Yohanes 1:33

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.’

Yohanes 2:9-10

2:9 When ¹  the head steward tasted the water that had been turned to wine, not knowing where it came from ²  (though the servants who had drawn the water knew), he ³  called the bridegroom 2:10 and said to him, “Everyone ⁴  serves the good wine first, and then the cheaper ⁵  wine when the guests ⁶  are drunk. You have kept the good wine until now!”

Yohanes 2:22

2:22 So after he was raised from the dead, his disciples remembered that he had said this, and they believed the scripture ⁷  and the saying ⁸  that Jesus had spoken.

Yohanes 4:21

4:21 Jesus said to her, “Believe me, woman, ⁹  a time ¹⁰  is coming when you will worship ¹¹  the Father neither on this mountain nor in Jerusalem.

Yohanes 4:45

4:45 So when he came to Galilee, the Galileans welcomed him because they had seen all the things he had done in Jerusalem ¹²  at the feast ¹³  (for they themselves had gone to the feast). ¹⁴ 

Yohanes 5:7

5:7 The sick man answered him, “Sir, ¹⁵  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, ¹⁶  someone else ¹⁷  goes down there ¹⁸  before me.”

Yohanes 8:28

8:28 Then Jesus said, ¹⁹  “When you lift up the Son of Man, then you will know that I am he, ²⁰  and I do nothing on my own initiative, ²¹  but I speak just what the Father taught me. ²² 

Yohanes 12:16

12:16 (His disciples did not understand these things when they first happened, ²³  but when Jesus was glorified, ²⁴  then they remembered that these things were written about him and that these things had happened ²⁵  to him.) ²⁶ 

Yohanes 12:35

12:35 Jesus replied, ²⁷  “The light is with you for a little while longer. ²⁸  Walk while you have the light, so that the darkness may not overtake you. ²⁹  The one who walks in the darkness does not know where he is going.

Yohanes 19:6

19:6 When the chief priests and their officers saw him, they shouted out, “Crucify ³⁰  him! Crucify him!” ³¹  Pilate said, ³²  “You take him and crucify him! ³³  Certainly ³⁴  I find no reason for an accusation ³⁵  against him!”

Yohanes 19:23

19:23 Now when the soldiers crucified ³⁶  Jesus, they took his clothes and made four shares, one for each soldier, ³⁷  and the tunic ³⁸  remained. (Now the tunic ³⁹  was seamless, woven from top to bottom as a single piece.) ⁴⁰ 

Yohanes 20:19

Jesus’ Appearance to the Disciples

20:19 On the evening of that day, the first day of the week, the disciples had gathered together ⁴¹  and locked the doors ⁴²  of the place ⁴³  because they were afraid of the Jewish leaders. ⁴⁴  Jesus came and stood among them and said to them, “Peace be with you.”

Yohanes 21:7

21:7 Then the disciple whom ⁴⁵  Jesus loved ⁴⁶  said to Peter, “It is the Lord!” So Simon Peter, when he heard that it was the Lord, tucked in his outer garment (for he had nothing on underneath it), ⁴⁷  and plunged ⁴⁸  into the sea.

Yohanes 21:15

Peter’s Restoration

21:15 Then when they had finished breakfast, Jesus said to Simon Peter, “Simon, son of John, ⁴⁹  do you love me more than these do?” ⁵⁰  He replied, ⁵¹  “Yes, Lord, you know I love you.” ⁵²  Jesus ⁵³  told him, “Feed my lambs.”

[2:9]  ¹ 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]  ² tn Grk “and he did not know where it came from.”

[2:9]  ³ 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]  ⁴ tn Grk “every man” (in a generic sense).

[2:10]  ⁵ tn Or “poorer.”

[2:10]  ⁶ tn Grk “when they”; the referent (the guests) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[2:22]  ⁷ 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]  ⁸ tn Or “statement”; Grk “word.”

[4:21]  ⁹ 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]  ¹⁰ tn Grk “an hour.”

[4:21]  ¹¹ tn The verb is plural.

