118 times total in the NT. The general significance of the verb μένω for John is to express the permanency of relationship between Father and Son and Son and believer. Here the use of the word implies that Jesus permanently possesses the Holy Spirit, and because he does, he will dispense the Holy Spirit to others in baptism. Other notes on the dispensation of the Spirit occur at John 3:5 and following (at least implied by the wordplay), John 3:34, 7:38-39, numerous passages in John 14-16 (the Paraclete passages) and John 20:22. Note also the allusion to Isa 42:1 – “Behold my servant…my chosen one in whom my soul delights. I have put my Spirit on him.”

[1:34]  ³⁸² 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.”

[1:35]  ³⁸³ sn John refers to John the Baptist.

[1:35]  ³⁸⁴ tn “There” is not in the Greek text but is implied by current English idiom.

[1:36]  ³⁸⁵ sn This section (1:35-51) is joined to the preceding by the literary expedient of repeating the Baptist’s testimony about Jesus being the Lamb of God (1:36, cf. 1:29). This repeated testimony (1:36) no longer has revelatory value in itself, since it has been given before; its purpose, instead, is to institute a chain reaction which will bring John the Baptist’s disciples to Jesus and make them Jesus’ own disciples.

[1:37]  ³⁸⁶ tn Grk “his”; the referent (John) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[1:37]  ³⁸⁷ tn Grk “And the two disciples heard him speaking.”

[1:37]  ³⁸⁸ sn The expression followed Jesus pictures discipleship, which means that to learn from Jesus is to follow him as the guiding priority of one’s life.

[1:38]  ³⁸⁹ tn Grk “What are you seeking?”

[1:38]  ³⁹⁰ sn This is a parenthetical note by the author.

[1:39]  ³⁹¹ tn Grk “He”; the referent (Jesus) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[1:39]  ³⁹² tn Grk “said to them.”

[1:39]  ³⁹³ tn Grk “about the tenth hour.”

[1:39]  sn About four o’clock in the afternoon. What system of time reckoning is the author using? B. F. Westcott thought John, unlike the synoptic gospels, was using Roman time, which started at midnight (St. John, 282). This would make the time 10 a.m., which would fit here. But later in the Gospel’s Passover account (John 19:42, where the sixth hour is on the “eve of the Passover”) it seems clear the author had to be using Jewish reckoning, which began at 6 a.m. This would make the time here in 1:39 to be 4 p.m. This may be significant: If the hour was late, Andrew and the unnamed disciple probably spent the night in the same house where Jesus was staying, and the events of 1:41-42 took place on the next day. The evidence for Westcott’s view, that the Gospel is using Roman time, is very slim. The Roman reckoning which started at midnight was only used by authorities as legal time (for contracts, official documents, etc.). Otherwise, the Romans too reckoned time from 6 a.m. (e.g., Roman sundials are marked VI, not XII, for noon).

[1:40]  ³⁹⁴ tn Grk “who heard from John.”

[1:40]  ³⁹⁵ tn Grk “him”; the referent (Jesus) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[1:41]  ³⁹⁶ tc Most witnesses (א* L W^s Ï) read πρῶτος (prwtos) here instead of πρῶτον (prwton). The former reading would be a predicate adjective and suggest that Andrew “was the first” person to proselytize another regarding Jesus. The reading preferred, however, is the neuter πρῶτον, used as an adverb (BDAG 893 s.v. πρῶτος 1.a.β.), and it suggests that the first thing that Andrew did was to proselytize Peter. The evidence for this reading is early and weighty: Ì^66,75 א² A B Θ Ψ 083 Ë^1,13 892 al lat.

[1:41]  ³⁹⁷ sn Naturally part of Andrew’s concept of the Messiah would have been learned from John the Baptist (v. 40). However, there were a number of different messianic expectations in 1st century Palestine (see the note on “Who are you?” in v. 19), and it would be wrong to assume that what Andrew meant here is the same thing the author means in the purpose statement at the end of the Fourth Gospel, 20:31. The issue here is not whether the disciples’ initial faith in Jesus as Messiah was genuine or not, but whether their concept of who Jesus was grew and developed progressively as they spent time following him, until finally after his resurrection it is affirmed in the climactic statement of John’s Gospel, the affirmation of Thomas in 20:28.

[1:41]  ³⁹⁸ tn Both Greek “Christ” and Hebrew and Aramaic “Messiah” mean “the one who has been anointed.”

[1:41]  sn This is a parenthetical note by the author. See the note on Christ in 1:20.

[1:42]  ³⁹⁹ tn Grk “He brought him”; both referents (Andrew, Simon) have been specified in the translation for clarity.

[1:42]  ⁴⁰⁰ tc The reading “Simon, son of John” is well attested in Ì^66,75,106 א B* L 33 pc it co. The majority of mss (A B² Ψ Ë^1,13 Ï) read “Simon, the son of Jonah” here instead, but that is perhaps an assimilation to Matt 16:17.

[1:42]  ⁴⁰¹ sn This is a parenthetical note by the author. The change of name from Simon to Cephas is indicative of the future role he will play. Only John among the gospel writers gives the Greek transliteration (Κηφᾶς, Khfas) of Simon’s new name, Qéphâ (which is Galilean Aramaic). Neither Πέτρος (Petros) in Greek nor Qéphâ in Aramaic is a normal proper name; it is more like a nickname.

[1:43]  ⁴⁰² tn Grk “he”; the referent (Jesus) has been specified in the translation for clarity. Jesus is best taken as the subject of εὑρίσκει (Jeuriskei), since Peter would scarcely have wanted to go to Galilee.

[1:43]  ⁴⁰³ sn No explanation is given for why Jesus wanted to set out for Galilee, but probably he wanted to go to the wedding at Cana (about a two day trip).

[1:43]  ⁴⁰⁴ tn Grk “and he.” Because of the length and complexity of the Greek sentence, a new sentence was started here in the translation.

[1:43]  ⁴⁰⁵ tn Grk “and Jesus said.”

[1:44]  ⁴⁰⁶ sn Although the author thought of the town as in Galilee (12:21), Bethsaida technically was in Gaulanitis (Philip the Tetrarch’s territory) across from Herod’s Galilee. There may have been two places called Bethsaida, or this may merely reflect popular imprecision – locally it was considered part of Galilee, even though it was just east of the Jordan river. This territory was heavily Gentile (which may explain why Andrew and Philip both have Gentile names).

[1:44]  ⁴⁰⁷ tn Probably ἀπό (apo) indicates “originally from” in the sense of birthplace rather than current residence; Mark 1:21, 29 seems to locate the home of Andrew and Peter at Capernaum. The entire remark (v. 44) amounts to a parenthetical comment by the author.

[1:45]  ⁴⁰⁸ sn Nathanael is traditionally identified with Bartholomew (although John never describes him as such). He appears here after Philip, while in all lists of the twelve except in Acts 1:13, Bartholomew follows Philip. Also, the Aramaic Bar-tolmai means “son of Tolmai,” the surname; the man almost certainly had another name.

[1:45]  ⁴⁰⁹ tn “Also” is not in the Greek text, but is implied.

[1:46]  ⁴¹⁰ tn Grk “And Nathanael.”

[1:46]  ⁴¹¹ tn Grk “said to him.”

[1:46]  ⁴¹² sn Can anything good come out of Nazareth? may be a local proverb expressing jealousy among the towns.

[1:46]  map For location see Map1 D3; Map2 C2; Map3 D5; Map4 C1; Map5 G3.

[1:46]  ⁴¹³ tn Grk “And Philip said to him.”

[1:47]  ⁴¹⁴ tn Grk “said about him.”

[1:47]  ⁴¹⁵ tn Or “treachery.”

[1:47]  sn An allusion to Ps 32:2.

[1:48]  ⁴¹⁶ tn Grk “answered and said to him.” This is somewhat redundant in English and has been simplified in the translation to “replied.”

[1:48]  ⁴¹⁷ sn Many have speculated about what Nathanael was doing under the fig tree. Meditating on the Messiah who was to come? A good possibility, since the fig tree was used as shade for teaching or studying by the later rabbis (Ecclesiastes Rabbah 5:11). Also, the fig tree was symbolic for messianic peace and plenty (Mic 4:4, Zech 3:10.)

[1:49]  ⁴¹⁸ tn Although βασιλεύς (basileus) lacks the article it is definite due to contextual and syntactical considerations. See ExSyn 263.

[1:49]  ⁴¹⁹ 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.

[1:50]  ⁴²⁰ tn Grk “answered and said to him.” This has been simplified in the translation to “said to him.”

[1:50]  ⁴²¹ sn What are the greater things Jesus had in mind? In the narrative this forms an excellent foreshadowing of the miraculous signs which began at Cana of Galilee.

[1:51]  ⁴²² tn Grk “and he said to him.”

[1:51]  ⁴²³ tn Grk “Truly, truly, I say to you.”

[1:51]  ⁴²⁴ sn The title Son of Man appears 13 times in John’s Gospel. It is associated especially with the themes of crucifixion (3:14; 8:28), revelation (6:27; 6:53), and eschatological authority (5:27; 9:35). The title as used in John’s Gospel has for its background the son of man figure who appears in Dan 7:13-14 and is granted universal regal authority. Thus for the author, the emphasis in this title is not on Jesus’ humanity, but on his heavenly origin and divine authority.

[2:1]  ⁴²⁵ map For location see Map1 C3; Map2 D2; Map3 C5.

[2:1]  ⁴²⁶ sn Cana in Galilee was not a very well-known place. It is mentioned only here, in 4:46, and 21:2, and nowhere else in the NT. Josephus (Life 16 [86]) says he once had his quarters there. The probable location is present day Khirbet Cana, 8 mi (14 km) north of Nazareth, or Khirbet Kenna, 4 mi (7 km) northeast of Nazareth.

[2:1]  ⁴²⁷ tn Grk “in Galilee, and Jesus’ mother.”

[2:2]  ⁴²⁸ sn There is no clue to the identity of the bride and groom, but in all probability either relatives or friends of Jesus’ family were involved, since Jesus’ mother and both Jesus and his disciples were invited to the celebration. The attitude of Mary in approaching Jesus and asking him to do something when the wine ran out also suggests that familial obligations were involved.

[2:3]  ⁴²⁹ tn The word “left” is not in the Greek text but is implied.

[2:3]  sn They have no wine left. On the backgrounds of this miracle J. D. M. Derrett pointed out among other things the strong element of reciprocity about weddings in the Ancient Near East. It was possible in certain circumstances to take legal action against the man who failed to provide an appropriate wedding gift. The bridegroom and family here might have been involved in a financial liability for failing to provide adequately for their guests (“Water into Wine,” BZ 7 [1963]: 80-97). Was Mary asking for a miracle? There is no evidence that Jesus had worked any miracles prior to this (although this is an argument from silence). Some think Mary was only reporting the situation, or (as Calvin thought) asking Jesus to give some godly exhortations to the guests and thus relieve the bridegroom’s embarrassment. But the words, and the reply of Jesus in v. 4, seem to imply more. It is not inconceivable that Mary, who had probably been witness to the events of the preceding days, or at least was aware of them, knew that her son’s public career was beginning. She also knew the supernatural events surrounding his birth, and the prophetic words of the angel, and of Simeon and Anna in the temple at Jesus’ dedication. In short, she had good reason to believe Jesus to be the Messiah, and now his public ministry had begun. In this kind of context, her request does seem more significant.

[2:4]  ⁴³⁰ tn Grk “and Jesus said to her.”

[2:4]  ⁴³¹ sn The term Woman is Jesus’ normal, polite way of addressing women (Matt 15:28, Luke 13:12; John 4:21; 8:10; 19:26; 20:15). But it is unusual for a son to address his mother with this term. The custom in both Hebrew (or Aramaic) and Greek would be for a son to use a qualifying adjective or title. Is there significance in Jesus’ use here? It probably indicates that a new relationship existed between Jesus and his mother once he had embarked on his public ministry. He was no longer or primarily only her son, but the “Son of Man.” This is also suggested by the use of the same term in 19:26 in the scene at the cross, where the beloved disciple is “given” to Mary as her “new” son.

[2:4]  ⁴³² tn Grk “Woman, what to me and to you?” (an idiom). The phrase τί ἐμοὶ καὶ σοί, γύναι (ti emoi kai soi, gunai) is Semitic in origin. The equivalent Hebrew expression in the Old Testament had two basic meanings: (1) When one person was unjustly bothering another, the injured party could say “What to me and to you?” meaning, “What have I done to you that you should do this to me?” (Judg 11:12, 2 Chr 35:21, 1 Kgs 17:18). (2) When someone was asked to get involved in a matter he felt was no business of his, he could say to the one asking him, “What to me and to you?” meaning, “That is your business, how am I involved?” (2 Kgs 3:13, Hos 14:8). Option (1) implies hostility, while option (2) implies merely disengagement. Mere disengagement is almost certainly to be understood here as better fitting the context (although some of the Greek Fathers took the remark as a rebuke to Mary, such a rebuke is unlikely).

[2:4]  ⁴³³ tn Grk “my hour” (referring to the time of Jesus’ crucifixion and return to the Father).

[2:4]  sn The Greek word translated time (ὥρα, Jwra) occurs in John 2:4; 4:21, 23; 5:25, 28, 29; 7:30; 8:20; 12:23, 27; 13:1; 16:25; and 17:1. It is a reference to the special period in Jesus’ life when he was to leave this world and return to the Father (13:1); the hour when the Son of man is glorified (17:1). This is accomplished through his suffering, death, resurrection (and ascension – though this last is not emphasized by John). John 7:30 and 8:20 imply that Jesus’ arrest and death are included. John 12:23 and 17:1, referring to the glorification of the Son, imply that the resurrection and ascension are included as part of the “hour.” In John 2:4 Jesus’ remark to his mother indicates that the time for this self-manifestation has not yet arrived; his identity as Messiah is not yet to be publicly revealed.

[2:5]  ⁴³⁴ tn The pronoun “it” is not in the Greek text, but has been supplied. Direct objects in Greek were often omitted when clear from the context.

[2:6]  ⁴³⁵ tn Grk “for the purification of the Jews.”

[2:6]  ⁴³⁶ tn Grk “holding two or three metretes” (about 75 to 115 liters). Each of the pots held 2 or 3 μετρηταί (metrhtai). A μετρητῆς (metrhths) was about 9 gallons (40 liters); thus each jar held 18-27 gallons (80-120 liters) and the total volume of liquid involved was 108-162 gallons (480-720 liters).

[2:6]  sn Significantly, these jars held water for Jewish ceremonial washing (purification rituals). The water of Jewish ritual purification has become the wine of the new messianic age. The wine may also be, after the fashion of Johannine double meanings, a reference to the wine of the Lord’s Supper. A number have suggested this, but there does not seem to be anything in the immediate context which compels this; it seems more related to how frequently a given interpreter sees references to the sacraments in John’s Gospel as a whole.

[2:7]  ⁴³⁷ tn Grk “them” (it is clear from the context that the servants are addressed).

[2:8]  ⁴³⁸ tn Or “the master of ceremonies.”

[2:9]  ⁴³⁹ tn Grk “And when.” Because of the difference between Greek style, which often begins sentences or clauses with “and,” and English style, which generally does not, δέ (de) has not been translated here.

[2:9]  ⁴⁴⁰ tn Grk “and he did not know where it came from.”

[2:9]  ⁴⁴¹ tn Grk “the head steward”; here the repetition of the phrase is somewhat redundant in English and the pronoun (“he”) is substituted in the translation.

[2:10]  ⁴⁴² tn Grk “every man” (in a generic sense).

