Yohanes 1:1

The Prologue to the Gospel

1:1 In the beginning ¹  was the Word, and the Word was with God, ²  and the Word was fully God. ³ 

Yohanes 1:14

1:14 Now ⁴  the Word became flesh ⁵  and took up residence ⁶  among us. We ⁷  saw his glory – the glory of the one and only, ⁸  full of grace and truth, who came from the Father.

Yohanes 1:23

1:23 John ⁹  said, “I am the voice of one shouting in the wilderness, ‘Make straight ¹⁰  the way for the Lord,’ ¹¹  as Isaiah the prophet said.”

Yohanes 1:26

1:26 John answered them, ¹²  “I baptize with water. Among you stands one whom you do not recognize, ¹³ 

Yohanes 1:31

1:31 I did not recognize ¹⁴  him, but I came baptizing with water so that he could be revealed to Israel.” ¹⁵ 

Yohanes 1:47

1:47 Jesus saw Nathanael coming toward him and exclaimed, ¹⁶  “Look, a true Israelite in whom there is no deceit!” ¹⁷ 

Yohanes 2:1

Turning Water into Wine

2:1 Now on the third day there was a wedding at Cana ¹⁸  in Galilee. ¹⁹  Jesus’ mother ²⁰  was there,

Yohanes 2:20

2:20 Then the Jewish leaders ²¹  said to him, “This temple has been under construction ²²  for forty-six years, ²³  and are you going to raise it up in three days?”

Yohanes 2:25

2:25 He did not need anyone to testify about man, ²⁴  for he knew what was in man. ²⁵ 

Yohanes 3:21

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. ²⁶ 

Yohanes 3:23

3:23 John ²⁷  was also baptizing at Aenon near Salim, ²⁸  because water was plentiful there, and people were coming ²⁹  to him ³⁰  and being baptized.

Yohanes 4:52

4:52 So he asked them the time ³¹  when his condition began to improve, ³²  and ³³  they told him, “Yesterday at one o’clock in the afternoon ³⁴  the fever left him.”

Yohanes 5:9

5:9 Immediately the man was healed, ³⁵  and he picked up his mat ³⁶  and started walking. (Now that day was a Sabbath.) ³⁷ 

Yohanes 5:13

5:13 But the man who had been healed did not know who it was, for Jesus had slipped out, since there was a crowd in that place.

Yohanes 5:35

5:35 He was a lamp that was burning and shining, ³⁸  and you wanted to rejoice greatly for a short time ³⁹  in his light.

Yohanes 5:38-39

5:38 nor do you have his word residing in you, because you do not believe the one whom he sent. 5:39 You study the scriptures thoroughly ⁴⁰  because you think in them you possess eternal life, ⁴¹  and it is these same scriptures ⁴²  that testify about me,

Yohanes 6:31

6:31 Our ancestors ⁴³  ate the manna in the wilderness, just as it is written, ‘He gave them bread from heaven to eat.’” ⁴⁴ 

Yohanes 6:44-45

6:44 No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him, ⁴⁵  and I will raise him up at the last day. 6:45 It is written in the prophets, ‘And they will all be taught by God.’ ⁴⁶  Everyone who hears and learns from the Father ⁴⁷  comes to me.

Yohanes 6:61

6:61 When Jesus was aware ⁴⁸  that his disciples were complaining ⁴⁹  about this, he said to them, “Does this cause you to be offended? ⁵⁰ 

Yohanes 7:22

7:22 However, because Moses gave you the practice of circumcision ⁵¹  (not that it came from Moses, but from the forefathers), you circumcise a male child ⁵²  on the Sabbath.

Yohanes 8:9

8:9 Now when they heard this, they began to drift away one at a time, starting with the older ones, ⁵³  until Jesus was left alone with the woman standing before him.