[4:45]  ¹² 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]  ¹³ sn See John 2:23-25.

[4:45]  ¹⁴ 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.

[5:7]  ¹⁵ 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]  ¹⁶ tn Grk “while I am going.”

[5:7]  ¹⁷ tn Grk “another.”

[5:7]  ¹⁸ tn The word “there” is not in the Greek text but is implied.

[8:28]  ¹⁹ tn Grk “Then Jesus said to them” (the words “to them” are not found in all mss).

[8:28]  ²⁰ tn Grk “that I am.” See the note on this phrase in v. 24.

[8:28]  ²¹ tn Grk “I do nothing from myself.”

[8:28]  ²² tn Grk “but just as the Father taught me, these things I speak.”

[12:16]  ²³ tn Or “did not understand these things at first”; Grk “formerly.”

[12:16]  ²⁴ sn When Jesus was glorified, that is, glorified through his resurrection, exaltation, and return to the Father. Jesus’ glorification is consistently portrayed this way in the Gospel of John.

[12:16]  ²⁵ tn Grk “and that they had done these things,” though the referent is probably indefinite and not referring to the disciples; as such, the best rendering is as a passive (see ExSyn 402-3; R. E. Brown, John [AB], 1:458).

[12:16]  ²⁶ sn The comment His disciples did not understand these things when they first happened (a parenthetical note by the author) informs the reader that Jesus’ disciples did not at first associate the prophecy from Zechariah with the events as they happened. This came with the later (postresurrection) insight which the Holy Spirit would provide after Jesus’ resurrection and return to the Father. Note the similarity with John 2:22, which follows another allusion to a prophecy in Zechariah (14:21).

[12:35]  ²⁷ tn Grk “Then Jesus said to them.”

[12:35]  ²⁸ tn Grk “Yet a little while the light is with you.”

[12:35]  ²⁹ sn The warning Walk while you have the light, so that the darkness may not overtake you operates on at least two different levels: (1) To the Jewish people in Jerusalem to whom Jesus spoke, the warning was a reminder that there was only a little time left for them to accept him as their Messiah. (2) To those later individuals to whom the Fourth Gospel was written, and to every person since, the words of Jesus are also a warning: There is a finite, limited time in which each individual has opportunity to respond to the Light of the world (i.e., Jesus); after that comes darkness. One’s response to the Light decisively determines one’s judgment for eternity.

[19:6]  ³⁰ sn Crucifixion was the cruelest form of punishment practiced by the Romans. Roman citizens could not normally undergo it. It was reserved for the worst crimes, like treason and evasion of due process in a capital case. The Roman statesman and orator Cicero (106-43 b.c.) called it “a cruel and disgusting penalty” (Against Verres 2.5.63-66 §§163-70); Josephus (J. W. 7.6.4 [7.203]) called it the worst of deaths.

[19:6]  ³¹ tn The word “him” is not in the Greek text. Direct objects were often omitted in Greek when clear from context.

[19:6]  ³² tn Grk “said to them.” The words “to them” are not translated because they are unnecessary in contemporary English style.

[19:6]  ³³ sn How are Pilate’s words “You take him and crucify him” to be understood? Was he offering a serious alternative to the priests who wanted Jesus crucified? Was he offering them an exception to the statement in 18:31 that the Jewish authorities did not have the power to carry out a death penalty? Although a few scholars have suggested that the situation was at this point so far out of Pilate’s control that he really was telling the high priests they could go ahead and crucify a man he had found to be innocent, this seems unlikely. It is far more likely that Pilate’s statement should be understood as one of frustration and perhaps sarcasm. This seems to be supported by the context, for the Jewish authorities make no attempt at this point to seize Jesus and crucify him. Rather they continue to pester Pilate to order the crucifixion.

[19:6]  ³⁴ tn On this use of γάρ (gar) used in exclamations and strong affirmations, see BDAG 190 s.v. γάρ 3.

[19:6]  ³⁵ tn Or “find no basis for an accusation”; Grk “find no cause.”