[2:10]  ⁴⁴³ tn Or “poorer.”

[2:10]  ⁴⁴⁴ tn Grk “when they”; the referent (the guests) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[2:11]  ⁴⁴⁵ tn This sentence in Greek involves an object-complement construction. The force can be either “Jesus did this as,” or possibly “Jesus made this to be.” The latter translation accents not only Jesus’ power but his sovereignty too. Cf. also 4:54 where the same construction occurs.

[2:11]  ⁴⁴⁶ map For location see Map1 C3; Map2 D2; Map3 C5.

[2:11]  ⁴⁴⁷ tn Grk “in Cana of Galilee, and he revealed.”

[2:11]  ⁴⁴⁸ tn Or “his disciples trusted in him,” or “his disciples put their faith in him.”

[2:12]  ⁴⁴⁹ sn Verse 12 is merely a transitional note in the narrative (although Capernaum does not lie on the direct route to Jerusalem from Cana). Nothing is mentioned in John’s Gospel at this point about anything Jesus said or did there (although later his teaching is mentioned, see 6:59). From the synoptics it is clear that Capernaum was a center of Jesus’ Galilean ministry and might even be called “his own town” (Matt 9:1). The royal official whose son Jesus healed (John 4:46-54) was from Capernaum. He may have heard Jesus speak there, or picked up the story about the miracle at Cana from one of Jesus’ disciples.

[2:12]  map For location see Map1 D2; Map2 C3; Map3 B2.

[2:12]  ⁴⁵⁰ sn With respect to Jesus’ brothers, the so-called Helvidian view is to be preferred (named after Helvidius, a 4th-century theologian). This view holds that the most natural way to understand the phrase is as a reference to children of Joseph and Mary after the birth of Jesus. Other views are that of Epiphanius (they were children of Joseph by a former marriage) or Jerome (they were cousins). The tradition of Mary’s perpetual virginity appeared in the 2nd century and is difficult to explain (as J. H. Bernard, St. John [ICC], 1:85, points out) if some of her other children were prominent members of the early church (e.g., James of Jerusalem). But this is outweighed by the natural sense of the words.

[2:13]  ⁴⁵¹ tn Grk “the Passover of the Jews.” This is first of at least three (and possibly four) Passovers mentioned in John’s Gospel. If it is assumed that the Passovers appear in the Gospel in their chronological order (and following a date of a.d. 33 for the crucifixion), this would be the Passover of the spring of a.d. 30, the first of Jesus’ public ministry. There is a clear reference to another Passover in 6:4, and another still in 11:55, 12:1, 13:1, 18:28, 39, and 19:14. The latter would be the Passover of a.d. 33. There is a possibility that 5:1 also refers to a Passover, in which case it would be the second of Jesus’ public ministry (a.d. 31), while 6:4 would refer to the third (a.d. 32) and the remaining references would refer to the final Passover at the time of the crucifixion. It is entirely possible, however, that the Passovers occurring in the Fourth Gospel are not intended to be understood as listed in chronological sequence. If the material of the Fourth Gospel originally existed in the form of homilies or sermons by the Apostle John on the life and ministry of Jesus, the present arrangement would not have to be in strict chronological order (it does not explicitly claim to be). In this case the Passover mentioned in 2:13, for example, might actually be later in Jesus’ public ministry than it might at first glance appear. This leads, however, to a discussion of an even greater problem in the passage, the relationship of the temple cleansing in John’s Gospel to the similar account in the synoptic gospels.

[2:13]  ⁴⁵² map For location see Map5 B1; Map6 F3; Map7 E2; Map8 F2; Map10 B3; JP1 F4; JP2 F4; JP3 F4; JP4 F4.

[2:14]  ⁴⁵³ sn John 2:14-22. Does John’s account of the temple cleansing describe the same event as the synoptic gospels describe, or a separate event? The other accounts of the cleansing of the temple are Matt 21:12-13; Mark 11:15-17; and Luke 19:45-46. None are as long as the Johannine account. The fullest of the synoptic accounts is Mark’s. John’s account differs from Mark’s in the mention of sheep and oxen, the mention of the whip of cords, the Greek word κερματιστῆς (kermatisths) for money changer (the synoptics use κολλυβιστῆς [kollubisths], which John mentions in 2:15), the scattering of the coins (2:15), and the command by Jesus, “Take these things away from here!” The word for overturned in John is ἀναστρεφω (anastrefw), while Matthew and Mark use καταστρεφω (katastrefw; Luke does not mention the moneychangers at all). The synoptics all mention that Jesus quoted Isa 56:7 followed by Jer 7:11. John mentions no citation of scripture at all, but says that later the disciples remembered Ps 69:9. John does not mention, as does Mark, Jesus’ prohibition on carrying things through the temple (i.e., using it for a shortcut). But the most important difference is one of time: In John the cleansing appears as the first great public act of Jesus’ ministry, while in the synoptics it is virtually the last. The most common solution of the problem, which has been endlessly discussed among NT scholars, is to say there was only one cleansing, and that it took place, as the synoptics record it, at the end of Jesus’ ministry. In the synoptics it appears to be the event that finalized the opposition of the high priest, and precipitated the arrest of Jesus. According to this view, John’s placing of the event at the opening of Jesus’ ministry is due to his general approach; it was fitting ‘theologically’ for Jesus to open his ministry this way, so this is the way John records it. Some have overstated the case for one cleansing and John’s placing of it at the opening of Jesus’ public ministry, however. For example W. Barclay stated: “John, as someone has said, is more interested in the truth than in the facts. He was not interested to tell men when Jesus cleansed the Temple; he was supremely interested in telling men that Jesus did cleanse the Temple” (John [DSBS], 94). But this is not the impression one gets by a reading of John’s Gospel: The evangelist seems to go out of his way to give details and facts, including notes of time and place. To argue as Barclay does that John is interested in truth apart from the facts is to set up a false dichotomy. Why should one have to assume, in any case, that there could have been only one cleansing of the temple? This account in John is found in a large section of nonsynoptic material. Apart from the work of John the Baptist – and even this is markedly different from the references in the synoptics – nothing else in the first five chapters of John’s Gospel is found in any of the synoptics. It is certainly not impossible that John took one isolated episode from the conclusion of Jesus’ earthly ministry and inserted it into his own narrative in a place which seemed appropriate according to his purposes. But in view of the differences between John and the synoptics, in both wording and content, as well as setting and time, it is at least possible that the event in question actually occurred twice (unless one begins with the presupposition that the Fourth Gospel is nonhistorical anyway). In support of two separate cleansings of the temple, it has been suggested that Jesus’ actions on this occasion were not permanent in their result, and after (probably) 3 years the status quo in the temple courts had returned to normal. And at this time early in Jesus’ ministry, he was virtually unknown. Such an action as he took on this occasion would have created a stir, and evoked the response John records in 2:18-22, but that is probably about all, especially if Jesus’ actions met with approval among part of the populace. But later in Jesus’ ministry, when he was well-known, and vigorously opposed by the high-priestly party in Jerusalem, his actions might have brought forth another, harsher response. It thus appears possible to argue for two separate cleansings of the temple as well as a single one relocated by John to suit his own purposes. Which then is more probable? On the whole, more has been made of the differences between John’s account and the synoptic accounts than perhaps should have been. After all, the synoptic accounts also differ considerably from one another, yet few scholars would be willing to posit four cleansings of the temple as an explanation for this. While it is certainly possible that the author did not intend by his positioning of the temple cleansing to correct the synoptics’ timing of the event, but to highlight its significance for the course of Jesus’ ministry, it still appears somewhat more probable that John has placed the event he records in the approximate period of Jesus’ public ministry in which it did occur, that is, within the first year or so of Jesus’ public ministry. The statement of the Jewish authorities recorded by the author (this temple has been under construction for forty-six years) would tend to support an earlier rather than a later date for the temple cleansing described by John, since 46 years from the beginning of construction on Herod’s temple in ca. 19 b.c. (the date varies somewhat in different sources) would be around a.d. 27. This is not conclusive proof, however.

[2:14]  ⁴⁵⁴ tn Grk “in the temple.”

[2:14]  sn The merchants (those who were selling) would have been located in the Court of the Gentiles.

[2:14]  ⁴⁵⁵ tn Grk “the money changers sitting”; the words “at tables” are not in the Greek text, but are implied.

[2:15]  ⁴⁵⁶ tc Several witnesses, two of which are quite ancient (Ì^66,75 L N ˹ 33 565 892 1241 al lat), have ὡς (Jws, “like”) before φραγέλλιον (fragellion, “whip”). A decision based on external evidence would be difficult to make because the shorter reading also has excellent witnesses, as well as the majority, on its side (א A B Θ Ψ Ë¹³ Ï co). Internal evidence, though, leans toward the shorter reading. Scribes tended to add to the text, and the addition of ὡς here clearly softens the assertion of the evangelist: Instead of making a whip of cords, Jesus made “[something] like a whip of cords.”

[2:15]  ⁴⁵⁷ tn Grk “the temple.”

[2:15]  ⁴⁵⁸ sn Because of the imperial Roman portraits they carried, Roman denarii and Attic drachmas were not permitted to be used in paying the half-shekel temple-tax (the Jews considered the portraits idolatrous). The money changers exchanged these coins for legal Tyrian coinage at a small profit.

[2:16]  ⁴⁵⁹ tn Or (perhaps) “Stop making.”

[2:16]  ⁴⁶⁰ tn Or “a house of merchants” (an allusion to Zech 14:21).

[2:16]  sn A marketplace. Zech 14:20-21, in context, is clearly a picture of the messianic kingdom. The Hebrew word translated “Canaanite” may also be translated “merchant” or “trader.” Read in this light, Zech 14:21 states that there will be no merchant in the house of the Lord in that day (the day of the Lord, at the establishment of the messianic kingdom). And what would Jesus’ words (and actions) in cleansing the temple have suggested to the observers? That Jesus was fulfilling messianic expectations would have been obvious – especially to the disciples, who had just seen the miracle at Cana with all its messianic implications.

[2:17]  ⁴⁶¹ tn Or “Fervent devotion to your house.”

[2:17]  ⁴⁶² sn A quotation from Ps 69:9.

[2:18]  ⁴⁶³ 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 authorities or leaders in Jerusalem. (For further information see R. G. Bratcher, “‘The Jews’ in the Gospel of John,” BT 26 [1975]: 401-9.)

[2:18]  ⁴⁶⁴ tn Grk “answered and said to him.”

[2:18]  ⁴⁶⁵ sn The request “What sign can you show us” by Jesus’ adversaries was a request for a defense of his actions – a mark of divine authentication. Whether this was a request for a miracle is not entirely clear. Jesus never obliged such a request. Yet, ironically, the only sign the Jewish leadership will get is that predicted by Jesus in 2:19 – his crucifixion and resurrection. Cf. the “sign of Jonah” in the synoptics (Matt 12:39, 40; Luke 11:29-32).

[2:19]  ⁴⁶⁶ tn Grk “answered and said to them.”

[2:19]  ⁴⁶⁷ tn The imperative here is really more than a simple conditional imperative (= “if you destroy”); its semantic force here is more like the ironical imperative found in the prophets (Amos 4:4, Isa 8:9) = “Go ahead and do this and see what happens.”

[2:20]  ⁴⁶⁸ tn See the note on this phrase in v. 18.

[2:20]  ⁴⁶⁹ tn A close parallel to the aorist οἰκοδομήθη (oikodomhqh) can be found in Ezra 5:16 (LXX), where it is clear from the following verb that the construction had not yet been completed. Thus the phrase has been translated “This temple has been under construction for forty-six years.” Some, however, see the term ναός (naos) here as referring only to the sanctuary and the aorist verb as consummative, so that the meaning would be “this temple was built forty-six years ago” (so ExSyn 560-61). Ultimately in context the logic of the authorities’ reply appears to fit more naturally if it compares length of time for original construction with length of time to reconstruct it.

[2:20]  ⁴⁷⁰ sn According to Josephus (Ant. 15.11.1 [15.380]), work on this temple was begun in the 18th year of Herod the Great’s reign, which would have been ca. 19 b.c. (The reference in the Ant. is probably more accurate than the date given in J. W. 1.21.1 [1.401]). Forty-six years later would be around the Passover of a.d. 27/28.

[2:21]  ⁴⁷¹ tn Grk “that one”; the referent (Jesus) has been specified in the translation for clarity. This Greek term is frequently used as a way of referring to Jesus in the Johannine letters (cf. 1 John 2:6; 3:3, 5, 7, 16; 4:17).

[2:21]  ⁴⁷² tn The genitive “of his body” (τοῦ σώματος αὐτοῦ, tou swmato" autou) is a genitive of apposition, clarifying which temple Jesus was referring to. Thus, Jesus not only was referring to his physical resurrection, but also to his participation in the resurrection process. The New Testament thus records the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit as all performing the miracle of Christ's resurrection.

[2:21]  sn Jesus was speaking about the temple of his body. For the author, the temple is not just the building, it is Jesus’ resurrected body. Compare the nonlocalized worship mentioned in John 4:21-23, and also Rev 21:22 (there is to be no temple in the New Jerusalem; the Lord and the Lamb are its temple). John points to the fact that, as the place where men go in order to meet God, the temple has been supplanted and replaced by Jesus himself, in whose resurrected person people may now encounter God (see John 1:18, 14:6).

[2:22]  ⁴⁷³ sn They believed the scripture is probably an anaphoric reference to Ps 69:9 (69:10 LXX), quoted in John 2:17 above. Presumably the disciples did not remember Ps 69:9 on the spot, but it was a later insight.

[2:22]  ⁴⁷⁴ tn Or “statement”; Grk “word.”

[2:23]  ⁴⁷⁵ tn Grk “he”; the referent (Jesus) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[2:23]  ⁴⁷⁶ map For location see Map5 B1; Map6 F3; Map7 E2; Map8 F2; Map10 B3; JP1 F4; JP2 F4; JP3 F4; JP4 F4.

[2:23]  ⁴⁷⁷ sn Because they saw the miraculous signs he was doing. The issue here is not whether their faith was genuine or not, but what its object was. These individuals, after seeing the miracles, believed Jesus to be the Messiah. They most likely saw in him a political-eschatological figure of some sort. That does not, however, mean that their concept of “Messiah” was the same as Jesus’ own, or the author’s.

[2:24]  ⁴⁷⁸ tn Grk “all.” The word “people” has been supplied for clarity, since the Greek word πάντας (pantas) is masculine plural (thus indicating people rather than things).

[2:25]  ⁴⁷⁹ tn The masculine form has been retained here in the translation to maintain the connection with “a man of the Pharisees” in 3:1, with the understanding that the reference is to people of both genders.

[2:25]  ⁴⁸⁰ tn See previous note on “man” in this verse.

[3:1]  ⁴⁸¹ sn See the note on Pharisees in 1:24.

[3:1]  ⁴⁸² tn Grk “a ruler of the Jews” (denoting a member of the Sanhedrin, the highest legal, legislative, and judicial body among the Jews).

[3:2]  ⁴⁸³ tn Grk “him”; the referent (Jesus) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[3:2]  ⁴⁸⁴ tn Or “during the night.”

[3:2]  sn Possibly Nicodemus came…at night because he was afraid of public association with Jesus, or he wanted a lengthy discussion without interruptions; no explanation for the timing of the interview is given by the author. But the timing is significant for John in terms of the light-darkness motif – compare John 9:4, 11:10, 13:30 (especially), 19:39, and 21:3. Out of the darkness of his life and religiosity Nicodemus came to the Light of the world. The author probably had multiple meanings or associations in mind here, as is often the case.