Yohanes 8:31

Abraham’s Children and the Devil’s Children

8:31 Then Jesus said to those Judeans ⁵⁴  who had believed him, “If you continue to follow my teaching, ⁵⁵  you are really ⁵⁶  my disciples

Yohanes 8:37

8:37 I know that you are Abraham’s descendants. ⁵⁷  But you want ⁵⁸  to kill me, because my teaching ⁵⁹  makes no progress among you. ⁶⁰ 

Yohanes 9:3

9:3 Jesus answered, “Neither this man ⁶¹  nor his parents sinned, but he was born blind so that ⁶²  the acts ⁶³  of God may be revealed ⁶⁴  through what happens to him. ⁶⁵ 

Yohanes 9:25

9:25 He replied, ⁶⁶  “I do not know whether he is a sinner. I do know one thing – that although I was blind, now I can see.”

Yohanes 9:34

9:34 They replied, ⁶⁷  “You were born completely in sinfulness, ⁶⁸  and yet you presume to teach us?” ⁶⁹  So they threw him out.

Yohanes 10:34

10:34 Jesus answered, ⁷⁰  “Is it not written in your law, ‘I said, you are gods’? ⁷¹ 

Yohanes 11:30

11:30 (Now Jesus had not yet entered the village, but was still in the place where Martha had come out to meet him.)

Yohanes 11:38

Lazarus Raised from the Dead

11:38 Jesus, intensely moved ⁷²  again, came to the tomb. (Now it was a cave, and a stone was placed across it.) ⁷³ 

Yohanes 11:56

11:56 Thus they were looking for Jesus, ⁷⁴  and saying to one another as they stood in the temple courts, ⁷⁵  “What do you think? That he won’t come to the feast?”

Yohanes 12:46

12:46 I have come as a light into the world, so that everyone who believes in me should not remain in darkness.

Yohanes 13:23

13:23 One of his disciples, the one Jesus loved, ⁷⁶  was at the table ⁷⁷  to the right of Jesus in a place of honor. ⁷⁸ 

Yohanes 13:31

The Prediction of Peter’s Denial

13:31 When ⁷⁹  Judas ⁸⁰  had gone out, Jesus said, “Now the Son of Man is glorified, and God is glorified in him.

Yohanes 14:2

14:2 There are many dwelling places ⁸¹  in my Father’s house. ⁸²  Otherwise, I would have told you, because ⁸³  I am going away to make ready ⁸⁴  a place for you. ⁸⁵ 

Yohanes 14:30

14:30 I will not speak with you much longer, ⁸⁶  for the ruler of this world is coming. ⁸⁷  He has no power over me, ⁸⁸ 

Yohanes 15:2

15:2 He takes away ⁸⁹  every branch that does not bear ⁹⁰  fruit in me. He ⁹¹  prunes ⁹²  every branch that bears ⁹³  fruit so that it will bear more fruit.

Yohanes 16:24

16:24 Until now you have not asked for anything in my name. Ask and you will receive it, ⁹⁴  so that your joy may be complete.

Yohanes 16:30

16:30 Now we know that you know everything ⁹⁵  and do not need anyone ⁹⁶  to ask you anything. ⁹⁷  Because of this ⁹⁸  we believe that you have come from God.”

Yohanes 18:39

18:39 But it is your custom that I release one prisoner ⁹⁹  for you at the Passover. ¹⁰⁰  So do you want me to release for you the king of the Jews?”

Yohanes 19:4

19:4 Again Pilate went out and said to the Jewish leaders, ¹⁰¹  “Look, I am bringing him out to you, so that you may know that I find no reason for an accusation ¹⁰²  against him.”

Yohanes 20:12

20:12 And she saw two angels in white sitting where Jesus’ body had been lying, one at the head and one at the feet.

Yohanes 20:30

20:30 Now Jesus performed ¹⁰³  many other miraculous signs in the presence of the ¹⁰⁴  disciples, which are not recorded ¹⁰⁵  in this book. ¹⁰⁶ 

[1:1]  ¹ 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]  ² 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]  ³ 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.