[19:23]  ³⁶ sn See the note on Crucify in 19:6.

[19:23]  ³⁷ sn Four shares, one for each soldier. The Gospel of John is the only one to specify the number of soldiers involved in the crucifixion. This was a quaternion, a squad of four soldiers. It was accepted Roman practice for the soldiers who performed a crucifixion to divide the possessions of the person executed among themselves.

[19:23]  ³⁸ tn Or “shirt” (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.

[19:23]  ³⁹ tn Or “shirt” (a long garment worn under the cloak next to the skin). See the note on the same word earlier in this verse.

[19:23]  ⁴⁰ sn This is a parenthetical note by the author.

[20:19]  ⁴¹ tn Although the words “had gathered together” are omitted in some of the earliest and best mss, they are nevertheless implied, and have thus been included in the translation.

[20:19]  ⁴² tn Grk “the doors were shut”; “locked” conveys a more appropriate idea for the modern English reader.

[20:19]  sn The fact that the disciples locked the doors is a perfectly understandable reaction to the events of the past few days. But what is the significance of the inclusion of this statement by the author? It is often taken to mean that Jesus, when he entered the room, passed through the closed doors. This may well be the case, but it may be assuming too much about our knowledge of the mode in which the resurrected body of Jesus exists. The text does not explicitly state how Jesus got through the closed doors. It is possible to assume that the doors opened of their own accord before him, or that he simply appeared in the middle of the room without passing through the doors at all. The point the author makes here is simply that the closed doors were no obstacle at all to the resurrected Jesus.

[20:19]  ⁴³ tn Grk “where they were.”

[20:19]  ⁴⁴ 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. (For further information see R. G. Bratcher, “‘The Jews’ in the Gospel of John,” BT 26 [1975]: 401-9.) Here the phrase refers to the Jewish leaders.

[21:7]  ⁴⁵ tn Grk “the disciple, that one whom.”

[21:7]  ⁴⁶ sn On the disciple whom Jesus loved see 13:23-26.

[21:7]  ⁴⁷ tn Grk “for he was naked.” Peter’s behavior here has been puzzling to many interpreters. It is usually understood that the Greek word γυμνός (gumnos, usually translated “naked”) does not refer to complete nudity (as it could), since this would have been offensive to Jewish sensibilities in this historical context. It is thus commonly understood to mean “stripped for work” here (cf. NASB, NLT), that is, with one’s outer clothing removed, and Peter was wearing either a loincloth or a loose-fitting tunic (a long shirt-like garment worn under a cloak, cf. NAB, “for he was lightly clad”). Believing himself inadequately dressed to greet the Lord, Peter threw his outer garment around himself and dived into the sea. C. K. Barrett (St. John, 580-81) offered the explanation that a greeting was a religious act and thus could not be performed unless one was clothed. This still leaves the improbable picture of a person with much experience around the water putting on his outer garment before diving in. R. E. Brown’s suggestion (John [AB], 2:1072) seems much more probable here: The Greek verb used (διαζώννυμι, diazwnnumi) does not necessarily mean putting clothing on, but rather tying the clothing around oneself (the same verb is used in 13:4-5 of Jesus tying the towel around himself). The statement that Peter was “naked” could just as well mean that he was naked underneath the outer garment, and thus could not take it off before jumping into the water. But he did pause to tuck it up and tie it with the girdle before jumping in, to allow himself more freedom of movement. Thus the clause that states Peter was naked is explanatory (note the use of for), explaining why Peter girded up his outer garment rather than taking it off – he had nothing on underneath it and so could not remove it.

[21:7]  sn This is a parenthetical note by the author.

[21:7]  ⁴⁸ tn Grk “threw himself.”

[21:15]  ⁴⁹ 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]  ⁵⁰ 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]  ⁵¹ tn Grk “He said to him.”

[21:15]  ⁵² 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]  ⁵³ tn Grk “He”; the referent (Jesus) has been specified in the translation for clarity.