[3:2]  ⁴⁸⁵ sn The reference to signs (σημεῖα, shmeia) forms a link with John 2:23-25. Those people in Jerusalem believed in Jesus because of the signs he had performed. Nicodemus had apparently seen them too. But for Nicodemus all the signs meant is that Jesus was a great teacher sent from God. His approach to Jesus was well-intentioned but theologically inadequate; he had failed to grasp the messianic implications of the miraculous signs.

[3:3]  ⁴⁸⁶ tn Grk “answered and said to him.”

[3:3]  ⁴⁸⁷ tn Grk “Truly, truly, I say to you.”

[3:3]  ⁴⁸⁸ tn The word ἄνωθεν (anwqen) has a double meaning, either “again” (in which case it is synonymous with παλίν [palin]) or “from above” (BDAG 92 s.v. ἄνωθεν). This is a favorite technique of the author of the Fourth Gospel, and it is lost in almost all translations at this point. John uses the word 5 times, in 3:3, 7; 3:31; 19:11 and 23. In the latter 3 cases the context makes clear that it means “from above.” Here (3:3, 7) it could mean either, but the primary meaning intended by Jesus is “from above.” Nicodemus apparently understood it the other way, which explains his reply, “How can a man be born when he is old? He can’t enter his mother’s womb a second time and be born, can he?” The author uses the technique of the “misunderstood question” often to bring out a particularly important point: Jesus says something which is misunderstood by the disciples or (as here) someone else, which then gives Jesus the opportunity to explain more fully and in more detail what he really meant.

[3:3]  sn Or born again. The Greek word ἄνωθεν (anwqen) can mean both “again” and “from above,” giving rise to Nicodemus’ misunderstanding about a second physical birth (v. 4).

[3:3]  ⁴⁸⁹ sn What does Jesus’ statement about not being able to see the kingdom of God mean within the framework of John’s Gospel? John uses the word kingdom (βασιλεία, basileia) only 5 times (3:3, 5; 18:36 [3x]). Only here is it qualified with the phrase of God. The fact that John does not stress the concept of the kingdom of God does not mean it is absent from his theology, however. Remember the messianic implications found in John 2, both the wedding and miracle at Cana and the cleansing of the temple. For Nicodemus, the term must surely have brought to mind the messianic kingdom which Messiah was supposed to bring. But Nicodemus had missed precisely this point about who Jesus was. It was the Messiah himself with whom Nicodemus was speaking. Whatever Nicodemus understood, it is clear that the point is this: He misunderstood Jesus’ words. He over-literalized them, and thought Jesus was talking about repeated physical birth, when he was in fact referring to new spiritual birth.

[3:4]  ⁴⁹⁰ tn The grammatical structure of the question in Greek presupposes a negative reply.

[3:5]  ⁴⁹¹ tn Grk “Truly, truly, I say to you.”

[3:5]  ⁴⁹² tn Or “born of water and wind” (the same Greek word, πνεύματος [pneumatos], may be translated either “spirit/Spirit” or “wind”).

[3:5]  sn Jesus’ somewhat enigmatic statement points to the necessity of being born “from above,” because water and wind/spirit/Spirit come from above. Isaiah 44:3-5 and Ezek 37:9-10 are pertinent examples of water and wind as life-giving symbols of the Spirit of God in his work among people. Both occur in contexts that deal with the future restoration of Israel as a nation prior to the establishment of the messianic kingdom. It is therefore particularly appropriate that Jesus should introduce them in a conversation about entering the kingdom of God. Note that the Greek word πνεύματος is anarthrous (has no article) in v. 5. This does not mean that spirit in the verse should be read as a direct reference to the Holy Spirit, but that both water and wind are figures (based on passages in the OT, which Nicodemus, the teacher of Israel should have known) that represent the regenerating work of the Spirit in the lives of men and women.

[3:6]  ⁴⁹³ sn What is born of the flesh is flesh, i.e., what is born of physical heritage is physical. (It is interesting to compare this terminology with that of the dialogue in John 4, especially 4:23, 24.) For John the “flesh” (σάρξ, sarx) emphasizes merely the weakness and mortality of the creature – a neutral term, not necessarily sinful as in Paul. This is confirmed by the reference in John 1:14 to the Logos becoming “flesh.” The author avoids associating sinfulness with the incarnate Christ.

[3:7]  ⁴⁹⁴ tn “All” has been supplied to indicate the plural pronoun in the Greek text.

[3:7]  ⁴⁹⁵ tn Or “born again.” The same Greek word with the same double meaning occurs in v. 3.

[3:8]  ⁴⁹⁶ tn The same Greek word, πνεύματος (pneumatos), may be translated “wind” or “spirit.”

[3:8]  ⁴⁹⁷ 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.

[3:9]  ⁴⁹⁸ tn Grk “Nicodemus answered and said to him.”

[3:9]  ⁴⁹⁹ sn “How can these things be?” is Nicodemus’ answer. It is clear that at this time he has still not grasped what Jesus is saying. Note also that this is the last appearance of Nicodemus in the dialogue. Having served the purpose of the author, at this point he disappears from the scene. As a character in the narrative, he has served to illustrate the prevailing Jewish misunderstanding of Jesus’ teaching about the necessity of a new, spiritual birth from above. Whatever parting words Nicodemus might have had with Jesus, the author does not record them.

[3:10]  ⁵⁰⁰ tn Grk “Jesus answered and said to him.”

[3:10]  ⁵⁰¹ sn Jesus’ question “Are you the teacher of Israel and yet you don’t understand these things?” implies that Nicodemus had enough information at his disposal from the OT scriptures to have understood Jesus’ statements about the necessity of being born from above by the regenerating work of the Spirit. Isa 44:3-5 and Ezek 37:9-10 are passages Nicodemus might have known which would have given him insight into Jesus’ words. Another significant passage which contains many of these concepts is Prov 30:4-5.

[3:11]  ⁵⁰² tn Grk “Truly, truly, I say to you.”

[3:11]  ⁵⁰³ tn Here καί (kai) has been translated as “but” to show the contrast present in the context.

[3:11]  ⁵⁰⁴ tn The word “people” is not in the Greek text, but is supplied in the translation to indicate that the verb is second person plural (referring to more than Nicodemus alone).

[3:11]  ⁵⁰⁵ sn Note the remarkable similarity of Jesus’ testimony to the later testimony of the Apostle John himself in 1 John 1:2: “And we have seen and testify and report to you the eternal life which was with the Father and was revealed to us.” This is only one example of how thoroughly the author’s own thoughts were saturated with the words of Jesus (and also how difficult it is to distinguish the words of Jesus from the words of the author in the Fourth Gospel).

[3:12]  ⁵⁰⁶ tn The word “people” is not in the Greek text, but is supplied to indicate that the verb is second person plural (referring to more than Nicodemus alone).

[3:12]  ⁵⁰⁷ sn Obviously earthly things and heavenly things are in contrast, but what is the contrast? What are earthly things which Jesus has just spoken to Nicodemus? And through him to others – this is not the first instance of the plural pronoun, see v. 7, you must all. Since Nicodemus began with a plural (we know, v. 2) Jesus continues it, and through Nicodemus addresses a broader audience. It makes most sense to take this as a reference to the things Jesus has just said (and the things he is about to say, vv. 13-15). If this is the case (and it seems the most natural explanation) then earthly things are not necessarily strictly physical things, but are so called because they take place on earth, in contrast to things like v. 16, which take place in heaven. Some have added the suggestion that the things are called earthly because physical analogies (birth, wind, water) are used to describe them. This is possible, but it seems more probable that Jesus calls these things earthly because they happen on earth (even though they are spiritual things). In the context, taking earthly things as referring to the words Jesus has just spoken fits with the fact that Nicodemus did not believe. And he would not after hearing heavenly things either, unless he first believed in the earthly things – which included the necessity of a regenerating work from above, by the Holy Spirit.

[3:13]  ⁵⁰⁸ tn Grk “And no one.”

[3:13]  ⁵⁰⁹ sn The verb ascended is a perfect tense in Greek (ἀναβέβηκεν, anabebhken) which seems to look at a past, completed event. (This is not as much of a problem for those who take Jesus’ words to end at v. 12, and these words to be a comment by the author, looking back on Jesus’ ascension.) As a saying of Jesus, these words are a bit harder to explain. Note, however, the lexical similarities with 1:51: “ascending,” “descending,” and “son of man.” Here, though, the ascent and descent is accomplished by the Son himself, not the angels as in 1:51. There is no need to limit this saying to Jesus’ ascent following the resurrection, however; the point of the Jacob story (Gen 28), which seems to be the background for 1:51, is the freedom of communication and relationship between God and men (a major theme of John’s Gospel). This communication comes through the angels in Gen 28 (and John 1:51); but here (most appropriately) it comes directly through the Son of Man. Although Jesus could be referring to a prior ascent, after an appearance as the preincarnate Son of Man, more likely he is simply pointing out that no one from earth has ever gone up to heaven and come down again. The Son, who has come down from heaven, is the only one who has been ‘up’ there. In both Jewish intertestamental literature and later rabbinic accounts, Moses is portrayed as ascending to heaven to receive the Torah and descending to distribute it to men (e.g., Targum Ps 68:19.) In contrast to these Jewish legends, the Son is the only one who has ever made the ascent and descent.

[3:13]  ⁵¹⁰ tc Most witnesses, including a few important ones (A^[*^] Θ Ψ 050 Ë^1,13 Ï latt sy^c,p,h), have at the end of this verse “the one who is in heaven” (ὁ ὢν ἐν τῷ οὐρανῷ, Jo wn en tw ouranw). A few others have variations on this phrase, such as “who was in heaven” (e sy^c), or “the one who is from heaven” (0141 pc sy^s). The witnesses normally considered the best, along with several others, lack the phrase in its entirety (Ì^66,75 א B L T W^s 083 086 33 1241 pc co). On the one hand, if the reading ὁ ὢν ἐν τῷ οὐρανῷ is authentic it may suggest that while Jesus was speaking to Nicodemus he spoke of himself as in heaven even while he was on earth. If that is the case, one could see why variations from this hard saying arose: “who was in heaven,” “the one who is from heaven,” and omission of the clause. At the same time, such a saying could be interpreted (though with difficulty) as part of the narrator’s comments rather than Jesus’ statement to Nicodemus, alleviating the problem. And if v. 13 was viewed in early times as the evangelist’s statement, “the one who is in heaven” could have crept into the text through a marginal note. Other internal evidence suggests that this saying may be authentic. The adjectival participle, ὁ ὤν, is used in the Fourth Gospel more than any other NT book (though the Apocalypse comes in a close second), and frequently with reference to Jesus (1:18; 6:46; 8:47). It may be looking back to the LXX of Exod 3:14 (ἐγώ εἰμι ὁ ὤν). Especially since this exact construction is not necessary to communicate the location of the Son of Man, its presence in many witnesses here may suggest authenticity. Further, John uses the singular of οὐρανός (ourano", “heaven”) in all 18 instances of the word in this Gospel, and all but twice with the article (only 1:32 and 6:58 are anarthrous, and even in the latter there is significant testimony to the article). At the same time, the witnesses that lack this clause are very weighty and must not be discounted. Generally speaking, if other factors are equal, the reading of such mss should be preferred. And internally, it could be argued that ὁ ὤν is the most concise way to speak of the Son of Man in heaven at that time (without the participle the point would be more ambiguous). Further, the articular singular οὐρανός is already used twice in this verse, thus sufficiently prompting scribes to add the same in the longer reading. This combination of factors suggests that ὁ ὢν ἐν τῷ οὐρανῷ is not a genuine Johannism. Further intrinsic evidence against the longer reading relates to the evangelist’s purposes: If he intended v. 13 to be his own comments rather than Jesus’ statement, his switch back to Jesus’ words in v. 14 (for the lifting up of the Son of Man is still seen as in the future) seems inexplicable. The reading “who is in heaven” thus seems to be too hard. All things considered, as intriguing as the longer reading is, it seems almost surely to have been a marginal gloss added inadvertently to the text in the process of transmission. For an argument in favor of the longer reading, see David Alan Black, “The Text of John 3:13,” GTJ 6 (1985): 49-66.

[3:13]  sn See the note on the title Son of Man in 1:51.

[3:14]  ⁵¹¹ tn Grk “And just as.”

[3:14]  ⁵¹² sn Or the snake, referring to the bronze serpent mentioned in Num 21:9.

[3:14]  ⁵¹³ sn An allusion to Num 21:5-9.

[3:14]  ⁵¹⁴ sn So must the Son of Man be lifted up. This is ultimately a prediction of Jesus’ crucifixion. Nicodemus could not have understood this, but John’s readers, the audience to whom the Gospel is addressed, certainly could have (compare the wording of John 12:32). In John, being lifted up refers to one continuous action of ascent, beginning with the cross but ending at the right hand of the Father. Step 1 is Jesus’ death; step 2 is his resurrection; and step 3 is the ascension back to heaven. It is the upward swing of the “pendulum” which began with the incarnation, the descent of the Word become flesh from heaven to earth (cf. Paul in Phil 2:5-11). See also the note on the title Son of Man in 1:51.

[3:15]  ⁵¹⁵ tn This is the first use of the term ζωὴν αἰώνιον (zwhn aiwnion) in the Gospel, although ζωή (zwh) in chap. 1 is to be understood in the same way without the qualifying αἰώνιος (aiwnios).

[3:15]  sn Some interpreters extend the quotation of Jesus’ words through v. 21.

[3:16]  ⁵¹⁶ 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]  ⁵¹⁷ 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]  ⁵¹⁸ 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]  ⁵¹⁹ 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]  ⁵²⁰ sn That is, “to judge the world to be guilty and liable to punishment.”

[3:18]  ⁵²¹ tn Grk “judged.”

[3:18]  ⁵²² tn Grk “judged.”

[3:18]  ⁵²³ tn See the note on the term “one and only” in 3:16.

[3:19]  ⁵²⁴ tn Or “this is the reason for God judging,” or “this is how judgment works.”

[3:19]  ⁵²⁵ tn Grk “and men,” but in a generic sense, referring to people of both genders (as “everyone” in v. 20 makes clear).

[3:21]  ⁵²⁶ sn John 3:16-21 provides an introduction to the (so-called) “realized” eschatology of the Fourth Gospel: Judgment has come; eternal life may be possessed now, in the present life, as well as in the future. The terminology “realized eschatology” was originally coined by E. Haenchen and used by J. Jeremias in discussion with C. H. Dodd, but is now characteristically used to describe Dodd’s own formulation. See L. Goppelt, Theology of the New Testament, 1:54, note 10, and R. E. Brown (John [AB], 1:cxvii-cxviii) for further discussion. Especially important to note is the element of choice portrayed in John’s Gospel. If there is a twofold reaction to Jesus in John’s Gospel, it should be emphasized that that reaction is very much dependent on a person’s choice, a choice that is influenced by his way of life, whether his deeds are wicked or are done in God (John 3:20-21). For John there is virtually no trace of determinism at the surface. Only when one looks beneath the surface does one find statements like “no one can come to me, unless the Father who sent me draws him” (John 6:44).

[3:22]  ⁵²⁷ tn This section is related loosely to the preceding by μετὰ ταῦτα (meta tauta). This constitutes an indefinite temporal reference; the intervening time is not specified.

[3:23]  ⁵²⁸ sn John refers to John the Baptist.

[3:23]  ⁵²⁹ 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]  ⁵³⁰ tn Or “people were continually coming.”

[3:23]  ⁵³¹ tn The words “to him” are not in the Greek text, but are implied.

[3:24]  ⁵³² sn This is a parenthetical note by the author.