[1:14]  ⁴ 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]  ⁵ 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]  ⁶ 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]  ⁷ tn Grk “and we saw.”

[1:14]  ⁸ 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).

[1:23]  ⁹ tn Grk “He”; the referent (John the Baptist) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[1:23]  ¹⁰ sn This call to “make straight” is probably an allusion to preparation through repentance.

[1:23]  ¹¹ sn A quotation from Isa 40:3.

[1:26]  ¹² tn Grk “answered them, saying.” The participle λέγων (legwn) is redundant in contemporary English and has not been translated.

[1:26]  ¹³ tn Or “know.”

[1:31]  ¹⁴ tn Or “know.”

[1:31]  ¹⁵ 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.

[1:47]  ¹⁶ tn Grk “said about him.”

[1:47]  ¹⁷ tn Or “treachery.”

[1:47]  sn An allusion to Ps 32:2.

[2:1]  ¹⁸ map For location see Map1 C3; Map2 D2; Map3 C5.

[2:1]  ¹⁹ 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]  ²⁰ tn Grk “in Galilee, and Jesus’ mother.”

[2:20]  ²¹ tn See the note on this phrase in v. 18.

[2:20]  ²² 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]  ²³ 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.

[2:25]  ²⁴ 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]  ²⁵ tn See previous note on “man” in this verse.

[3:21]  ²⁶ 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).

[3:23]  ²⁷ sn John refers to John the Baptist.

[3:23]  ²⁸ 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]  ²⁹ tn Or “people were continually coming.”

[3:23]  ³⁰ tn The words “to him” are not in the Greek text, but are implied.

[4:52]  ³¹ tn Grk “the hour.”

[4:52]  ³² tn BDAG 558 s.v. κομψότερον translates the idiom κομψότερον ἔχειν (komyoteron ecein) as “begin to improve.”

[4:52]  ³³ tn The second οὖν (oun) in 4:52 has been translated as “and” to improve English style by avoiding redundancy.

[4:52]  ³⁴ tn Grk “at the seventh hour.”

[5:9]  ³⁵ tn Grk “became well.”

[5:9]  ³⁶ tn Or “pallet,” “mattress,” “cot,” or “stretcher.” See the note on “mat” in the previous verse.

[5:9]  ³⁷ tn Grk “Now it was Sabbath on that day.”

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

[5:35]  ³⁸ sn He was a lamp that was burning and shining. Sir 48:1 states that the word of Elijah was “a flame like a torch.” Because of the connection of John the Baptist with Elijah (see John 1:21 and the note on John’s reply, “I am not”), it was natural for Jesus to apply this description to John.

[5:35]  ³⁹ tn Grk “for an hour.”

[5:39]  ⁴⁰ tn Or “Study the scriptures thoroughly” (an imperative). For the meaning of the verb see G. Delling, TDNT 2:655-57.

[5:39]  ⁴¹ sn In them you possess eternal life. Note the following examples from the rabbinic tractate Pirqe Avot (“The Sayings of the Fathers”): Pirqe Avot 2:8, “He who has acquired the words of the law has acquired for himself the life of the world to come”; Pirqe Avot 6:7, “Great is the law for it gives to those who practice it life in this world and in the world to come.”

[5:39]  ⁴² tn The words “same scriptures” are not in the Greek text, but are supplied to clarify the referent (“these”).

[6:31]  ⁴³ tn Or “forefathers”; Grk “fathers.”

[6:31]  ⁴⁴ sn A quotation from Ps 78:24 (referring to the events of Exod 16:4-36).

[6:44]  ⁴⁵ tn Or “attracts him,” or “pulls him.” The word is used of pulling or dragging, often by force. It is even used once of magnetic attraction (A. Oepke, TDNT 2:503).

[6:44]  sn The Father who sent me draws him. The author never specifically explains what this “drawing” consists of. It is evidently some kind of attraction; whether it is binding and irresistible or not is not mentioned. But there does seem to be a parallel with 6:65, where Jesus says that no one is able to come to him unless the Father has allowed it. This apparently parallels the use of Isaiah by John to reflect the spiritual blindness of the Jewish leaders (see the quotations from Isaiah in John 9:41 and 12:39-40).

