Yohanes 1:18

1:18 No one has ever seen God. The only one, ¹  himself God, who is in closest fellowship with ²  the Father, has made God ³  known. ⁴ 

Yohanes 1:50-51

1:50 Jesus said to him, ⁵  “Because I told you that I saw you under the fig tree, do you believe? You will see greater things than these.” ⁶  1:51 He continued, ⁷  “I tell all of you the solemn truth ⁸  – you will see heaven opened and the angels of God ascending and descending on the Son of Man.” ⁹ 

Yohanes 2:16

2:16 To those who sold the doves he said, “Take these things away from here! Do not make ¹⁰  my Father’s house a marketplace!” ¹¹ 

Yohanes 2:23

Jesus at the Passover Feast

2:23 Now while Jesus ¹²  was in Jerusalem ¹³  at the feast of the Passover, many people believed in his name because they saw the miraculous signs he was doing. ¹⁴ 

Yohanes 3:3

3:3 Jesus replied, ¹⁵  “I tell you the solemn truth, ¹⁶  unless a person is born from above, ¹⁷  he cannot see the kingdom of God.” ¹⁸ 

Yohanes 3:36--4:1

3:36 The one who believes in the Son has eternal life. The one who rejects ¹⁹  the Son will not see life, but God’s wrath ²⁰  remains ²¹  on him.

Departure From Judea

4:1 Now when Jesus ²²  knew that the Pharisees ²³  had heard that he ²⁴  was winning ²⁵  and baptizing more disciples than John

Yohanes 4:39

The Samaritans Respond

4:39 Now many Samaritans from that town believed in him because of the report of the woman who testified, ²⁶  “He told me everything I ever did.”

Yohanes 4:47

4:47 When he heard that Jesus had come back from Judea to Galilee, he went to him and begged him ²⁷  to come down and heal his son, who was about to die.

Yohanes 6:26

6:26 Jesus replied, ²⁸  “I tell you the solemn truth, ²⁹  you are looking for me not because you saw miraculous signs, but because you ate all the loaves of bread you wanted. ³⁰ 

Yohanes 6:42

6:42 and they said, “Isn’t this Jesus the son of Joseph, whose father and mother we know? How can he now say, ‘I have come down from heaven’?”

Yohanes 6:65

6:65 So Jesus added, ³¹  “Because of this I told you that no one can come to me unless the Father has allowed him to come.” ³² 

Yohanes 7:30

7:30 So then they tried to seize Jesus, ³³  but no one laid a hand on him, because his time ³⁴  had not yet come.

Yohanes 7:37

Teaching About the Spirit

7:37 On the last day of the feast, the greatest day, ³⁵  Jesus stood up and shouted out, ³⁶  “If anyone is thirsty, let him come to me, and

Yohanes 7:52

7:52 They replied, ³⁷  “You aren’t from Galilee too, are you? ³⁸  Investigate carefully and you will see that no prophet ³⁹  comes from Galilee!”

Yohanes 8:21-22

Where Jesus Came From and Where He is Going

8:21 Then Jesus ⁴⁰  said to them again, ⁴¹  “I am going away, and you will look for me ⁴²  but will die in your sin. ⁴³  Where I am going you cannot come.” 8:22 So the Jewish leaders ⁴⁴  began to say, ⁴⁵  “Perhaps he is going to kill himself, because he says, ‘Where I am going you cannot come.’”

Yohanes 11:4

11:4 When Jesus heard this, he said, “This sickness will not lead to death, ⁴⁶  but to God’s glory, ⁴⁷  so that the Son of God may be glorified through it.” ⁴⁸ 

Yohanes 11:11

11:11 After he said this, he added, ⁴⁹  “Our friend Lazarus has fallen asleep. ⁵⁰  But I am going there to awaken him.”