[3:25]  ⁵³³ tc Was this dispute between the Baptist’s disciples and an individual Judean (᾿Ιουδαίου, Ioudaiou) or representatives of the Jewish authorities (᾿Ιουδαίων, Ioudaiwn)? There is good external support for the plural ᾿Ιουδαίων (Ì⁶⁶ א* Θ Ë^1,13 565 al latt), but the external evidence for the singular ᾿Ιουδαίου is slightly stronger ({Ì⁷⁵ א² A B L Ψ 33 1241 the majority of Byzantine minuscules and others}).

[3:25]  tn Or “a certain Judean.” Here BDAG 478 s.v. ᾿Ιουδαίος 2.a states, “Judean (with respect to birth, nationality, or cult).” If the emphasis is simply on the individual’s origin, “Judean” would be preferable since it designates a nationality or place of origin. However, the mention of ceremonial washing in the context suggests the dispute was religious in nature, so “Jew” has been retained in the translation here.

[3:25]  ⁵³⁴ tn Or “ceremonial cleansing,” or “purification.”

[3:25]  sn What was the controversy concerning ceremonial washing? It is not clear. Some have suggested that it was over the relative merits of the baptism of Jesus and John. But what about the ceremonial nature of the washing? There are so many unanswered questions here that even R. E. Brown (who does not usually resort to dislocations in the text as a solution to difficulties) proposes that this dialogue originally took place immediately after 1:19-34 and before the wedding at Cana. (Why else the puzzled hostility of the disciples over the crowds coming to Jesus?) Also, the synoptics imply John was imprisoned before Jesus began his Galilean ministry. At any rate, there is no reason to rearrange the material here – it occurs in this place for a very good reason. As far as the author is concerned, it serves as a further continuation of the point made to Nicodemus, that is, the necessity of being born “from above” (3:3). Note that John the Baptist describes Jesus as “the one who comes from heaven” in 3:31 (ἄνωθεν [anwqen], the same word as in 3:3). There is another lexical tie to preceding material: The subject of the dispute, ceremonial washing (3:25), calls to mind the six stone jars of water changed to wine at the wedding feast in 2:6, put there for “Jewish ceremonial washing.” This section ultimately culminates and concludes ideas begun in chap. 2 and continued in chap. 3. Although the author does not supply details, one scenario would be this: The disciples of John, perplexed after this disagreement with an individual Jew (or with the Jewish authorities), came to John and asked about the fact that Jesus was baptizing and more and more were coming to him. John had been preaching a baptism of repentance for forgiveness of sin (see Mark 1:4, Luke 3:3). Possibly what the Jew(s) reported to John’s disciples was that Jesus was now setting aside the Jewish purification rituals as unnecessary. To John’s disciples this might also be interpreted as: (a) a falling away from Judaism, and (b) a break with John’s own teaching. That Jesus could have said this is very evident from many incidents in his ministry in all the gospels. The thrust would be that outward cleansing (that is, observance of purification rituals) was not what made a person clean. A new heart within (that is, being born from above) is what makes a person clean. So John’s disciples came to him troubled about an apparent contradiction in doctrine though the explicit problem they mentioned is that Jesus was baptizing and multitudes were coming to him. (Whether Jesus was or was not baptizing really wasn’t the issue though, and John the Baptist knew that because he didn’t mention it in his reply. In 4:2 the author says that Jesus was not baptizing, but his disciples. That reference would seem to cover this incident as well, and so the disciples of John are just reporting what they have heard, or thought they heard.) The real point at issue is the authority of Jesus to “overturn” the system of ritual purification within Judaism. John replied to this question of the authority of Jesus in 3:27-36. In 3:27-30 he reassured his disciples, reminding them that if more people were coming to Jesus, it did not threaten him at all, because “heaven” had ordained it to be so (v. 27). (After all, some of these very disciples of John had presumably heard him tell the Jewish delegation that he was not the Messiah but was sent before him, mentioned in John 1.) Then John compared himself to the friend of the bridegroom who stands by and yet participates in the bridegroom’s joy (v. 29). John was completely content in his own position as forerunner and preparer of the way.

[3:26]  ⁵³⁵ tn “River” is not in the Greek text but is supplied for clarity.

[3:27]  ⁵³⁶ tn Grk “answered and said.”

[3:28]  ⁵³⁷ tn Or “the Messiah” (Both Greek “Christ” and Hebrew and Aramaic “Messiah” mean “one who has been anointed”).

[3:28]  sn See the note on Christ in 1:20.

[3:29]  ⁵³⁸ tn Grk “rejoices with joy” (an idiom).

[3:29]  ⁵³⁹ tn Grk “Therefore this my joy is fulfilled.”

[3:30]  ⁵⁴⁰ sn Some interpreters extend the quotation of John the Baptist’s words through v. 36.

[3:31]  ⁵⁴¹ tn Or “is above all.”

[3:31]  ⁵⁴² tn Grk “speaks from the earth.”

[3:31]  ⁵⁴³ sn The one who comes from heaven refers to Christ. As in John 1:1, the Word’s preexistence is indicated here.

[3:31]  ⁵⁴⁴ tc Ì⁷⁵ א* D ˹ 565 as well as several versions and fathers lack the phrase “is superior to all” (ἐπάνω πάντων ἐστίν, epanw pantwn estin). This effectively joins the last sentence of v. 31 with v. 32: “The one who comes from heaven testifies about what he has seen and heard, but no one accepts his testimony.” On the other side, the phrase may have been deleted because of perceived redundancy, since it duplicates what is said earlier in the verse. The witnesses that include ἐπάνω πάντων ἐστίν in both places are weighty and widespread (Ì^36vid,66 א² A B L W^s Θ Ψ 083 086 ˹³ 33 Ï lat sy^s,p,h bo). On balance, the longer reading should probably be considered authentic.

[3:31]  tn Or “is above all.”

[3:33]  ⁵⁴⁵ tn Or “is true.”

[3:34]  ⁵⁴⁶ tn That is, Christ.

[3:34]  ⁵⁴⁷ tn Grk “for not by measure does he give the Spirit” (an idiom). Leviticus Rabbah 15:2 states: “The Holy Spirit rested on the prophets by measure.” Jesus is contrasted to this. The Spirit rests upon him without measure.

[3:35]  ⁵⁴⁸ tn Grk “has given all things into his hand” (an idiom).

[3:36]  ⁵⁴⁹ tn Or “refuses to believe,” or “disobeys.”

[3:36]  ⁵⁵⁰ tn Or “anger because of evil,” or “punishment.”

[3:36]  ⁵⁵¹ tn Or “resides.”

[4:1]  ⁵⁵² 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]  ⁵⁵³ sn See the note on Pharisees in 1:24.

[4:1]  ⁵⁵⁴ 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]  ⁵⁵⁵ tn Grk “was making.”

[4:2]  ⁵⁵⁶ sn This is a parenthetical note by the author.

[4:3]  ⁵⁵⁷ sn The author doesn’t tell why Jesus chose to set out once more for Galilee. Some have suggested that the Pharisees turned their attention to Jesus because John the Baptist had now been thrown into prison. But the text gives no hint of this. In any case, perhaps Jesus simply did not want to provoke a confrontation at this time (knowing that his “hour” had not yet come).

[4:4]  ⁵⁵⁸ sn Travel through Samaria was not geographically necessary; the normal route for Jews ran up the east side of the Jordan River (Transjordan). Although some take the impersonal verb had to (δεῖ, dei) here to indicate logical necessity only, normally in John’s Gospel its use involves God’s will or plan (3:7, 3:14, 3:30, 4:4, 4:20, 4:24, 9:4, 10:16, 12:34, 20:9).

[4:4]  ⁵⁵⁹ sn Samaria. The Samaritans were descendants of 2 groups: (1) The remnant of native Israelites who were not deported after the fall of the Northern Kingdom in 722 b.c.; (2) Foreign colonists brought in from Babylonia and Media by the Assyrian conquerors to settle the land with inhabitants who would be loyal to Assyria. There was theological opposition between the Samaritans and the Jews because the former refused to worship in Jerusalem. After the exile the Samaritans put obstacles in the way of the Jewish restoration of Jerusalem, and in the 2nd century b.c. the Samaritans helped the Syrians in their wars against the Jews. In 128 b.c. the Jewish high priest retaliated and burned the Samaritan temple on Mount Gerizim.

[4:5]  ⁵⁶⁰ tn Grk “town of Samaria.” The noun Σαμαρείας (Samareias) has been translated as an attributive genitive.

[4:5]  ⁵⁶¹ sn Sychar was somewhere in the vicinity of Shechem, possibly the village of Askar, 1.5 km northeast of Jacob’s well.

[4:5]  ⁵⁶² sn Perhaps referred to in Gen 48:22.

[4:6]  ⁵⁶³ tn Grk “on (ἐπί, epi) the well.” There may have been a low stone rim encircling the well, or the reading of Ì⁶⁶ (“on the ground”) may be correct.

[4:6]  ⁵⁶⁴ tn Grk “the sixth hour.”

[4:6]  sn It was about noon. The suggestion has been made by some that time should be reckoned from midnight rather than sunrise. This would make the time 6 a.m. rather than noon. That would fit in this passage but not in John 19:14 which places the time when Jesus is condemned to be crucified at “the sixth hour.”

[4:7]  ⁵⁶⁵ tn Grk “a woman from Samaria.” According to BDAG 912 s.v. Σαμάρεια, the prepositional phrase is to be translated as a simple attributive: “γυνὴ ἐκ τῆς Σαμαρείας a Samaritan woman J 4:7.”

[4:7]  ⁵⁶⁶ tn The phrase “some water” is supplied as the understood direct object of the infinitive πεῖν (pein).

[4:8]  ⁵⁶⁷ tn Grk “buy food.”

[4:8]  ⁵⁶⁸ sn This is a parenthetical note by the author, indicating why Jesus asked the woman for a drink (for presumably his disciples also took the water bucket with them).

[4:9]  ⁵⁶⁹ 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]  ⁵⁷⁰ tn “Water” is supplied as the understood direct object of the infinitive πεῖν (pein).

[4:9]  ⁵⁷¹ 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]  ⁵⁷² sn This is a parenthetical note by the author.

[4:10]  ⁵⁷³ tn Grk “answered and said to her.”

[4:10]  ⁵⁷⁴ tn Or “if you knew.”

[4:10]  ⁵⁷⁵ tn The phrase “some water” is supplied as the understood direct object of the infinitive πεῖν (pein).

[4:10]  ⁵⁷⁶ 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.

[4:11]  ⁵⁷⁷ tn Or “Lord.” The Greek term κύριος (kurios) means both “Sir” and “Lord.” In this passage there is probably a gradual transition from one to the other as the woman’s respect for Jesus grows throughout the conversation (4:11, 15, 19).

[4:11]  ⁵⁷⁸ tc ‡ Two early and important Greek mss along with two versional witnesses (Ì⁷⁵ B sy^s ac²) lack ἡ γυνή (Jh gunh, “the woman”) here; א* has ἐκείνη (ekeinh, “that one” or possibly “she”) instead of ἡ γυνή. It is possible that no explicit subject was in the original text and scribes added either ἡ γυνή or ἐκείνη to make the meaning clear. It is also possible that the archetype of Ì⁷⁵ א B expunged the subject because it was not altogether necessary, with the scribe of א later adding the pronoun. However, ἡ γυνή is not in doubt in any other introduction to the woman’s words in this chapter (cf. vv. 9, 15, 17, 19, 25), suggesting that intentional deletion was not the motive for the shorter reading in v. 11 (or else why would they delete the words only here?). Thus, the fact that virtually all witnesses (Ì⁶⁶ א² A C D L W^s Θ Ψ 050 083 086 Ë^1,13 Ï latt sy^c,p,h sa bo) have ἡ γυνή here may suggest that it is a motivated reading, conforming this verse to the rest of the pericope. Although a decision is difficult, it is probably best to regard the shorter reading as authentic. NA²⁷ has ἡ γυνή in brackets, indicating doubts as to their authenticity. For English stylistic reasons, the translation also includes “the woman” here.

[4:11]  ⁵⁷⁹ tn The word for “well” has now shifted to φρέαρ (frear, “cistern”); earlier in the passage it was πηγή (phgh).

[4:11]  ⁵⁸⁰ tn The anaphoric article has been translated “this.”

[4:11]  ⁵⁸¹ sn Where then do you get this living water? The woman’s reply is an example of the “misunderstood statement,” a technique appearing frequently in John’s Gospel. Jesus was speaking of living water which was spiritual (ultimately a Johannine figure for the Holy Spirit, see John 7:38-39), but the woman thought he was speaking of flowing (fresh drinkable) water. Her misunderstanding gave Jesus the opportunity to explain what he really meant.

[4:12]  ⁵⁸² tn Or “our forefather”; Grk “our father.”

[4:12]  ⁵⁸³ tn Questions prefaced with μή (mh) in Greek anticipate a negative answer. This can sometimes be indicated by using a “tag” at the end. In this instance all of v. 12 is one question. It has been broken into two sentences for the sake of English style (instead of “for he” the Greek reads “who”).

[4:13]  ⁵⁸⁴ tn Grk “answered and said to her.”

[4:13]  ⁵⁸⁵ tn Grk “will thirst.”

[4:14]  ⁵⁸⁶ tn Grk “will never be thirsty forever.” The possibility of a later thirst is emphatically denied.

[4:14]  ⁵⁸⁷ tn Or “well.” “Fountain” is used as the translation for πηγή (phgh) here since the idea is that of an artesian well that flows freely, but the term “artesian well” is not common in contemporary English.

[4:14]  ⁵⁸⁸ tn The verb ἁλλομένου (Jallomenou) is used of quick movement (like jumping) on the part of living beings. This is the only instance of its being applied to the action of water. However, in the LXX it is used to describe the “Spirit of God” as it falls on Samson and Saul. See Judg 14:6, 19; 15:14; 1 Kgdms 10:2, 10 LXX (= 1 Sam 10:6, 10 ET); and Isa 35:6 (note context).

[4:15]  ⁵⁸⁹ tn Grk “or come here to draw.”

[4:15]  ⁵⁹⁰ tn The direct object of the infinitive ἀντλεῖν (antlein) is understood in Greek but supplied for clarity in the English translation.

[4:16]  ⁵⁹¹ tc Most witnesses have “Jesus” here, either with the article (א^c C² D L W^s Ψ 086 Ï lat) or without (א* A Θ Ë^1,13 al), while several important and early witnesses lack the name (Ì^66,75 B C* 33^vid pc). It is unlikely that scribes would have deliberately expunged the name of Jesus from the text here, especially since it aids the reader with the flow of the dialogue. Further, that the name occurs both anarthrously and with the article suggests that it was a later addition. (For similar arguments, see the tc note on “woman” in 4:11).

[4:16]  ⁵⁹² tn Grk “come here” (“back” is implied).

[4:17]  ⁵⁹³ tn Grk “answered and said to him.”

[4:17]  ⁵⁹⁴ tn Grk “Well have you said.”

[4:17]  ⁵⁹⁵ tn The word order in Jesus’ reply is reversed from the woman’s original statement. The word “husband” in Jesus’ reply is placed in an emphatic position.

[4:18]  ⁵⁹⁶ tn Grk “the one you have.”

[4:19]  ⁵⁹⁷ tn Grk “behold” or “perceive,” but these are not as common in contemporary English usage.

[4:20]  ⁵⁹⁸ sn This mountain refers to Mount Gerizim, where the Samaritan shrine was located.

[4:20]  ⁵⁹⁹ tn The word “people” is not in the Greek text, but is supplied to indicate that the Greek verb translated “say” is second person plural and thus refers to more than Jesus alone.