[6:45]  ⁴⁶ sn A quotation from Isa 54:13.

[6:45]  ⁴⁷ tn Or “listens to the Father and learns.”

[6:61]  ⁴⁸ tn Grk “When Jesus knew within himself.”

[6:61]  ⁴⁹ tn Or “were grumbling.”

[6:61]  ⁵⁰ tn Or “Does this cause you to no longer believe?” (Grk “cause you to stumble?”)

[6:61]  sn Does this cause you to be offended? It became apparent to some of Jesus’ followers at this point that there would be a cost involved in following him. They had taken offense at some of Jesus’ teaching (perhaps the graphic imagery of “eating his flesh” and “drinking his blood,” and Jesus now warned them that if they thought this was a problem, there was an even worse cause for stumbling in store: his upcoming crucifixion (John 6:61b-62). Jesus asked, in effect, “Has what I just taught caused you to stumble? What will you do, then, if you see the Son of Man ascending where he was before?” This ascent is to be accomplished through the cross; for John, Jesus’ departure from this world and his return to the Father form one continual movement from cross to resurrection to ascension.

[7:22]  ⁵¹ tn Grk “gave you circumcision.”

[7:22]  ⁵² tn Grk “a man.” While the text literally reads “circumcise a man” in actual fact the practice of circumcising male infants on the eighth day after birth (see Phil 3:5) is primarily what is in view here.

[8:9]  ⁵³ tn Or “beginning from the eldest.”

[8:31]  ⁵⁴ tn Grk “to the Jews.” In NT usage the term ᾿Ιουδαῖοι (Ioudaioi) may refer to the entire Jewish people, the residents of Jerusalem and surrounding territory (i.e., “Judeans”), the authorities in Jerusalem, or merely those who were hostile to Jesus. (For further information see R. G. Bratcher, “‘The Jews’ in the Gospel of John,” BT 26 [1975]: 401-9; also BDAG 479 s.v. ᾿Ιουδαῖος 2.e.) Here the phrase refers to the Jewish people in Jerusalem who had been listening to Jesus’ teaching in the temple and had believed his claim to be the Messiah, hence, “those Judeans who had believed him.” The term “Judeans” is preferred here to the more general “people” because the debate concerns descent from Abraham (v. 33).

[8:31]  ⁵⁵ tn Grk “If you continue in my word.”

[8:31]  ⁵⁶ tn Or “truly.”

[8:37]  ⁵⁷ tn Grk “seed” (an idiom).

[8:37]  ⁵⁸ tn Grk “you are seeking.”

[8:37]  ⁵⁹ tn Grk “my word.”

[8:37]  ⁶⁰ tn Or “finds no place in you.” The basic idea seems to be something (in this case Jesus’ teaching) making headway or progress where resistance is involved. See BDAG 1094 s.v. χωρέω 2.

[9:3]  ⁶¹ tn Grk “this one.”

[9:3]  ⁶² tn Grk “but so that.” There is an ellipsis that must be supplied: “but [he was born blind] so that” or “but [it happened to him] so that.”

[9:3]  ⁶³ tn Or “deeds”; Grk “works.”

[9:3]  ⁶⁴ tn Or “manifested,” “brought to light.”

[9:3]  ⁶⁵ tn Grk “in him.”

[9:25]  ⁶⁶ tn Grk “Then that one answered.”

[9:34]  ⁶⁷ tn Grk “They answered and said to him.” This has been simplified in the translation to “They replied.”

[9:34]  ⁶⁸ tn Or “From birth you have been evil.” The implication of this insult, in the context of John 9, is that the man whom Jesus caused to see had not previously adhered rigorously to all the conventional requirements of the OT law as interpreted by the Pharisees. Thus he had no right to instruct them about who Jesus was.

