Yohanes 8:38

8:38 I am telling you the things I have seen while with the ¹  Father; ²  as for you, ³  practice the things you have heard from the ⁴  Father!”

Yohanes 8:41

8:41 You people ⁵  are doing the deeds of your father.”

Then ⁶  they said to Jesus, ⁷  “We were not born as a result of immorality! ⁸  We have only one Father, God himself.”

Yohanes 6:70

6:70 Jesus replied, ⁹  “Didn’t I choose you, the twelve, and yet one of you is the devil?” ¹⁰ 

Kejadian 3:15

3:15 And I will put hostility ¹¹  between you and the woman

and between your offspring and her offspring; ¹² 

her offspring will attack ¹³  your head,

and ¹⁴  you ¹⁵  will attack her offspring’s heel.” ¹⁶ 

Matius 13:38

13:38 The field is the world and the good seed are the people ¹⁷  of the kingdom. The weeds are the people ¹⁸  of the evil one,

Kisah Para Rasul 13:10

13:10 and said, “You who are full of all deceit and all wrongdoing, ¹⁹  you son of the devil, you enemy of all righteousness – will you not stop making crooked the straight paths of the Lord? ²⁰ 

Kisah Para Rasul 13:1

The Church at Antioch Commissions Barnabas and Saul

13:1 Now there were these prophets and teachers in the church at Antioch: ²¹  Barnabas, Simeon called Niger, ²²  Lucius the Cyrenian, ²³  Manaen (a close friend of Herod ²⁴  the tetrarch ²⁵  from childhood ²⁶ ) and Saul.

Yohanes 3:8-10

3:8 The wind ²⁷  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.” ²⁸ 

3:9 Nicodemus replied, ²⁹  “How can these things be?” ³⁰  3:10 Jesus answered, ³¹  “Are you the teacher of Israel and yet you don’t understand these things? ³² 

Yohanes 3:12

3:12 If I have told you people ³³  about earthly things and you don’t believe, how will you believe if I tell you about heavenly things? ³⁴ 

[8:38]  ¹ tc The first person pronoun μου (mou, “my”) may be implied, especially if ὑμῶν (Jumwn, “your”) follows the second mention of “father” in this verse (as it does in the majority of mss); no doubt this implication gave rise to the reading μου found in most witnesses (א D Θ Ψ 0250 Ë^1,13 33 Ï it sy). No pronoun here is read by Ì^66,75 B C L 070 pc. This problem cannot be isolated from the second in the verse, however. See that discussion below.

[8:38]  ² tn Grk “The things which I have seen with the Father I speak about.”

[8:38]  ³ tn Grk “and you.”

[8:38]  ⁴ tc A few significant witnesses lack ὑμῶν (Jumwn, “your”) here (Ì^66,75 B L W 070 pc), while the majority have the pronoun (א C D Θ Ψ 0250 Ë^1,13 33 565 892 Ï al lat sy). However, these mss do not agree on the placement of the pronoun: τοῦ πατρὸς ὑμῶν ποιεῖτε (tou patro" Jumwn poieite), τῷ πατρὶ ὑμῶν (tw patri Jumwn), and τῷ πατρὶ ὑμῶν ταῦτα (tw patri Jumwn tauta) all occur. If the pronoun is read, then the devil is in view and the text should be translated as “you are practicing the things you have heard from your father.” If it is not read, then the same Father mentioned in the first part of the verse is in view. In this case, ποιεῖτε should be taken as an imperative: “you [must] practice the things you have heard from the Father.” The omission is decidedly the harder reading, both because the contrast between God and the devil is now delayed until v. 41, and because ποιεῖτε could be read as an indicative, especially since the two clauses are joined by καί (kai, “and”). Thus, the pronoun looks to be a motivated reading. In light of the better external and internal evidence the omission is preferred.

[8:41]  ⁵ tn The word “people” is not in the Greek text, but is supplied in English to clarify the plural Greek pronoun and verb.

[8:41]  ⁶ tc ‡ Important and early witnesses (א B L W 070 it sy^s,p co) lack the conjunction here, while the earliest witnesses along with many others read οὖν (oun, “therefore”; Ì^66,75 C D Θ Ψ 0250 ˹³ 33 Ï). This conjunction occurs in John some 200 times, far more than in any other NT book. Even though the combined testimony of two early papyri for the conjunction is impressive, the reading seems to be a predictable scribal emendation. In particular, οὖν is frequently used with the plural of εἶπον (eipon, “they said”) in John (in this chapter alone, note vv. 13, 39, 48, 57, and possibly 52). On balance, it is probably best to consider the shorter reading as authentic, even though “Then” is virtually required in translation for English stylistic reasons. NA²⁷ has the conjunction in brackets, indicating some doubt as to its authenticity.

[8:41]  ⁷ tn Grk “him”; the referent (Jesus) is specified in the translation for clarity.