[4:20]  ⁶⁰⁰ map For location see Map5 B1; Map6 F3; Map7 E2; Map8 F2; Map10 B3; JP1 F4; JP2 F4; JP3 F4; JP4 F4.

[4:21]  ⁶⁰¹ sn Woman was a polite form of address (see BDAG 208-9 s.v. γυνή 1), similar to “Madam” or “Ma’am” used in English in different regions.

[4:21]  ⁶⁰² tn Grk “an hour.”

[4:21]  ⁶⁰³ tn The verb is plural.

[4:22]  ⁶⁰⁴ tn The word “people” is not in the Greek text, but is supplied to indicate that the Greek verb translated “worship” is second person plural and thus refers to more than the woman alone.

[4:22]  ⁶⁰⁵ tn Or “from the Judeans.” See the note on “Jew” in v. 9.

[4:23]  ⁶⁰⁶ tn Grk “an hour.”

[4:23]  ⁶⁰⁷ tn “Here” is not in the Greek text but is supplied to conform to contemporary English idiom.

[4:23]  ⁶⁰⁸ sn See also John 4:27.

[4:23]  ⁶⁰⁹ tn Or “as.” The object-complement construction implies either “as” or “to be.”

[4:23]  ⁶¹⁰ tn This is a double accusative construction of object and complement with τοιούτους (toioutous) as the object and the participle προσκυνοῦντας (proskunounta") as the complement.

[4:23]  sn The Father wants such people as his worshipers. Note how the woman has been concerned about where people ought to worship, while Jesus is concerned about who people ought to worship.

[4:24]  ⁶¹¹ tn Here πνεῦμα (pneuma) is understood as a qualitative predicate nominative while the articular θεός (qeos) is the subject.

[4:25]  ⁶¹² tn Both Greek “Christ” and Hebrew and Aramaic “Messiah” mean “the one who has been anointed.”

[4:25]  sn The one called Christ. This is a parenthetical statement by the author. See the note on Christ in 1:20.

[4:25]  ⁶¹³ tn Grk “that one.”

[4:25]  ⁶¹⁴ tn Or “he will announce to us.”

[4:25]  ⁶¹⁵ tn Grk “all things.”

[4:27]  ⁶¹⁶ tn Or “his disciples returned”; Grk “came” (“back” is supplied in keeping with English usage). Because of the length of the Greek sentence it is better to divide here and begin a new English sentence, leaving the καί (kai) before ἐθαύμαζον (eqaumazon) untranslated.

[4:27]  ⁶¹⁷ tn BDAG 444 s.v. θαυμάζω 1.a.γ has “be surprised that” followed by indirect discourse. The context calls for a slightly stronger wording.

[4:27]  ⁶¹⁸ tn The ὅτι (Joti) could also be translated as declarative (“that he had been speaking with a woman”) but since this would probably require translating the imperfect verb as a past perfect (which is normal after a declarative ὅτι), it is preferable to take this ὅτι as causal.

[4:27]  ⁶¹⁹ tn Grk “seek.” See John 4:23.

[4:27]  sn The question “What do you want?” is John’s editorial comment (for no one in the text was asking it). The author is making a literary link with Jesus’ statement in v. 23: It is evident that, in spite of what the disciples may have been thinking, what Jesus was seeking is what the Father was seeking, that is to say, someone to worship him.

[4:28]  ⁶²⁰ tn The term ἄνθρωποι (anqrwpoi) used here can mean either “people” (when used generically) or “men” (though there is a more specific term in Greek for adult males, ανήρ [anhr]). Thus the woman could have been speaking either (1) to all the people or (2) to the male leaders of the city as their representatives. However, most recent English translations regard the former as more likely and render the word “people” here.

[4:29]  ⁶²¹ tn Grk “the Christ” (both Greek “Christ” and Hebrew and Aramaic “Messiah” mean “one who has been anointed”). Although the Greek text reads χριστός (cristos) here, it is more consistent based on 4:25 (where Μεσσίας [Messias] is the lead term and is qualified by χριστός) to translate χριστός as “Messiah” here.

[4:29]  ⁶²² tn The use of μήτι (mhti) normally presupposes a negative answer. This should not be taken as an indication that the woman did not believe, however. It may well be an example of “reverse psychology,” designed to gain a hearing for her testimony among those whose doubts about her background would obviate her claims.

[4:30]  ⁶²³ tn “So” is supplied for transitional smoothness in English.

[4:30]  ⁶²⁴ sn The imperfect tense is here rendered began coming for the author is not finished with this part of the story yet; these same Samaritans will appear again in v. 35.

[4:31]  ⁶²⁵ tn Grk “were asking him, saying.”

[4:31]  ⁶²⁶ tn The direct object of φάγε (fage) in Greek is understood; “something” is supplied in English.

[4:33]  ⁶²⁷ tn An ingressive imperfect conveys the idea that Jesus’ reply provoked the disciples’ response.

[4:33]  ⁶²⁸ tn The direct object of ἤνεγκεν (hnenken) in Greek is understood; “anything” is supplied in English.

[4:33]  ⁶²⁹ tn Questions prefaced with μή (mh) in Greek anticipate a negative answer. This can sometimes be indicated by using a “tag” at the end in English (here it is “did they?”).

[4:34]  ⁶³⁰ sn The one who sent me refers to the Father.

[4:34]  ⁶³¹ tn Or “to accomplish.”

[4:34]  ⁶³² tn The substantival ἵνα (Jina) clause has been translated as an English infinitive clause.

[4:34]  sn No one brought him anything to eat, did they? In the discussion with the disciples which took place while the woman had gone into the city, note again the misunderstanding: The disciples thought Jesus referred to physical food, while he was really speaking figuratively and spiritually again. Thus Jesus was forced to explain what he meant, and the explanation that his food was his mission, to do the will of God and accomplish his work, leads naturally into the metaphor of the harvest. The fruit of his mission was represented by the Samaritans who were coming to him.

[4:35]  ⁶³³ tn The recitative ὅτι (Joti) after λέγετε (legete) has not been translated.

[4:35]  ⁶³⁴ tn Grk “lift up your eyes” (an idiom). BDAG 357 s.v. ἐπαίρω 1 has “look up” here.

[4:35]  ⁶³⁵ tn That is, “ripe.”

[4:36]  ⁶³⁶ tn Or “a reward”; see L&N 38.14 and 57.173. This is something of a wordplay.

[4:37]  ⁶³⁷ tn The recitative ὅτι (Joti) after ἀληθινός (alhqino") has not been translated.

[4:39]  ⁶³⁸ tn Grk “when she testified.”

[4:40]  ⁶³⁹ tn Following the arrival of the Samaritans, the imperfect verb has been translated as ingressive.

[4:40]  ⁶⁴⁰ tn Because of the length of the Greek sentence and the sequencing with the following verse, the conjunction καί (kai) has not been translated here. Instead a new English sentence is begun.

[4:41]  ⁶⁴¹ tn Or “and they believed much more.”

[4:42]  ⁶⁴² tn Or “this.” The Greek pronoun can mean either “this one” or “this” (BDAG 740 s.v. οὗτος 1).

[4:42]  ⁶⁴³ sn There is irony in the Samaritans’ declaration that Jesus was really the Savior of the world, an irony foreshadowed in the prologue to the Fourth Gospel (1:11): “He came to his own, and his own did not receive him.” Yet the Samaritans welcomed Jesus and proclaimed him to be not the Jewish Messiah only, but the Savior of the world.

[4:44]  ⁶⁴⁴ sn This is a parenthetical note by the author.

[4:45]  ⁶⁴⁵ sn All the things he had done in Jerusalem probably refers to the signs mentioned in John 2:23.

[4:45]  map For location see Map5 B1; Map6 F3; Map7 E2; Map8 F2; Map10 B3; JP1 F4; JP2 F4; JP3 F4; JP4 F4.

[4:45]  ⁶⁴⁶ sn See John 2:23-25.

[4:45]  ⁶⁴⁷ sn John 4:44-45. The last part of v. 45 is a parenthetical note by the author. The major problem in these verses concerns the contradiction between the proverb stated by Jesus in v. 44 and the reception of the Galileans in v. 45. Origen solved the problem by referring his own country to Judea (which Jesus had just left) and not Galilee. But this runs counter to the thrust of John’s Gospel, which takes pains to identify Jesus with Galilee (cf. 1:46) and does not even mention his Judean birth. R. E. Brown typifies the contemporary approach: He regards v. 44 as an addition by a later redactor who wanted to emphasize Jesus’ unsatisfactory reception in Galilee. Neither expedient is necessary, though, if honor is understood in its sense of attributing true worth to someone. The Galileans did welcome him, but their welcome was to prove a superficial response based on what they had seen him do at the feast. There is no indication that the signs they saw brought them to place their faith in Jesus any more than Nicodemus did on the basis of the signs. But a superficial welcome based on enthusiasm for miracles is no real honor at all.

[4:46]  ⁶⁴⁸ map For location see Map1 C3; Map2 D2; Map3 C5.

[4:46]  ⁶⁴⁹ sn See John 2:1-11.

[4:46]  ⁶⁵⁰ tn Grk “And in.”

[4:46]  ⁶⁵¹ sn Capernaum was a town on the northwest shore of the Sea of Galilee, 680 ft (204 m) below sea level. It was a major trade and economic center in the North Galilean region.

[4:46]  map For location see Map1 D2; Map2 C3; Map3 B2.

[4:46]  ⁶⁵² tn Although βασιλικός (basiliko") has often been translated “nobleman” it is almost certainly refers here to a servant of Herod, tetrarch of Galilee (who in the NT is called a king, Matt 14:9, Mark 6:14-29). Capernaum was a border town, so doubtless there were many administrative officials in residence there.

[4:47]  ⁶⁵³ tn The direct object of ἠρώτα (hrwta) is supplied from context. Direct objects were frequently omitted in Greek when clear from the context.

[4:48]  ⁶⁵⁴ tn The word “people” is not in the Greek text, but is supplied to indicate that the verb is second person plural (referring to more than the royal official alone).

[4:48]  ⁶⁵⁵ tn Or “you never believe.” The verb πιστεύσητε (pisteushte) is aorist subjunctive and may have either nuance.

[4:50]  ⁶⁵⁶ tn Grk “Go”; the word “home” is not in the Greek text, but is implied.

[4:50]  ⁶⁵⁷ tn Grk “and left.” The words “for home” are implied by the following verse.

[4:51]  ⁶⁵⁸ sn While he was on his way down. Going to Capernaum from Cana, one must go east across the Galilean hills and then descend to the Sea of Galilee. The 20 mi (33 km) journey could not be made in a single day. The use of the description on his way down shows the author was familiar with Palestinian geography.

[4:51]  ⁶⁵⁹ tn Traditionally, “servants.” Though δοῦλος (doulos) is normally translated “servant,” the word does not bear the connotation of a free individual serving another. BDAG notes that “‘servant’ for ‘slave’ is largely confined to Biblical transl. and early American times…in normal usage at the present time the two words are carefully distinguished” (BDAG 260 s.v.). The most accurate translation is “bondservant” (sometimes found in the ASV for δοῦλος), in that it often indicates one who sells himself into slavery to another. But as this is archaic, few today understand its force.

[4:52]  ⁶⁶⁰ tn Grk “the hour.”

[4:52]  ⁶⁶¹ tn BDAG 558 s.v. κομψότερον translates the idiom κομψότερον ἔχειν (komyoteron ecein) as “begin to improve.”

[4:52]  ⁶⁶² tn The second οὖν (oun) in 4:52 has been translated as “and” to improve English style by avoiding redundancy.

[4:52]  ⁶⁶³ tn Grk “at the seventh hour.”

[4:53]  ⁶⁶⁴ tn Grk “at that hour.”

[4:54]  ⁶⁶⁵ tn This sentence in Greek involves an object-complement construction. The force can be either “Jesus did this as,” or possibly “Jesus made this to be.” The latter translation accents not only Jesus’ power but his sovereignty too. Cf. 2:11 where the same construction occurs.

[5:1]  ⁶⁶⁶ sn The temporal indicator After this is not specific, so it is uncertain how long after the incidents at Cana this occurred.

[5:1]  ⁶⁶⁷ 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]  ⁶⁶⁸ map For location see Map5 B1; Map6 F3; Map7 E2; Map8 F2; Map10 B3; JP1 F4; JP2 F4; JP3 F4; JP4 F4.

[5:2]  ⁶⁶⁹ tn Regarding the use of the present tense ἐστιν (estin) and its implications for the dating of the Gospel of John, see the article by D. B. Wallace, “John 5,2 and the Date of the Fourth Gospel,” Bib 71 (1990): 177-205.

[5:2]  ⁶⁷⁰ tn The site of the miracle is also something of a problem: προβατικῇ (probatikh) is usually taken as a reference to the Sheep Gate near the temple. Some (R. E. Brown and others) would place the word κολυμβήθρα (kolumbhqra) with προβατικῇ to read “in Jerusalem, by the Sheep Pool, there is (another pool) with the Hebrew name.” This would imply that there is reference to two pools in the context rather than only one. This does not seem necessary (although it is a grammatical possibility). The gender of the words does not help since both are feminine (as is the participle ἐπιλεγομένη [epilegomenh]). Note however that Brown’s suggestion would require a feminine word to be supplied (for the participle ἐπιλεγομένη to modify). The traditional understanding of the phrase as a reference to the Sheep Gate near the temple appears more probably correct.

[5:2]  ⁶⁷¹ tc Some mss (א [L] 33 it) read Bethzatha, while others read Bethsaida (Ì^[66],75 B T W^s [Ψ] pc vg); codex D has Belzetha. A lot of controversy has surrounded the name of the pool itself: The reading of the Byzantine (or majority) text (A C Θ 078 Ë^1,13 Ï), Bethesda, has been virtually discarded by scholars in favor of what is thought to be the more primitive Bethzatha, even though many recent translations continue to employ Bethesda, the traditional reading. The latter is attested by Josephus as the name of a quarter of the city near the northeast corner of the temple area. He reports that the Syrian Legate Cestius burned this suburb in his attack on Jerusalem in October a.d. 68 (J. W. 2.19.4 [2.530]). However, there is some new archaeological evidence for this problem. 3Q15 (Copper Scroll) from Qumran seems to indicate that in the general area of the temple, on the eastern hill of Jerusalem, a treasure was buried in Bet áEsdatayin, in the pool at the entrance to the smaller basin. The name of the region or pool itself seems then to have been Bet ᾿Esda, “house of the flowing.” It appears with the dual ending in the scroll because there were two basins. Bethesda seems to be an accurate Greek rendition of the name, while J. T. Milik suggests Bethzatha is a rendition of the Aramaic intensive plural Bet áEsdata (DJDJ 3, 271). As for the text of John 5:2, the fundamental problems with the Bethesda reading are that it looks motivated (with an edifying Semitic etymology, meaning “House of Mercy” [TCGNT 178]), and is minimally attested. Apart from the Copper Scroll, the evidence for Bethesda is almost entirely shut up to the Byzantine text (C being the most notable exception, but it often has Byzantine encroachments). On the one hand, this argues the Byzantine reading here had ancient, semitic roots; on the other hand, since both readings are attested as historically accurate, a decision has to be based on the better witnesses. The fact that there are multiple readings here suggests that the original was not well understood. Which reading best explains the rise of the others? It seems that Bethzatha is the best choice.