[9:34]  ⁶⁹ tn Grk “and are you teaching us?”

[10:34]  ⁷⁰ tn Grk “answered them.”

[10:34]  ⁷¹ sn A quotation from Ps 82:6. Technically the Psalms are not part of the OT “law” (which usually referred to the five books of Moses), but occasionally the term “law” was applied to the entire OT, as here. The problem in this verse concerns the meaning of Jesus’ quotation from Ps 82:6. It is important to look at the OT context: The whole line reads “I say, you are gods, sons of the Most High, all of you.” Jesus will pick up on the term “sons of the Most High” in 10:36, where he refers to himself as the Son of God. The psalm was understood in rabbinic circles as an attack on unjust judges who, though they have been given the title “gods” because of their quasi-divine function of exercising judgment, are just as mortal as other men. What is the argument here? It is often thought to be as follows: If it was an OT practice to refer to men like the judges as gods, and not blasphemy, why did the Jewish authorities object when this term was applied to Jesus? This really doesn’t seem to fit the context, however, since if that were the case Jesus would not be making any claim for “divinity” for himself over and above any other human being – and therefore he would not be subject to the charge of blasphemy. Rather, this is evidently a case of arguing from the lesser to the greater, a common form of rabbinic argument. The reason the OT judges could be called gods is because they were vehicles of the word of God (cf. 10:35). But granting that premise, Jesus deserves much more than they to be called God. He is the Word incarnate, whom the Father sanctified and sent into the world to save the world (10:36). In light of the prologue to the Gospel of John, it seems this interpretation would have been most natural for the author. If it is permissible to call men “gods” because they were the vehicles of the word of God, how much more permissible is it to use the word “God” of him who is the Word of God?

[11:38]  ⁷² tn Or (perhaps) “Jesus was deeply indignant.”

[11:38]  ⁷³ sn This is a parenthetical note by the author.

[11:56]  ⁷⁴ tn Grk “they were seeking Jesus.”

[11:56]  ⁷⁵ tn Grk “in the temple.”

[13:23]  ⁷⁶ 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]  ⁷⁷ tn Grk “was reclining.” This reflects the normal 1st century practice of eating a meal in a semi-reclining position.

[13:23]  ⁷⁸ 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.

[13:31]  ⁷⁹ tn Grk “Then when.”

[13:31]  ⁸⁰ tn Grk “he”; the referent (Judas) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[14:2]  ⁸¹ tn Many interpreters have associated μοναί (monai) with an Aramaic word that can refer to a stopping place or resting place for a traveler on a journey. This is similar to one of the meanings the word can have in secular Greek (Pausanius 10.31.7). Origen understood the use here to refer to stations on the road to God. This may well have been the understanding of the Latin translators who translated μονή (monh) by mansio, a stopping place. The English translation “mansions” can be traced back to Tyndale, but in Middle English the word simply meant “a dwelling place” (not necessarily large or imposing) with no connotation of being temporary. The interpretation put forward by Origen would have been well suited to Gnosticism, where the soul in its ascent passes through stages during which it is gradually purified of all that is material and therefore evil. It is much more likely that the word μονή should be related to its cognate verb μένω (menw), which is frequently used in the Fourth Gospel to refer to the permanence of relationship between Jesus and the Father and/or Jesus and the believer. Thus the idea of a permanent dwelling place, rather than a temporary stopping place, would be in view. Luther’s translation of μοναί by Wohnungen is very accurate here, as it has the connotation of a permanent residence.

