Yohanes 20:20

20:20 When he had said this, he showed them his hands and his side. Then the disciples rejoiced when they saw the Lord. ¹ 

Yohanes 20:25

20:25 The other disciples told him, “We have seen the Lord!” But he replied, ²  “Unless I see the wounds ³  from the nails in his hands, and put my finger into the wounds from the nails, and put my hand into his side, I will never believe it!” ⁴ 

Yohanes 20:27

20:27 Then he said to Thomas, “Put ⁵  your finger here, and examine ⁶  my hands. Extend ⁷  your hand and put it ⁸  into my side. Do not continue in your unbelief, but believe.” ⁹ 

Kisah Para Rasul 1:3

1:3 To the same apostles ¹⁰  also, after his suffering, ¹¹  he presented himself alive with many convincing proofs. He was seen by them over a forty-day period ¹²  and spoke about matters concerning the kingdom of God.

Kisah Para Rasul 1:1

Jesus Ascends to Heaven

1:1 I wrote ¹³  the former ¹⁴  account, ¹⁵  Theophilus, ¹⁶  about all that Jesus began to do and teach

Yohanes 1:1

The Prologue to the Gospel

1:1 In the beginning ¹⁷  was the Word, and the Word was with God, ¹⁸  and the Word was fully God. ¹⁹ 

[20:20]  ¹ sn When the disciples recognized Jesus (now referred to as the Lord, cf. Mary’s words in v. 18) they were suddenly overcome with joy. This was a fulfillment of Jesus’ words to the disciples in the Farewell Discourse (16:20-22) that they would have sorrow while the world rejoiced, but that their sorrow would be turned to lasting joy when they saw him again.

[20:25]  ² tn Grk “but he said to them.”

[20:25]  ³ tn Or “marks.”

[20:25]  ⁴ tn The word “it” is not in the Greek text but is implied. Direct objects were often omitted in Greek when clear from the context. The use of “it” here as direct object of the verb πιστεύσω (pisteusw) specifies exactly what Thomas was refusing to believe: that Jesus had risen from the dead, as reported by his fellow disciples. Otherwise the English reader may be left with the impression Thomas was refusing to “believe in” Jesus, or “believe Jesus to be the Christ.” The dramatic tension in this narrative is heightened when Thomas, on seeing for himself the risen Christ, believes more than just the resurrection (see John 20:28).

[20:27]  ⁵ tn Or “Extend” or “Reach out.” The translation “put” or “reach out” for φέρω (ferw) here is given in BDAG 1052 s.v. 4.

[20:27]  ⁶ tn Grk “see.” The Greek verb ἴδε (ide) is often used like its cognate ἰδού (idou) in Hellenistic Greek (which is “used to emphasize the …importance of someth.” [BDAG 468 s.v. ἰδού 1.b.ε]).

[20:27]  ⁷ tn Or “reach out” or “put.”

[20:27]  ⁸ tn The word “it” is not in the Greek text but is implied. Direct objects were often omitted in Greek when clear from the context.

[20:27]  ⁹ tn Grk “and do not be unbelieving, but believing.”

[1:3]  ¹⁰ tn Grk “to them”; the referent (the apostles) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[1:3]  ¹¹ sn After his suffering is a reference to Jesus’ crucifixion and the abuse which preceded it.

[1:3]  ¹² tn Grk “during forty days.” The phrase “over a forty-day period” is used rather than “during forty days” because (as the other NT accounts of Jesus’ appearances make clear) Jesus was not continually visible to the apostles during the forty days, but appeared to them on various occasions.

[1:1]  ¹³ tn Or “produced,” Grk “made.”

[1:1]  ¹⁴ tn Or “first.” The translation “former” is preferred because “first” could imply to the modern English reader that the author means that his previous account was the first one to be written down. The Greek term πρῶτος (prwtos) does not necessarily mean “first” in an absolute sense, but can refer to the first in a set or series. That is what is intended here – the first account (known as the Gospel of Luke) as compared to the second one (known as Acts).

[1:1]  ¹⁵ tn The Greek word λόγος (logos) is sometimes translated “book” (NRSV, NIV) or “treatise” (KJV). A formal, systematic treatment of a subject is implied, but the word “book” may be too specific and slightly misleading to the modern reader, so “account” has been used.

[1:1]  sn The former account refers to the Gospel of Luke, which was “volume one” of the two-volume work Luke-Acts.

[1:1]  ¹⁶ tn Grk “O Theophilus,” but the usage of the vocative in Acts with ὦ (w) is unemphatic, following more the classical idiom (see ExSyn 69).

[1:1]  ¹⁷ 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]  ¹⁸ 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]  ¹⁹ 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.