[5:2]  sn On the location of the pool called Bethzatha, the double-pool of St. Anne is the probable site, and has been excavated; the pools were trapezoidal in shape, 165 ft (49.5 m) wide at one end, 220 ft (66 m) wide at the other, and 315 ft (94.5 m) long, divided by a central partition. There were colonnades (rows of columns) on all 4 sides and on the partition, thus forming the five covered walkways mentioned in John 5:2. Stairways at the corners permitted descent to the pool.

[5:2]  ⁶⁷² tn Grk “in Hebrew.”

[5:2]  ⁶⁷³ tn Or “porticoes,” or “colonnades”; Grk “stoas.”

[5:2]  sn The pool had five porticoes. These were covered walkways formed by rows of columns supporting a roof and open on the side facing the pool. People could stand, sit, or walk on these colonnaded porches, protected from the weather and the heat of the sun.

[5:4]  ⁶⁷⁴ tc The majority of later mss (C³ Θ Ψ 078 Ë^1,13 Ï) add the following to 5:3: “waiting for the moving of the water. 5:4 For an angel of the Lord went down and stirred up the water at certain times. Whoever first stepped in after the stirring of the water was healed from whatever disease which he suffered.” Other mss include only v. 3b (A^c D 33 lat) or v. 4 (A L it). Few textual scholars today would accept the authenticity of any portion of vv. 3b-4, for they are not found in the earliest and best witnesses (Ì^66,75 א B C* T pc co), they include un-Johannine vocabulary and syntax, several of the mss that include the verses mark them as spurious (with an asterisk or obelisk), and because there is a great amount of textual diversity among the witnesses that do include the verses. The present translation follows NA²⁷ in omitting the verse number, a procedure also followed by a number of other modern translations.

[5:5]  ⁶⁷⁵ tn Grk “who had had thirty-eight years in his disability.”

[5:6]  ⁶⁷⁶ tn Or “knew.”

[5:6]  ⁶⁷⁷ tn Grk “he.” The referent (the man) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[5:7]  ⁶⁷⁸ tn Or “Lord.” The Greek κύριος (kurios) means both “Sir” and “Lord.” In this passage the paralytic who was healed by Jesus never acknowledges Jesus as Lord – he rather reports Jesus to the authorities.

[5:7]  ⁶⁷⁹ tn Grk “while I am going.”

[5:7]  ⁶⁸⁰ tn Grk “another.”

[5:7]  ⁶⁸¹ tn The word “there” is not in the Greek text but is implied.

[5:8]  ⁶⁸² tn Or “pallet,” “mattress,” “cot,” or “stretcher.” Some of these items, however, are rather substantial (e.g., “mattress”) and would probably give the modern English reader a false impression.

[5:9]  ⁶⁸³ tn Grk “became well.”

[5:9]  ⁶⁸⁴ tn Or “pallet,” “mattress,” “cot,” or “stretcher.” See the note on “mat” in the previous verse.

[5:9]  ⁶⁸⁵ tn Grk “Now it was Sabbath on that day.”

[5:9]  sn This is a parenthetical note by the author.

[5:10]  ⁶⁸⁶ 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]  ⁶⁸⁷ tn Or “pallet,” “mattress,” “cot,” or “stretcher.” See the note on “mat” in v. 8.

[5:11]  ⁶⁸⁸ tn Or “pallet,” “mattress,” “cot,” or “stretcher.” See the note on “mat” in v. 8.

[5:12]  ⁶⁸⁹ 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]  ⁶⁹⁰ tn Grk “Pick up and walk”; the object (the mat) is implied but not repeated.

[5:14]  ⁶⁹¹ tn Since this is a prohibition with a present imperative, the translation “stop sinning” is sometimes suggested. This is not likely, however, since the present tense is normally used in prohibitions involving a general condition (as here) while the aorist tense is normally used in specific instances. Only when used opposite the normal usage (the present tense in a specific instance, for example) would the meaning “stop doing what you are doing” be appropriate.

[5:15]  ⁶⁹² tn Or “the Jewish authorities”; Grk “the Jews.” See the note on the phrase “Jewish leaders” in v. 10.

[5:16]  ⁶⁹³ sn Note the plural phrase these things which seems to indicate that Jesus healed on the Sabbath more than once (cf. John 20:30). The synoptic gospels show this to be true; the incident in 5:1-15 has thus been chosen by the author as representative.

[5:16]  ⁶⁹⁴ tn Or “the Jewish authorities”; Grk “the Jews.” See the note on the phrase “Jewish leaders” in v. 10.

[5:16]  ⁶⁹⁵ tn Or “harassing.”

[5:17]  ⁶⁹⁶ tc ‡ Most witnesses (Ì⁶⁶ A D L Θ Ψ Ë^1,13 33 Ï latt co) have ᾿Ιησοῦς (Ihsou", “Jesus”) here, while generally better witnesses (Ì⁷⁵ א B W {0141} 892 1241 pbo) lack the name. Although it is possible that Alexandrian scribes deleted the name due to proclivities to prune, this is not as likely as other witnesses adding it for clarification, especially since multiple strands of the Alexandrian text are represented in the shorter reading. NA²⁷ places the word in brackets, indicating some doubts as to authenticity.

[5:17]  ⁶⁹⁷ tn Grk “answered.”

[5:17]  ⁶⁹⁸ sn “My Father is working until now, and I too am working.” What is the significance of Jesus’ claim? A preliminary understanding can be obtained from John 5:18, noting the Jewish authorities’ response and the author’s comment. They sought to kill Jesus, because not only was he breaking the Sabbath, but he was also calling God his own Father, thus making himself equal with God. This must be seen in the context of the relation of God to the Sabbath rest. In the commandment (Exod 20:11) it is explained that “In six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth…and rested on the seventh day; therefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and made it holy.” Philo, based on the LXX translation of Exod 20:11, denied outright that God had ever ceased his creative activity. And when Rabban Gamaliel II, R. Joshua, R. Eleazar ben Azariah, and R. Akiba were in Rome, ca. a.d. 95, they gave as a rebuttal to sectarian arguments evidence that God might do as he willed in the world without breaking the Sabbath because the entire world was his private residence. So even the rabbis realized that God did not really cease to work on the Sabbath: Divine providence remained active on the Sabbath, otherwise, all nature and life would cease to exist. As regards men, divine activity was visible in two ways: Men were born and men died on the Sabbath. Since only God could give life and only God could deal with the fate of the dead in judgment, this meant God was active on the Sabbath. This seems to be the background for Jesus’ words in 5:17. He justified his work of healing on the Sabbath by reminding the Jewish authorities that they admitted God worked on the Sabbath. This explains the violence of the reaction. The Sabbath privilege was peculiar to God, and no one was equal to God. In claiming the right to work even as his Father worked, Jesus was claiming a divine prerogative. He was literally making himself equal to God, as 5:18 goes on to state explicitly for the benefit of the reader who might not have made the connection.

[5:18]  ⁶⁹⁹ tn Or “the Jewish authorities”; Grk “the Jews.” See the note on the phrase “Jewish leaders” in v. 10.

[5:19]  ⁷⁰⁰ tn Grk “answered and said to them.”

[5:19]  ⁷⁰¹ tn Grk “Truly, truly, I say to you.”

[5:19]  ⁷⁰² tn Grk “nothing from himself.”

[5:19]  ⁷⁰³ tn Grk “that one”; the referent (the Father) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[5:19]  ⁷⁰⁴ sn What works does the Son do likewise? The same that the Father does – and the same that the rabbis recognized as legitimate works of God on the Sabbath (see note on working in v. 17). (1) Jesus grants life (just as the Father grants life) on the Sabbath. But as the Father gives physical life on the Sabbath, so the Son grants spiritual life (John 5:21; note the “greater things” mentioned in v. 20). (2) Jesus judges (determines the destiny of people) on the Sabbath, just as the Father judges those who die on the Sabbath, because the Father has granted authority to the Son to judge (John 5:22-23). But this is not all. Not only has this power been granted to Jesus in the present; it will be his in the future as well. In v. 28 there is a reference not to spiritually dead (only) but also physically dead. At their resurrection they respond to the Son as well.

[5:21]  ⁷⁰⁵ tn Grk “and makes them live.”

[5:21]  ⁷⁰⁶ tn Grk “the Son makes whomever he wants to live.”

[5:2]  ⁷⁰⁷ tn Regarding the use of the present tense ἐστιν (estin) and its implications for the dating of the Gospel of John, see the article by D. B. Wallace, “John 5,2 and the Date of the Fourth Gospel,” Bib 71 (1990): 177-205.

[5:2]  ⁷⁰⁸ tn The site of the miracle is also something of a problem: προβατικῇ (probatikh) is usually taken as a reference to the Sheep Gate near the temple. Some (R. E. Brown and others) would place the word κολυμβήθρα (kolumbhqra) with προβατικῇ to read “in Jerusalem, by the Sheep Pool, there is (another pool) with the Hebrew name.” This would imply that there is reference to two pools in the context rather than only one. This does not seem necessary (although it is a grammatical possibility). The gender of the words does not help since both are feminine (as is the participle ἐπιλεγομένη [epilegomenh]). Note however that Brown’s suggestion would require a feminine word to be supplied (for the participle ἐπιλεγομένη to modify). The traditional understanding of the phrase as a reference to the Sheep Gate near the temple appears more probably correct.

[5:2]  ⁷⁰⁹ tc Some mss (א [L] 33 it) read Bethzatha, while others read Bethsaida (Ì^[66],75 B T W^s [Ψ] pc vg); codex D has Belzetha. A lot of controversy has surrounded the name of the pool itself: The reading of the Byzantine (or majority) text (A C Θ 078 Ë^1,13 Ï), Bethesda, has been virtually discarded by scholars in favor of what is thought to be the more primitive Bethzatha, even though many recent translations continue to employ Bethesda, the traditional reading. The latter is attested by Josephus as the name of a quarter of the city near the northeast corner of the temple area. He reports that the Syrian Legate Cestius burned this suburb in his attack on Jerusalem in October a.d. 68 (J. W. 2.19.4 [2.530]). However, there is some new archaeological evidence for this problem. 3Q15 (Copper Scroll) from Qumran seems to indicate that in the general area of the temple, on the eastern hill of Jerusalem, a treasure was buried in Bet áEsdatayin, in the pool at the entrance to the smaller basin. The name of the region or pool itself seems then to have been Bet ᾿Esda, “house of the flowing.” It appears with the dual ending in the scroll because there were two basins. Bethesda seems to be an accurate Greek rendition of the name, while J. T. Milik suggests Bethzatha is a rendition of the Aramaic intensive plural Bet áEsdata (DJDJ 3, 271). As for the text of John 5:2, the fundamental problems with the Bethesda reading are that it looks motivated (with an edifying Semitic etymology, meaning “House of Mercy” [TCGNT 178]), and is minimally attested. Apart from the Copper Scroll, the evidence for Bethesda is almost entirely shut up to the Byzantine text (C being the most notable exception, but it often has Byzantine encroachments). On the one hand, this argues the Byzantine reading here had ancient, semitic roots; on the other hand, since both readings are attested as historically accurate, a decision has to be based on the better witnesses. The fact that there are multiple readings here suggests that the original was not well understood. Which reading best explains the rise of the others? It seems that Bethzatha is the best choice.

[5:2]  sn On the location of the pool called Bethzatha, the double-pool of St. Anne is the probable site, and has been excavated; the pools were trapezoidal in shape, 165 ft (49.5 m) wide at one end, 220 ft (66 m) wide at the other, and 315 ft (94.5 m) long, divided by a central partition. There were colonnades (rows of columns) on all 4 sides and on the partition, thus forming the five covered walkways mentioned in John 5:2. Stairways at the corners permitted descent to the pool.

[5:2]  ⁷¹⁰ tn Grk “in Hebrew.”

[5:2]  ⁷¹¹ tn Or “porticoes,” or “colonnades”; Grk “stoas.”

[5:2]  sn The pool had five porticoes. These were covered walkways formed by rows of columns supporting a roof and open on the side facing the pool. People could stand, sit, or walk on these colonnaded porches, protected from the weather and the heat of the sun.

[1:1]  ⁷¹² sn In the beginning. The search for the basic “stuff” out of which things are made was the earliest one in Greek philosophy. It was attended by the related question of “What is the process by which the secondary things came out of the primary one (or ones)?,” or in Aristotelian terminology, “What is the ‘beginning’ (same Greek word as beginning, John 1:1) and what is the origin of the things that are made?” In the New Testament the word usually has a temporal sense, but even BDAG 138 s.v. ἀρχή 3 lists a major category of meaning as “the first cause.” For John, the words “In the beginning” are most likely a conscious allusion to the opening words of Genesis – “In the beginning.” Other concepts which occur prominently in Gen 1 are also found in John’s prologue: “life” (1:4) “light” (1:4) and “darkness” (1:5). Gen 1 describes the first (physical) creation; John 1 describes the new (spiritual) creation. But this is not to play off a false dichotomy between “physical” and “spiritual”; the first creation was both physical and spiritual. The new creation is really a re-creation, of the spiritual (first) but also the physical. (In spite of the common understanding of John’s “spiritual” emphasis, the “physical” re-creation should not be overlooked; this occurs in John 2 with the changing of water into wine, in John 11 with the resurrection of Lazarus, and the emphasis of John 20-21 on the aftermath of Jesus’ own resurrection.)

[1:1]  ⁷¹³ tn The preposition πρός (pros) implies not just proximity, but intimate personal relationship. M. Dods stated, “Πρός …means more than μετά or παρά, and is regularly employed in expressing the presence of one person with another” (“The Gospel of St. John,” The Expositor’s Greek Testament, 1:684). See also Mark 6:3, Matt 13:56, Mark 9:19, Gal 1:18, 2 John 12.

[1:1]  ⁷¹⁴ tn Or “and what God was the Word was.” Colwell’s Rule is often invoked to support the translation of θεός (qeos) as definite (“God”) rather than indefinite (“a god”) here. However, Colwell’s Rule merely permits, but does not demand, that a predicate nominative ahead of an equative verb be translated as definite rather than indefinite. Furthermore, Colwell’s Rule did not deal with a third possibility, that the anarthrous predicate noun may have more of a qualitative nuance when placed ahead of the verb. A definite meaning for the term is reflected in the traditional rendering “the word was God.” From a technical standpoint, though, it is preferable to see a qualitative aspect to anarthrous θεός in John 1:1c (ExSyn 266-69). Translations like the NEB, REB, and Moffatt are helpful in capturing the sense in John 1:1c, that the Word was fully deity in essence (just as much God as God the Father). However, in contemporary English “the Word was divine” (Moffatt) does not quite catch the meaning since “divine” as a descriptive term is not used in contemporary English exclusively of God. The translation “what God was the Word was” is perhaps the most nuanced rendering, conveying that everything God was in essence, the Word was too. This points to unity of essence between the Father and the Son without equating the persons. However, in surveying a number of native speakers of English, some of whom had formal theological training and some of whom did not, the editors concluded that the fine distinctions indicated by “what God was the Word was” would not be understood by many contemporary readers. Thus the translation “the Word was fully God” was chosen because it is more likely to convey the meaning to the average English reader that the Logos (which “became flesh and took up residence among us” in John 1:14 and is thereafter identified in the Fourth Gospel as Jesus) is one in essence with God the Father. The previous phrase, “the Word was with God,” shows that the Logos is distinct in person from God the Father.

[1:1]  sn And the Word was fully God. John’s theology consistently drives toward the conclusion that Jesus, the incarnate Word, is just as much God as God the Father. This can be seen, for example, in texts like John 10:30 (“The Father and I are one”), 17:11 (“so that they may be one just as we are one”), and 8:58 (“before Abraham came into existence, I am”). The construction in John 1:1c does not equate the Word with the person of God (this is ruled out by 1:1b, “the Word was with God”); rather it affirms that the Word and God are one in essence.