[14:2]  ⁸² sn Most interpreters have understood the reference to my Father’s house as a reference to heaven, and the dwelling places (μονή, monh) as the permanent residences of believers there. This seems consistent with the vocabulary and the context, where in v. 3 Jesus speaks of coming again to take the disciples to himself. However, the phrase in my Father’s house was used previously in the Fourth Gospel in 2:16 to refer to the temple in Jerusalem. The author in 2:19-22 then reinterpreted the temple as Jesus’ body, which was to be destroyed in death and then rebuilt in resurrection after three days. Even more suggestive is the statement by Jesus in 8:35, “Now the slave does not remain (μένω, menw) in the household forever, but the son remains (μένω) forever.” If in the imagery of the Fourth Gospel the phrase in my Father’s house is ultimately a reference to Jesus’ body, the relationship of μονή to μένω suggests the permanent relationship of the believer to Jesus and the Father as an adopted son who remains in the household forever. In this case the “dwelling place” is “in” Jesus himself, where he is, whether in heaven or on earth. The statement in v. 3, “I will come again and receive you to myself,” then refers not just to the parousia, but also to Jesus’ postresurrection return to the disciples in his glorified state, when by virtue of his death on their behalf they may enter into union with him and with the Father as adopted sons. Needless to say, this bears numerous similarities to Pauline theology, especially the concepts of adoption as sons and being “in Christ” which are prominent in passages like Eph 1. It is also important to note, however, the emphasis in the Fourth Gospel itself on the present reality of eternal life (John 5:24, 7:38-39, etc.) and the possibility of worshiping the Father “in the Spirit and in truth” (John 4:21-24) in the present age. There is a sense in which it is possible to say that the future reality is present now. See further J. McCaffrey, The House With Many Rooms (AnBib 114).

[14:2]  ⁸³ tc A number of important mss (Ì^66c א A B C* D K L W Ψ Ë¹³ 33 565 579 892 al lat) have ὅτι (Joti) here, while the majority lack it (Ì^66* C² Θ Ï). Should the ὅτι be included or omitted? The external evidence is significantly stronger for the longer reading. Most Alexandrian and Western mss favor inclusion (it is a little unusual for the Alexandrian to favor the longer reading), while most Byzantine mss favor omission (again, a little unusual). However, the reading of Ì^66*, which aligns with the Byzantine, needs to be given some value. At the same time, the scribe of this papyrus was known for freely omitting and adding words, and the fact that the ms was corrected discounts its testimony here. But because the shorter reading is out of character for the Byzantine text, the shorter reading (omitting the ὅτι) may well be authentic. Internally, the question comes down to whether the shorter reading is more difficult or not. And here, it loses the battle, for it seems to be a clarifying omission (so TCGNT 206). R. E. Brown is certainly right when he states: “all in all, the translation without ὅτι makes the best sense” (John [AB], 2:620). But this tacitly argues for the authenticity of the word. Thus, on both external and internal grounds, the ὅτι should be regarded as authentic.

[14:2]  tn If the ὅτι (Joti) is included (see tc above), there are no less than four possible translations for this sentence: The sentence could be either a question or a statement, and in addition the ὅτι could either indicate content or be causal. How does one determine the best translation? (1) A question here should probably be ruled out because it would imply a previous statement by Jesus that either there are many dwelling places in his Father’s house (if the ὅτι is causal) or he was going off to make a place ready for them (if the ὅτι indicates content). There is no indication anywhere in the Fourth Gospel that Jesus had made such statements prior to this time. So understanding the sentence as a statement is the best option. (2) A statement with ὅτι indicating content is understandable but contradictory. If there were no dwelling places, Jesus would have told them that he was going off to make dwelling places. But the following verse makes clear that Jesus’ departure is not hypothetical but real – he is really going away. So understanding the ὅτι with a causal nuance is the best option. (3) A statement with a causal ὅτι can be understood two ways: (a) “Otherwise I would have told you” is a parenthetical statement, and the ὅτι clause goes with the preceding “There are many dwelling places in my Father’s house.” This would be fairly awkward syntactically, however; it would be much more natural for the ὅτι clause to modify what directly preceded it. (b) “Otherwise I would have told you” is explained by Jesus’ statement that he is going to make ready a place. He makes a logical, necessary connection between his future departure and the reality of the dwelling places in his Father’s house. To sum up, all the possibilities for understanding the verse with the inclusion of ὅτι present some interpretive difficulties, but last option given seems best: “Otherwise, I would have told you, because I am going to make ready a place.” Of all the options it provides the best logical flow of thought in the passage without making any apparent contradictions in the context.