[8:41]  ⁸ sn We were not born as a result of immorality! is ironic, because Jesus’ opponents implied that it was not themselves but Jesus who had been born as a result of immoral behavior. This shows they did not know Jesus’ true origin and were not aware of the supernatural events surrounding his birth. The author does not even bother to refute the opponents’ suggestion but lets it stand, assuming his readers will know the true story.

[6:70]  ⁹ tn Grk “Jesus answered them.”

[6:70]  ¹⁰ tn Although most translations render this last phrase as “one of you is a devil,” such a translation presupposes that there is more than one devil. This finds roots in the KJV in which the Greek word for demon was often translated “devil.” In fact, the KJV never uses the word “demon.” (Sixty-two of the 63 NT instances of δαιμόνιον [daimonion] are translated “devil” [in Acts 17:18 the plural has been translated “gods”]. This can get confusing in places where the singular “devil” is used: Is Satan or one of the demons in view [cf. Matt 9:33 (demon); 13:39 (devil); 17:18 (demon); Mark 7:26 (demon); Luke 4:2 (devil); etc.]?) Now regarding John 6:70, both the construction in Greek and the technical use of διάβολος (diabolos) indicate that the one devil is in view. To object to the translation “the devil” because it thus equates Judas with Satan does not take into consideration that Jesus often spoke figuratively (e.g., “destroy this temple” [John 2:19]; “he [John the Baptist] is Elijah” [Matt 11:14]), even equating Peter with the devil on one occasion (Mark 8:33). According to ExSyn 249, “A curious phenomenon has occurred in the English Bible with reference to one particular monadic noun, διάβολος. The KJV translates both διάβολος and δαιμόνιον as ‘devil.’ Thus in the AV translators’ minds, ‘devil’ was not a monadic noun. Modern translations have correctly rendered δαιμόνιον as ‘demon’ and have, for the most part, recognized that διάβολος is monadic (cf., e.g., 1 Pet 5:8; Rev 20:2). But in John 6:70 modern translations have fallen into the error of the King James translators. The KJV has ‘one of you is a devil.’ So does the RSV, NRSV, ASV, NIV, NKJV, and the JB [Jerusalem Bible]. Yet there is only one devil…The legacy of the KJV still lives on, then, even in places where it ought not.”

[3:15]  ¹¹ tn The Hebrew word translated “hostility” is derived from the root אֵיב (’ev, “to be hostile, to be an adversary [or enemy]”). The curse announces that there will be continuing hostility between the serpent and the woman. The serpent will now live in a “battle zone,” as it were.

[3:15]  ¹² sn The Hebrew word translated “offspring” is a collective singular. The text anticipates the ongoing struggle between human beings (the woman’s offspring) and deadly poisonous snakes (the serpent’s offspring). An ancient Jewish interpretation of the passage states: “He made the serpent, cause of the deceit, press the earth with belly and flank, having bitterly driven him out. He aroused a dire enmity between them. The one guards his head to save it, the other his heel, for death is at hand in the proximity of men and malignant poisonous snakes.” See Sib. Or. 1:59-64. For a similar interpretation see Josephus, Ant. 1.1.4 (1.50-51).

[3:15]  ¹³ tn Heb “he will attack [or “bruise”] you [on] the head.” The singular pronoun and verb agree grammatically with the collective singular noun “offspring.” For other examples of singular verb and pronominal forms being used with the collective singular “offspring,” see Gen 16:10; 22:17; 24:60. The word “head” is an adverbial accusative, locating the blow. A crushing blow to the head would be potentially fatal.

[3:15]  ¹⁴ tn Or “but you will…”; or “as they attack your head, you will attack their heel.” The disjunctive clause (conjunction + subject + verb) is understood as contrastive. Both clauses place the subject before the verb, a construction that is sometimes used to indicate synchronic action (see Judg 15:14).

[3:15]  ¹⁵ sn You will attack her offspring’s heel. Though the conflict will actually involve the serpent’s offspring (snakes) and the woman’s offspring (human beings), v. 15b for rhetorical effect depicts the conflict as being between the serpent and the woman’s offspring, as if the serpent will outlive the woman. The statement is personalized for the sake of the addressee (the serpent) and reflects the ancient Semitic concept of corporate solidarity, which emphasizes the close relationship between a progenitor and his offspring. Note Gen 28:14, where the Lord says to Jacob, “Your offspring will be like the dust of the earth, and you [second masculine singular] will spread out in all directions.” Jacob will “spread out” in all directions through his offspring, but the text states the matter as if this will happen to him personally.

[3:15]  ¹⁶ tn Heb “you will attack him [on] the heel.” The verb (translated “attack”) is repeated here, a fact that is obscured by some translations (e.g., NIV “crush…strike”). The singular pronoun agrees grammatically with the collective singular noun “offspring.” For other examples of singular verb and pronominal forms being used with the collective singular “offspring,” see Gen 16:10; 22:17; 24:60. The word “heel” is an adverbial accusative, locating the blow. A bite on the heel from a poisonous serpent is potentially fatal.