[1:2]  ⁷¹⁵ tn Grk “He”; the referent (the Word) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[1:3]  ⁷¹⁶ tn Or “made”; Grk “came into existence.”

[1:3]  ⁷¹⁷ tn Or “made”; Grk “nothing came into existence.”

[1:3]  ⁷¹⁸ 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.”

[1:4]  ⁷¹⁹ tn John uses ζωή (zwh) 37 times: 17 times it occurs with αἰώνιος (aiwnios), and in the remaining occurrences outside the prologue it is clear from context that “eternal” life is meant. The two uses in 1:4, if they do not refer to “eternal” life, would be the only exceptions. (Also 1 John uses ζωή 13 times, always of “eternal” life.)

[1:4]  sn An allusion to Ps 36:9, which gives significant OT background: “For with you is the fountain of life; In your light we see light.” In later Judaism, Bar 4:2 expresses a similar idea. Life, especially eternal life, will become one of the major themes of John’s Gospel.

[1:4]  ⁷²⁰ tn Or “humanity”; Grk “of men” (but ἄνθρωπος [anqrwpo"] is used in a generic sense here, not restricted to males only, thus “mankind,” “humanity”).

[1:5]  ⁷²¹ tn To this point the author has used past tenses (imperfects, aorists); now he switches to a present. The light continually shines (thus the translation, “shines on”). Even as the author writes, it is shining. The present here most likely has gnomic force (though it is possible to take it as a historical present); it expresses the timeless truth that the light of the world (cf. 8:12, 9:5, 12:46) never ceases to shine.

[1:5]  sn The light shines on. The question of whether John has in mind here the preincarnate Christ or the incarnate Christ is probably too specific. The incarnation is not really introduced until v. 9, but here the point is more general: It is of the very nature of light, that it shines.

[1:5]  ⁷²² sn The author now introduces what will become a major theme of John’s Gospel: the opposition of light and darkness. The antithesis is a natural one, widespread in antiquity. Gen 1 gives considerable emphasis to it in the account of the creation, and so do the writings of Qumran. It is the major theme of one of the most important extra-biblical documents found at Qumran, the so-called War Scroll, properly titled The War of the Sons of Light with the Sons of Darkness. Connections between John and Qumran are still an area of scholarly debate and a consensus has not yet emerged. See T. A. Hoffman, “1 John and the Qumran Scrolls,” BTB 8 (1978): 117-25.

[1:5]  ⁷²³ tn Grk “and,” but the context clearly indicates a contrast, so this has been translated as an adversative use of καί (kai).

[1:5]  ⁷²⁴ tn Or “comprehended it,” or “overcome it.” The verb κατέλαβεν (katelaben) is not easy to translate. “To seize” or “to grasp” is possible, but this also permits “to grasp with the mind” in the sense of “to comprehend” (esp. in the middle voice). This is probably another Johannine double meaning – one does not usually think of darkness as trying to “understand” light. For it to mean this, “darkness” must be understood as meaning “certain people,” or perhaps “humanity” at large, darkened in understanding. But in John’s usage, darkness is not normally used of people or a group of people. Rather it usually signifies the evil environment or ‘sphere’ in which people find themselves: “They loved darkness rather than light” (John 3:19). Those who follow Jesus do not walk in darkness (8:12). They are to walk while they have light, lest the darkness “overtake/overcome” them (12:35, same verb as here). For John, with his set of symbols and imagery, darkness is not something which seeks to “understand (comprehend)” the light, but represents the forces of evil which seek to “overcome (conquer)” it. The English verb “to master” may be used in both sorts of contexts, as “he mastered his lesson” and “he mastered his opponent.”

[1:6]  ⁷²⁵ sn John refers to John the Baptist.

[1:7]  ⁷²⁶ tn Grk “came for a testimony.”

[1:7]  sn Witness is also one of the major themes of John’s Gospel. The Greek verb μαρτυρέω (marturew) occurs 33 times (compare to once in Matthew, once in Luke, 0 in Mark) and the noun μαρτυρία (marturia) 14 times (0 in Matthew, once in Luke, 3 times in Mark).

[1:7]  ⁷²⁷ tn Or “to bear witness.”

[1:7]  ⁷²⁸ tn Grk “all.”

[1:8]  ⁷²⁹ tn Or “to bear witness.”

[1:9]  ⁷³⁰ tn Grk “every man” (but in a generic sense, “every person,” or “every human being”).

[1:9]  ⁷³¹ tn Or “He was the true light, who gives light to everyone who comes into the world.” The participle ἐρχόμενον (ercomenon) may be either (1) neuter nominative, agreeing with τὸ φῶς (to fw"), or (2) masculine accusative, agreeing with ἄνθρωπον (anqrwpon). Option (1) results in a periphrastic imperfect with ἦν (hn), ἦν τὸ φῶς… ἐρχόμενον, referring to the incarnation. Option (2) would have the participle modifying ἄνθρωπον and referring to the true light as enlightening “every man who comes into the world.” Option (2) has some rabbinic parallels: The phrase “all who come into the world” is a fairly common expression for “every man” (cf. Leviticus Rabbah 31.6). But (1) must be preferred here, because: (a) In the next verse the light is in the world; it is logical for v. 9 to speak of its entering the world; (b) in other passages Jesus is described as “coming into the world” (6:14, 9:39, 11:27, 16:28) and in 12:46 Jesus says: ἐγὼ φῶς εἰς τὸν κόσμον ἐλήλυθα (egw fw" ei" ton kosmon elhluqa); (c) use of a periphrastic participle with the imperfect tense is typical Johannine style: 1:28, 2:6, 3:23, 10:40, 11:1, 13:23, 18:18 and 25. In every one of these except 13:23 the finite verb is first and separated by one or more intervening words from the participle.

[1:9]  sn In v. 9 the world (κόσμος, kosmos) is mentioned for the first time. This is another important theme word for John. Generally, the world as a Johannine concept does not refer to the totality of creation (the universe), although there are exceptions at 11:9. 17:5, 24, 21:25, but to the world of human beings and human affairs. Even in 1:10 the world created through the Logos is a world capable of knowing (or reprehensibly not knowing) its Creator. Sometimes the world is further qualified as this world (ὁ κόσμος οὗτος, Jo kosmos Joutos) as in 8:23, 9:39, 11:9, 12:25, 31; 13:1, 16:11, 18:36. This is not merely equivalent to the rabbinic phrase “this present age” (ὁ αἰών οὗτος, Jo aiwn Joutos) and contrasted with “the world to come.” For John it is also contrasted to a world other than this one, already existing; this is the lower world, corresponding to which there is a world above (see especially 8:23, 18:36). Jesus appears not only as the Messiah by means of whom an eschatological future is anticipated (as in the synoptic gospels) but also as an envoy from the heavenly world to this world.

[1:10]  ⁷³² tn Or “was made”; Grk “came into existence.”

[1:10]  ⁷³³ tn Grk “and,” but in context this is an adversative use of καί (kai) and is thus translated “but.”

[1:10]  ⁷³⁴ tn Or “know.”

[1:11]  ⁷³⁵ tn Grk “to his own things.”

[1:11]  ⁷³⁶ tn Grk “and,” but in context this is an adversative use of καί (kai) and is thus translated “but.”

[1:11]  ⁷³⁷ tn “People” is not in the Greek text but is implied.

[1:11]  ⁷³⁸ sn His own people did not receive him. There is a subtle irony here: When the λόγος (logos) came into the world, he came to his own (τὰ ἴδια, ta idia, literally “his own things”) and his own people (οἱ ἴδιοι, Joi idioi), who should have known and received him, but they did not. This time John does not say that “his own” did not know him, but that they did not receive him (παρέλαβον, parelabon). The idea is one not of mere recognition, but of acceptance and welcome.

[1:12]  ⁷³⁹ tn On the use of the πιστεύω + εἰς (pisteuw + ei") construction in John: The verb πιστεύω occurs 98 times in John (compared to 11 times in Matthew, 14 times in Mark [including the longer ending], and 9 times in Luke). One of the unsolved mysteries is why the corresponding noun form πίστις (pistis) is never used at all. Many have held the noun was in use in some pre-Gnostic sects and this rendered it suspect for John. It might also be that for John, faith was an activity, something that men do (cf. W. Turner, “Believing and Everlasting Life – A Johannine Inquiry,” ExpTim 64 [1952/53]: 50-52). John uses πιστεύω in 4 major ways: (1) of believing facts, reports, etc., 12 times; (2) of believing people (or the scriptures), 19 times; (3) of believing “in” Christ” (πιστεύω + εἰς + acc.), 36 times; (4) used absolutely without any person or object specified, 30 times (the one remaining passage is 2:24, where Jesus refused to “trust” himself to certain individuals). Of these, the most significant is the use of πιστεύω with εἰς + accusative. It is not unlike the Pauline ἐν Χριστῷ (en Cristw) formula. Some have argued that this points to a Hebrew (more likely Aramaic) original behind the Fourth Gospel. But it probably indicates something else, as C. H. Dodd observed: “πιστεύειν with the dative so inevitably connoted simple credence, in the sense of an intellectual judgment, that the moral element of personal trust or reliance inherent in the Hebrew or Aramaic phrase – an element integral to the primitive Christian conception of faith in Christ – needed to be otherwise expressed” (The Interpretation of the Fourth Gospel, 183).

[1:13]  ⁷⁴⁰ tn The Greek term translated “born” here also involves conception.

[1:13]  ⁷⁴¹ tn Grk “of blood(s).” The plural αἱμάτων (Jaimatwn) has seemed a problem to many interpreters. At least some sources in antiquity imply that blood was thought of as being important in the development of the fetus during its time in the womb: thus Wis 7:1: “in the womb of a mother I was molded into flesh, within the period of 10 months, compacted with blood, from the seed of a man and the pleasure of marriage.” In John 1:13, the plural αἱμάτων may imply the action of both parents. It may also refer to the “genetic” contribution of both parents, and so be equivalent to “human descent” (see BDAG 26 s.v. αἷμα 1.a). E. C. Hoskyns thinks John could not have used the singular here because Christians are in fact ‘begotten’ by the blood of Christ (The Fourth Gospel, 143), although the context would seem to make it clear that the blood in question is something other than the blood of Christ.

[1:13]  ⁷⁴² tn Or “of the will of the flesh.” The phrase οὐδὲ ἐκ θελήματος σαρκός (oude ek qelhmato" sarko") is more clearly a reference to sexual desire, but it should be noted that σάρξ (sarx) in John does not convey the evil sense common in Pauline usage. For John it refers to the physical nature in its weakness rather than in its sinfulness. There is no clearer confirmation of this than the immediately following verse, where the λόγος (logos) became σάρξ.

[1:13]  ⁷⁴³ tn Or “man’s.”

[1:13]  ⁷⁴⁴ tn The third phrase, οὐδὲ ἐκ θελήματος ἀνδρός (oude ek qelhmato" andros), means much the same as the second one. The word here (ἀνηρ, anhr) is often used for a husband, resulting in the translation “or a husband’s decision,” or more generally, “or of any human volition whatsoever.” L. Morris may be right when he sees here an emphasis directed at the Jewish pride in race and patriarchal ancestry, although such a specific reference is difficult to prove (John [NICNT], 101).

[1:3]  ⁷⁴⁵ tn Or “made”; Grk “came into existence.”

[1:3]  ⁷⁴⁶ tn Or “made”; Grk “nothing came into existence.”

[1:3]  ⁷⁴⁷ 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.”

[1:1]  ⁷⁴⁸ sn In the beginning. The search for the basic “stuff” out of which things are made was the earliest one in Greek philosophy. It was attended by the related question of “What is the process by which the secondary things came out of the primary one (or ones)?,” or in Aristotelian terminology, “What is the ‘beginning’ (same Greek word as beginning, John 1:1) and what is the origin of the things that are made?” In the New Testament the word usually has a temporal sense, but even BDAG 138 s.v. ἀρχή 3 lists a major category of meaning as “the first cause.” For John, the words “In the beginning” are most likely a conscious allusion to the opening words of Genesis – “In the beginning.” Other concepts which occur prominently in Gen 1 are also found in John’s prologue: “life” (1:4) “light” (1:4) and “darkness” (1:5). Gen 1 describes the first (physical) creation; John 1 describes the new (spiritual) creation. But this is not to play off a false dichotomy between “physical” and “spiritual”; the first creation was both physical and spiritual. The new creation is really a re-creation, of the spiritual (first) but also the physical. (In spite of the common understanding of John’s “spiritual” emphasis, the “physical” re-creation should not be overlooked; this occurs in John 2 with the changing of water into wine, in John 11 with the resurrection of Lazarus, and the emphasis of John 20-21 on the aftermath of Jesus’ own resurrection.)

[1:1]  ⁷⁴⁹ tn The preposition πρός (pros) implies not just proximity, but intimate personal relationship. M. Dods stated, “Πρός …means more than μετά or παρά, and is regularly employed in expressing the presence of one person with another” (“The Gospel of St. John,” The Expositor’s Greek Testament, 1:684). See also Mark 6:3, Matt 13:56, Mark 9:19, Gal 1:18, 2 John 12.

[1:1]  ⁷⁵⁰ tn Or “and what God was the Word was.” Colwell’s Rule is often invoked to support the translation of θεός (qeos) as definite (“God”) rather than indefinite (“a god”) here. However, Colwell’s Rule merely permits, but does not demand, that a predicate nominative ahead of an equative verb be translated as definite rather than indefinite. Furthermore, Colwell’s Rule did not deal with a third possibility, that the anarthrous predicate noun may have more of a qualitative nuance when placed ahead of the verb. A definite meaning for the term is reflected in the traditional rendering “the word was God.” From a technical standpoint, though, it is preferable to see a qualitative aspect to anarthrous θεός in John 1:1c (ExSyn 266-69). Translations like the NEB, REB, and Moffatt are helpful in capturing the sense in John 1:1c, that the Word was fully deity in essence (just as much God as God the Father). However, in contemporary English “the Word was divine” (Moffatt) does not quite catch the meaning since “divine” as a descriptive term is not used in contemporary English exclusively of God. The translation “what God was the Word was” is perhaps the most nuanced rendering, conveying that everything God was in essence, the Word was too. This points to unity of essence between the Father and the Son without equating the persons. However, in surveying a number of native speakers of English, some of whom had formal theological training and some of whom did not, the editors concluded that the fine distinctions indicated by “what God was the Word was” would not be understood by many contemporary readers. Thus the translation “the Word was fully God” was chosen because it is more likely to convey the meaning to the average English reader that the Logos (which “became flesh and took up residence among us” in John 1:14 and is thereafter identified in the Fourth Gospel as Jesus) is one in essence with God the Father. The previous phrase, “the Word was with God,” shows that the Logos is distinct in person from God the Father.

[1:1]  sn And the Word was fully God. John’s theology consistently drives toward the conclusion that Jesus, the incarnate Word, is just as much God as God the Father. This can be seen, for example, in texts like John 10:30 (“The Father and I are one”), 17:11 (“so that they may be one just as we are one”), and 8:58 (“before Abraham came into existence, I am”). The construction in John 1:1c does not equate the Word with the person of God (this is ruled out by 1:1b, “the Word was with God”); rather it affirms that the Word and God are one in essence.

[1:2]  ⁷⁵¹ tn Grk “He”; the referent (the Word) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[1:3]  ⁷⁵² tn Or “made”; Grk “came into existence.”

[1:3]  ⁷⁵³ tn Or “made”; Grk “nothing came into existence.”