[14:2]  ⁸⁴ tn Or “to prepare.”

[14:2]  ⁸⁵ tn Or “If not, would I have told you that I am going to prepare a place for you?” What is the meaning of the last clause with or without the ὅτι? One of the questions that must be answered here is whether or not τόπος (topos) is to be equated with μονή (monh). In Rev 12:8 τόπος is used to refer to a place in heaven, which would suggest that the two are essentially equal here. Jesus is going ahead of believers to prepare a place for them, a permanent dwelling place in the Father’s house (see the note on this phrase in v. 2).

[14:30]  ⁸⁶ tn Grk “I will no longer speak many things with you.”

[14:30]  ⁸⁷ sn The ruler of this world is a reference to Satan.

[14:30]  ⁸⁸ tn Grk “in me he has nothing.”

[15:2]  ⁸⁹ tn Or “He cuts off.”

[15:2]  sn The Greek verb αἴρω (airw) can mean “lift up” as well as “take away,” and it is sometimes argued that here it is a reference to the gardener “lifting up” (i.e., propping up) a weak branch so that it bears fruit again. In Johannine usage the word occurs in the sense of “lift up” in 8:59 and 5:8-12, but in the sense of “remove” it is found in 11:39, 11:48, 16:22, and 17:15. In context (theological presuppositions aside for the moment) the meaning “remove” does seem more natural and less forced (particularly in light of v. 6, where worthless branches are described as being “thrown out” – an image that seems incompatible with restoration). One option, therefore, would be to understand the branches which are taken away (v. 2) and thrown out (v. 6) as believers who forfeit their salvation because of unfruitfulness. However, many see this interpretation as encountering problems with the Johannine teaching on the security of the believer, especially John 10:28-29. This leaves two basic ways of understanding Jesus’ statements about removal of branches in 15:2 and 15:6: (1) These statements may refer to an unfaithful (disobedient) Christian, who is judged at the judgment seat of Christ “through fire” (cf. 1 Cor 3:11-15). In this case the “removal” of 15:2 may refer (in an extreme case) to the physical death of a disobedient Christian. (2) These statements may refer to someone who was never a genuine believer in the first place (e.g., Judas and the Jews who withdrew after Jesus’ difficult teaching in 6:66), in which case 15:6 refers to eternal judgment. In either instance it is clear that 15:6 refers to the fires of judgment (cf. OT imagery in Ps 80:16 and Ezek 15:1-8). But view (1) requires us to understand this in terms of the judgment of believers at the judgment seat of Christ. This concept does not appear in the Fourth Gospel because from the perspective of the author the believer does not come under judgment; note especially 3:18, 5:24, 5:29. The first reference (3:18) is especially important because it occurs in the context of 3:16-21, the section which is key to the framework of the entire Fourth Gospel and which is repeatedly alluded to throughout. A similar image to this one is used by John the Baptist in Matt 3:10, “And the ax is already laid at the root of the trees; every tree therefore that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire.” Since this is addressed to the Pharisees and Sadducees who were coming to John for baptism, it almost certainly represents a call to initial repentance. More importantly, however, the imagery of being cast into the fire constitutes a reference to eternal judgment, a use of imagery which is much nearer to the Johannine imagery in 15:6 than the Pauline concept of the judgment seat of Christ (a judgment for believers) mentioned above. The use of the Greek verb μένω (menw) in 15:6 also supports view (2). When used of the relationship between Jesus and the disciple and/or Jesus and the Father, it emphasizes the permanence of the relationship (John 6:56, 8:31, 8:35, 14:10). The prototypical branch who has not remained is Judas, who departed in 13:30. He did not bear fruit, and is now in the realm of darkness, a mere tool of Satan. His eternal destiny, being cast into the fire of eternal judgment, is still to come. It seems most likely, therefore, that the branches who do not bear fruit and are taken away and burned are false believers, those who profess to belong to Jesus but who in reality do not belong to him. In the Gospel of John, the primary example of this category is Judas. In 1 John 2:18-19 the “antichrists” fall into the same category; they too may be thought of as branches that did not bear fruit. They departed from the ranks of the Christians because they never did really belong, and their departure shows that they did not belong.