[3:15]  sn The etiological nature of v. 15 is apparent, though its relevance for modern western man is perhaps lost because we rarely come face to face with poisonous snakes. Ancient Israelites, who often encountered snakes in their daily activities (see, for example, Eccl 10:8; Amos 5:19), would find the statement quite meaningful as an explanation for the hostility between snakes and humans. (In the broader ancient Near Eastern context, compare the Mesopotamian serpent omens. See H. W. F. Saggs, The Greatness That Was Babylon, 309.) This ongoing struggle, when interpreted in light of v. 15, is a tangible reminder of the conflict introduced into the world by the first humans’ rebellion against God. Many Christian theologians (going back to Irenaeus) understand v. 15 as the so-called protevangelium, supposedly prophesying Christ’s victory over Satan (see W. Witfall, “Genesis 3:15 – a Protevangelium?” CBQ 36 [1974]: 361-65; and R. A. Martin, “The Earliest Messianic Interpretation of Genesis 3:15,” JBL 84 [1965]: 425-27). In this allegorical approach, the woman’s offspring is initially Cain, then the whole human race, and ultimately Jesus Christ, the offspring (Heb “seed”) of the woman (see Gal 4:4). The offspring of the serpent includes the evil powers and demons of the spirit world, as well as those humans who are in the kingdom of darkness (see John 8:44). According to this view, the passage gives the first hint of the gospel. Satan delivers a crippling blow to the Seed of the woman (Jesus), who in turn delivers a fatal blow to the Serpent (first defeating him through the death and resurrection [1 Cor 15:55-57] and then destroying him in the judgment [Rev 12:7-9; 20:7-10]). However, the grammatical structure of Gen 3:15b does not suggest this view. The repetition of the verb “attack,” as well as the word order, suggests mutual hostility is being depicted, not the defeat of the serpent. If the serpent’s defeat were being portrayed, it is odd that the alleged description of his death comes first in the sentence. If he has already been crushed by the woman’s “Seed,” how can he bruise his heel? To sustain the allegorical view, v. 15b must be translated in one of the following ways: “he will crush your head, even though you attack his heel” (in which case the second clause is concessive) or “he will crush your head as you attack his heel” (the clauses, both of which place the subject before the verb, may indicate synchronic action).

[13:38]  ¹⁷ tn Grk “the sons of the kingdom.” This idiom refers to people who should properly be, or were traditionally regarded as, a part of God’s kingdom. L&N 11.13 translates the phrase: “people of God’s kingdom, God’s people.”

[13:38]  ¹⁸ tn Grk “the sons of the evil one.” See the preceding note on the phrase “people of the kingdom” earlier in this verse, which is the opposite of this phrase. See also L&N 9.4; 11.13; 11.14.

[13:10]  ¹⁹ tn Or “unscrupulousness.”

[13:10]  ²⁰ sn “You who…paths of the Lord?” This rebuke is like ones from the OT prophets: Jer 5:27; Gen 32:11; Prov 10:7; Hos 14:9. Five separate remarks indicate the magician’s failings. The closing rhetorical question of v. 10 (“will you not stop…?”) shows how opposed he is to the way of God.

[13:1]  ²¹ sn Antioch was a city in Syria (not Antioch in Pisidia).

[13:1]  map For location see JP1 F2; JP2 F2; JP3 F2; JP4 F2.

[13:1]  ²² sn Simeon may well have been from North Africa, since the Latin loanword Niger refers to someone as “dark-complexioned.”

[13:1]  ²³ sn The Cyrenian refers to a native of the city of Cyrene, on the coast of northern Africa west of Egypt.

[13:1]  ²⁴ sn Herod is generally taken as a reference to Herod Antipas, who governed Galilee from 4 b.c. to a.d. 39, who had John the Baptist beheaded, and who is mentioned a number of times in the gospels.

[13:1]  ²⁵ tn Or “the governor.”

[13:1]  sn A tetrarch was a ruler with rank and authority lower than a king, who ruled only with the approval of the Roman authorities. This was roughly equivalent to being governor of a region. Several times in the NT, Herod tetrarch of Galilee is called a king (Matt 14:9, Mark 6:14-29), reflecting popular usage.

[13:1]  ²⁶ tn Or “(a foster brother of Herod the tetrarch).” The meaning “close friend from childhood” is given by L&N 34.15, but the word can also mean “foster brother” (L&N 10.51). BDAG 976 s.v. σύντροφας states, “pert. to being brought up with someone, either as a foster-brother or as a companion/friend,” which covers both alternatives. Context does not given enough information to be certain which is the case here, although many modern translations prefer the meaning “close friend from childhood.”

[3:8]  ²⁷ tn The same Greek word, πνεύματος (pneumatos), may be translated “wind” or “spirit.”

[3:8]  ²⁸ 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]  ²⁹ tn Grk “Nicodemus answered and said to him.”

[3:9]  ³⁰ 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]  ³¹ tn Grk “Jesus answered and said to him.”

[3:10]  ³² 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.

[3:12]  ³³ 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]  ³⁴ 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.