[1:3]  ⁷⁵⁴ 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.”

[1:4]  ⁷⁵⁵ tn John uses ζωή (zwh) 37 times: 17 times it occurs with αἰώνιος (aiwnios), and in the remaining occurrences outside the prologue it is clear from context that “eternal” life is meant. The two uses in 1:4, if they do not refer to “eternal” life, would be the only exceptions. (Also 1 John uses ζωή 13 times, always of “eternal” life.)

[1:4]  sn An allusion to Ps 36:9, which gives significant OT background: “For with you is the fountain of life; In your light we see light.” In later Judaism, Bar 4:2 expresses a similar idea. Life, especially eternal life, will become one of the major themes of John’s Gospel.

[1:4]  ⁷⁵⁶ tn Or “humanity”; Grk “of men” (but ἄνθρωπος [anqrwpo"] is used in a generic sense here, not restricted to males only, thus “mankind,” “humanity”).

[1:5]  ⁷⁵⁷ tn To this point the author has used past tenses (imperfects, aorists); now he switches to a present. The light continually shines (thus the translation, “shines on”). Even as the author writes, it is shining. The present here most likely has gnomic force (though it is possible to take it as a historical present); it expresses the timeless truth that the light of the world (cf. 8:12, 9:5, 12:46) never ceases to shine.

[1:5]  sn The light shines on. The question of whether John has in mind here the preincarnate Christ or the incarnate Christ is probably too specific. The incarnation is not really introduced until v. 9, but here the point is more general: It is of the very nature of light, that it shines.

[1:5]  ⁷⁵⁸ sn The author now introduces what will become a major theme of John’s Gospel: the opposition of light and darkness. The antithesis is a natural one, widespread in antiquity. Gen 1 gives considerable emphasis to it in the account of the creation, and so do the writings of Qumran. It is the major theme of one of the most important extra-biblical documents found at Qumran, the so-called War Scroll, properly titled The War of the Sons of Light with the Sons of Darkness. Connections between John and Qumran are still an area of scholarly debate and a consensus has not yet emerged. See T. A. Hoffman, “1 John and the Qumran Scrolls,” BTB 8 (1978): 117-25.

[1:5]  ⁷⁵⁹ tn Grk “and,” but the context clearly indicates a contrast, so this has been translated as an adversative use of καί (kai).

[1:5]  ⁷⁶⁰ tn Or “comprehended it,” or “overcome it.” The verb κατέλαβεν (katelaben) is not easy to translate. “To seize” or “to grasp” is possible, but this also permits “to grasp with the mind” in the sense of “to comprehend” (esp. in the middle voice). This is probably another Johannine double meaning – one does not usually think of darkness as trying to “understand” light. For it to mean this, “darkness” must be understood as meaning “certain people,” or perhaps “humanity” at large, darkened in understanding. But in John’s usage, darkness is not normally used of people or a group of people. Rather it usually signifies the evil environment or ‘sphere’ in which people find themselves: “They loved darkness rather than light” (John 3:19). Those who follow Jesus do not walk in darkness (8:12). They are to walk while they have light, lest the darkness “overtake/overcome” them (12:35, same verb as here). For John, with his set of symbols and imagery, darkness is not something which seeks to “understand (comprehend)” the light, but represents the forces of evil which seek to “overcome (conquer)” it. The English verb “to master” may be used in both sorts of contexts, as “he mastered his lesson” and “he mastered his opponent.”

[1:6]  ⁷⁶¹ sn John refers to John the Baptist.

[1:7]  ⁷⁶² tn Grk “came for a testimony.”

[1:7]  sn Witness is also one of the major themes of John’s Gospel. The Greek verb μαρτυρέω (marturew) occurs 33 times (compare to once in Matthew, once in Luke, 0 in Mark) and the noun μαρτυρία (marturia) 14 times (0 in Matthew, once in Luke, 3 times in Mark).

[1:7]  ⁷⁶³ tn Or “to bear witness.”

[1:7]  ⁷⁶⁴ tn Grk “all.”

[1:8]  ⁷⁶⁵ tn Or “to bear witness.”

[1:9]  ⁷⁶⁶ tn Grk “every man” (but in a generic sense, “every person,” or “every human being”).

[1:9]  ⁷⁶⁷ tn Or “He was the true light, who gives light to everyone who comes into the world.” The participle ἐρχόμενον (ercomenon) may be either (1) neuter nominative, agreeing with τὸ φῶς (to fw"), or (2) masculine accusative, agreeing with ἄνθρωπον (anqrwpon). Option (1) results in a periphrastic imperfect with ἦν (hn), ἦν τὸ φῶς… ἐρχόμενον, referring to the incarnation. Option (2) would have the participle modifying ἄνθρωπον and referring to the true light as enlightening “every man who comes into the world.” Option (2) has some rabbinic parallels: The phrase “all who come into the world” is a fairly common expression for “every man” (cf. Leviticus Rabbah 31.6). But (1) must be preferred here, because: (a) In the next verse the light is in the world; it is logical for v. 9 to speak of its entering the world; (b) in other passages Jesus is described as “coming into the world” (6:14, 9:39, 11:27, 16:28) and in 12:46 Jesus says: ἐγὼ φῶς εἰς τὸν κόσμον ἐλήλυθα (egw fw" ei" ton kosmon elhluqa); (c) use of a periphrastic participle with the imperfect tense is typical Johannine style: 1:28, 2:6, 3:23, 10:40, 11:1, 13:23, 18:18 and 25. In every one of these except 13:23 the finite verb is first and separated by one or more intervening words from the participle.

[1:9]  sn In v. 9 the world (κόσμος, kosmos) is mentioned for the first time. This is another important theme word for John. Generally, the world as a Johannine concept does not refer to the totality of creation (the universe), although there are exceptions at 11:9. 17:5, 24, 21:25, but to the world of human beings and human affairs. Even in 1:10 the world created through the Logos is a world capable of knowing (or reprehensibly not knowing) its Creator. Sometimes the world is further qualified as this world (ὁ κόσμος οὗτος, Jo kosmos Joutos) as in 8:23, 9:39, 11:9, 12:25, 31; 13:1, 16:11, 18:36. This is not merely equivalent to the rabbinic phrase “this present age” (ὁ αἰών οὗτος, Jo aiwn Joutos) and contrasted with “the world to come.” For John it is also contrasted to a world other than this one, already existing; this is the lower world, corresponding to which there is a world above (see especially 8:23, 18:36). Jesus appears not only as the Messiah by means of whom an eschatological future is anticipated (as in the synoptic gospels) but also as an envoy from the heavenly world to this world.

[1:10]  ⁷⁶⁸ tn Or “was made”; Grk “came into existence.”

[1:10]  ⁷⁶⁹ tn Grk “and,” but in context this is an adversative use of καί (kai) and is thus translated “but.”

[1:10]  ⁷⁷⁰ tn Or “know.”

[1:11]  ⁷⁷¹ tn Grk “to his own things.”

[1:11]  ⁷⁷² tn Grk “and,” but in context this is an adversative use of καί (kai) and is thus translated “but.”

[1:11]  ⁷⁷³ tn “People” is not in the Greek text but is implied.

[1:11]  ⁷⁷⁴ sn His own people did not receive him. There is a subtle irony here: When the λόγος (logos) came into the world, he came to his own (τὰ ἴδια, ta idia, literally “his own things”) and his own people (οἱ ἴδιοι, Joi idioi), who should have known and received him, but they did not. This time John does not say that “his own” did not know him, but that they did not receive him (παρέλαβον, parelabon). The idea is one not of mere recognition, but of acceptance and welcome.

[1:12]  ⁷⁷⁵ tn On the use of the πιστεύω + εἰς (pisteuw + ei") construction in John: The verb πιστεύω occurs 98 times in John (compared to 11 times in Matthew, 14 times in Mark [including the longer ending], and 9 times in Luke). One of the unsolved mysteries is why the corresponding noun form πίστις (pistis) is never used at all. Many have held the noun was in use in some pre-Gnostic sects and this rendered it suspect for John. It might also be that for John, faith was an activity, something that men do (cf. W. Turner, “Believing and Everlasting Life – A Johannine Inquiry,” ExpTim 64 [1952/53]: 50-52). John uses πιστεύω in 4 major ways: (1) of believing facts, reports, etc., 12 times; (2) of believing people (or the scriptures), 19 times; (3) of believing “in” Christ” (πιστεύω + εἰς + acc.), 36 times; (4) used absolutely without any person or object specified, 30 times (the one remaining passage is 2:24, where Jesus refused to “trust” himself to certain individuals). Of these, the most significant is the use of πιστεύω with εἰς + accusative. It is not unlike the Pauline ἐν Χριστῷ (en Cristw) formula. Some have argued that this points to a Hebrew (more likely Aramaic) original behind the Fourth Gospel. But it probably indicates something else, as C. H. Dodd observed: “πιστεύειν with the dative so inevitably connoted simple credence, in the sense of an intellectual judgment, that the moral element of personal trust or reliance inherent in the Hebrew or Aramaic phrase – an element integral to the primitive Christian conception of faith in Christ – needed to be otherwise expressed” (The Interpretation of the Fourth Gospel, 183).

[1:13]  ⁷⁷⁶ tn The Greek term translated “born” here also involves conception.

[1:13]  ⁷⁷⁷ tn Grk “of blood(s).” The plural αἱμάτων (Jaimatwn) has seemed a problem to many interpreters. At least some sources in antiquity imply that blood was thought of as being important in the development of the fetus during its time in the womb: thus Wis 7:1: “in the womb of a mother I was molded into flesh, within the period of 10 months, compacted with blood, from the seed of a man and the pleasure of marriage.” In John 1:13, the plural αἱμάτων may imply the action of both parents. It may also refer to the “genetic” contribution of both parents, and so be equivalent to “human descent” (see BDAG 26 s.v. αἷμα 1.a). E. C. Hoskyns thinks John could not have used the singular here because Christians are in fact ‘begotten’ by the blood of Christ (The Fourth Gospel, 143), although the context would seem to make it clear that the blood in question is something other than the blood of Christ.

[1:13]  ⁷⁷⁸ tn Or “of the will of the flesh.” The phrase οὐδὲ ἐκ θελήματος σαρκός (oude ek qelhmato" sarko") is more clearly a reference to sexual desire, but it should be noted that σάρξ (sarx) in John does not convey the evil sense common in Pauline usage. For John it refers to the physical nature in its weakness rather than in its sinfulness. There is no clearer confirmation of this than the immediately following verse, where the λόγος (logos) became σάρξ.

[1:13]  ⁷⁷⁹ tn Or “man’s.”

[1:13]  ⁷⁸⁰ tn The third phrase, οὐδὲ ἐκ θελήματος ἀνδρός (oude ek qelhmato" andros), means much the same as the second one. The word here (ἀνηρ, anhr) is often used for a husband, resulting in the translation “or a husband’s decision,” or more generally, “or of any human volition whatsoever.” L. Morris may be right when he sees here an emphasis directed at the Jewish pride in race and patriarchal ancestry, although such a specific reference is difficult to prove (John [NICNT], 101).

[1:14]  ⁷⁸¹ tn Here καί (kai) has been translated as “now” to indicate the transition to a new topic, the incarnation of the Word. Greek style often begins sentences or clauses with “and,” but English style generally does not.

[1:14]  ⁷⁸² tn This looks at the Word incarnate in humility and weakness; the word σάρξ (sarx) does not carry overtones of sinfulness here as it frequently does in Pauline usage. See also John 3:6.

[1:14]  ⁷⁸³ tn Grk “and tabernacled.”

[1:14]  sn The Greek word translated took up residence (σκηνόω, skhnow) alludes to the OT tabernacle, where the Shekinah, the visible glory of God’s presence, resided. The author is suggesting that this glory can now be seen in Jesus (note the following verse). The verb used here may imply that the Shekinah glory that once was found in the tabernacle has taken up residence in the person of Jesus. Cf. also John 2:19-21. The Word became flesh. This verse constitutes the most concise statement of the incarnation in the New Testament. John 1:1 makes it clear that the Logos was fully God, but 1:14 makes it clear that he was also fully human. A Docetic interpretation is completely ruled out. Here for the first time the Logos of 1:1 is identified as Jesus of Nazareth – the two are one and the same. Thus this is the last time the word logos is used in the Fourth Gospel to refer to the second person of the Trinity. From here on it is Jesus of Nazareth who is the focus of John’s Gospel.

[1:14]  ⁷⁸⁴ tn Grk “and we saw.”

[1:14]  ⁷⁸⁵ tn Or “of the unique one.” 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 Clem. 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, 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).

[1:1]  ⁷⁸⁶ tn The phrase ἀποκάλυψις ᾿Ιησοῦ Χριστοῦ (ajpokaluyi" Ihsou Cristou, “the revelation of Jesus Christ”) could be interpreted as either an objective genitive (“the revelation about Jesus Christ”), subjective genitive (“the revelation from Jesus Christ”), or both (M. Zerwick’s “general” genitive [Biblical Greek, §§36-39]; D. B. Wallace’s “plenary” genitive [ExSyn 119-21]). In 1:1 and 22:16 it is clear that Jesus has sent his angel to proclaim the message to John; thus the message is from Christ, and this would be a subjective genitive. On a broader scale, though, the revelation is about Christ, so this would be an objective genitive. One important point to note is that the phrase under consideration is best regarded as the title of the book and therefore refers to the whole of the work in all its aspects. This fact favors considering this as a plenary genitive.

[1:1]  ⁷⁸⁷ tn Grk “slaves.” Although this translation frequently renders δοῦλος (doulos) as “slave,” the connotation is often of one who has sold himself into slavery; in a spiritual sense, the idea is that of becoming a slave of God or of Jesus Christ voluntarily. The voluntary notion is not conspicuous here; hence, the translation “servants.” In any case, the word does not bear the connotation of a free individual serving another. BDAG notes that “‘servant’ for ‘slave’ is largely confined to Biblical transl. and early American times…in normal usage at the present time the two words are carefully distinguished” (BDAG 260 s.v.). The most accurate translation is “bondservant” (sometimes found in the ASV for δοῦλος), in that it often indicates one who sells himself into slavery to another. But as this is archaic, few today understand its force.

[1:1]  ⁷⁸⁸ tn BDAG 992-93 s.v. τάχος has “quickly, at once, without delay Ac 10:33 D; 12:7; 17:15 D; 22:18; 1 Cl 48:1; 63:4…soon, in a short time…Rv 1:1; 22:6…shortly Ac 25:4.”

[1:1]  ⁷⁸⁹ tn Or “He indicated it clearly” (L&N 33.153).

[1:1]  ⁷⁹⁰ tn See the note on the word “servants” earlier in this verse.

[1:2]  ⁷⁹¹ tn “Then” is not in the Greek text, but is supplied to make the chronological succession clear in the translation.

[1:2]  ⁷⁹² tn The genitive phrase “about Jesus Christ” is taken as an objective genitive.

[1:3]  ⁷⁹³ tn The word “this” is used to translate the Greek article τῆς (ths), bringing out its demonstrative force.

[1:3]  ⁷⁹⁴ tn The word “aloud” has been supplied to indicate that in the original historical setting reading would usually refer to reading out loud in public rather than silently to oneself.

[1:3]  ⁷⁹⁵ tn The words “blessed are” are repeated from the beginning of this verse for stylistic reasons and for clarity.

[1:3]  ⁷⁹⁶ tn Grk “keep.” L&N 36.19 has “to continue to obey orders or commandments – ‘to obey, to keep commandments, obedience.’”

[1:3]  ⁷⁹⁷ sn The time refers to the time when the things prophesied would happen.