[15:2]  ⁹⁰ tn Or “does not yield.”

[15:2]  ⁹¹ tn Grk “And he”; the conjunction καί (kai, “and”) has been omitted in the translation in keeping with the tendency in contemporary English style to use shorter sentences.

[15:2]  ⁹² tn Or “trims”; Grk “cleanses” (a wordplay with “clean” in v. 3). Καθαίρει (kaqairei) is not the word one would have expected here, but it provides the transition from the vine imagery to the disciples – there is a wordplay (not reproducible in English) between αἴρει (airei) and καθαίρει in this verse. While the purpose of the Father in cleansing his people is clear, the precise means by which he does so is not immediately obvious. This will become clearer, however, in the following verse.

[15:2]  ⁹³ tn Or “that yields.”

[16:24]  ⁹⁴ 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.

[16:30]  ⁹⁵ tn Grk “all things.”

[16:30]  ⁹⁶ tn Grk “and have no need of anyone.”

[16:30]  ⁹⁷ tn The word “anything” is not in the Greek text, but is implied. Direct objects were often omitted in Greek when clear from the context.

[16:30]  ⁹⁸ tn Or “By this.”

[18:39]  ⁹⁹ tn The word “prisoner” is not in the Greek text but is implied.

[18:39]  ¹⁰⁰ sn Pilate then offered to release Jesus, reminding the Jewish authorities that they had a custom that he release one prisoner for them at the Passover. There is no extra-biblical evidence alluding to the practice. It is, however, mentioned in Matthew and Mark, described either as a practice of Pilate (Mark 15:6) or of the Roman governor (Matt 27:15). These references may explain the lack of extra-biblical attestation: The custom to which Pilate refers here (18:39) is not a permanent one acknowledged by all the Roman governors, but one peculiar to Pilate as a means of appeasement, meant to better relations with his subjects. Such a limited meaning is certainly possible and consistent with the statement here.

[19:4]  ¹⁰¹ tn Grk “to them.” The words “the Jewish leaders” are supplied from John 18:38 for clarity.

[19:4]  ¹⁰² tn Or “find no basis for an accusation”; Grk “find no cause.”

[20:30]  ¹⁰³ tn Or “did.”

[20:30]  ¹⁰⁴ tc ‡ Although most mss, including several important ones (Ì⁶⁶ א C D L W Θ Ψ Ë^1,13 33 Ï lat), read αὐτοῦ (autou, “his”) after τῶν μαθητῶν (twn maqhtwn, “the disciples”), the pronoun is lacking in A B K Δ 0250 al. The weight of the witnesses for the inclusion is somewhat stronger than that for the exclusion. However, the addition of “his” to “disciples” is a frequent scribal emendation and as such is a predictable variant. It is thus most likely that the shorter reading is authentic. NA²⁷ puts the pronoun in brackets, indicating doubts as to its authenticity.

[20:30]  ¹⁰⁵ tn Grk “are not written.”

[20:30]  ¹⁰⁶ sn The author mentions many other miraculous signs performed by Jesus in the presence of the disciples, which are not written in the Gospel. What are these signs the author of the Gospel has in mind? One can only speculate. The author says they were performed in the presence of the disciples, which emphasizes again their role as witnesses (cf. 15:27). The point here is that the author has been selective in his use of material. He has chosen to record those incidents from the life and ministry of Jesus which supported his purpose in writing the Gospel. Much which might be of tremendous interest, but does not directly contribute to that purpose in writing, he has omitted. The author explains his purpose in writing in the following verse.