Yohanes 11:39

11:39 Jesus said, “Take away the stone.” ⁵¹  Martha, the sister of the deceased, ⁵²  replied, “Lord, by this time the body will have a bad smell, ⁵³  because he has been buried ⁵⁴  four days.” ⁵⁵ 

Yohanes 12:3

12:3 Then Mary took three quarters of a pound ⁵⁶  of expensive aromatic oil from pure nard ⁵⁷  and anointed the feet of Jesus. She ⁵⁸  then wiped his feet dry with her hair. (Now the house was filled with the fragrance of the perfumed oil.) ⁵⁹ 

Yohanes 13:21

13:21 When he had said these things, Jesus was greatly distressed ⁶⁰  in spirit, and testified, ⁶¹  “I tell you the solemn truth, ⁶²  one of you will betray me.” ⁶³ 

Yohanes 19:26-27

19:26 So when Jesus saw his mother and the disciple whom he loved standing there, he said to his mother, “Woman, ⁶⁴  look, here is your son!” 19:27 He then said to his disciple, “Look, here is your mother!” From that very time ⁶⁵  the disciple took her into his own home.

Yohanes 20:18

20:18 Mary Magdalene came and informed the disciples, “I have seen the Lord!” And she told them ⁶⁶  what ⁶⁷  Jesus ⁶⁸  had said to her. ⁶⁹ 

Yohanes 20:30-31

20:30 Now Jesus performed ⁷⁰  many other miraculous signs in the presence of the ⁷¹  disciples, which are not recorded ⁷²  in this book. ⁷³  20:31 But these ⁷⁴  are recorded ⁷⁵  so that you may believe ⁷⁶  that Jesus is the Christ, ⁷⁷  the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name. ⁷⁸ 

[1:18]  ¹ 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]  ² 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]  ³ tn Grk “him”; the referent (God) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[1:18]  ⁴ 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.”

[1:50]  ⁵ tn Grk “answered and said to him.” This has been simplified in the translation to “said to him.”

[1:50]  ⁶ 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]  ⁷ tn Grk “and he said to him.”

[1:51]  ⁸ tn Grk “Truly, truly, I say to you.”

[1:51]  ⁹ 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.

[2:16]  ¹⁰ tn Or (perhaps) “Stop making.”

[2:16]  ¹¹ 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.

[2:23]  ¹² tn Grk “he”; the referent (Jesus) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[2:23]  ¹³ map For location see Map5 B1; Map6 F3; Map7 E2; Map8 F2; Map10 B3; JP1 F4; JP2 F4; JP3 F4; JP4 F4.

[2:23]  ¹⁴ 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.

[3:3]  ¹⁵ tn Grk “answered and said to him.”

[3:3]  ¹⁶ tn Grk “Truly, truly, I say to you.”

[3:3]  ¹⁷ 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]  ¹⁸ 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.

[3:36]  ¹⁹ tn Or “refuses to believe,” or “disobeys.”

[3:36]  ²⁰ tn Or “anger because of evil,” or “punishment.”

[3:36]  ²¹ tn Or “resides.”

[4:1]  ²² 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]  ²³ sn See the note on Pharisees in 1:24.

[4:1]  ²⁴ 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]  ²⁵ tn Grk “was making.”

[4:39]  ²⁶ tn Grk “when she testified.”

[4:47]  ²⁷ tn The direct object of ἠρώτα (hrwta) is supplied from context. Direct objects were frequently omitted in Greek when clear from the context.

[6:26]  ²⁸ tn Grk “answered and said to them.”

[6:26]  ²⁹ tn Grk “Truly, truly, I say to you.”

[6:26]  ³⁰ tn Grk “because you ate of the loaves of bread and were filled.”

[6:65]  ³¹ tn Grk “And he said”; the referent (Jesus) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[6:65]  ³² tn Grk “unless it has been permitted to him by the Father.”

[7:30]  ³³ tn Grk “him”; the referent (Jesus) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[7:30]  sn Here the response is on the part of the crowd, who tried to seize Jesus. This is apparently distinct from the attempted arrest by the authorities mentioned in 7:32.

[7:30]  ³⁴ tn Grk “his hour.”

[7:37]  ³⁵ sn There is a problem with the identification of this reference to the last day of the feast, the greatest day: It appears from Deut 16:13 that the feast went for seven days. Lev 23:36, however, makes it plain that there was an eighth day, though it was mentioned separately from the seven. It is not completely clear whether the seventh or eighth day was the climax of the feast, called here by the author the “last great day of the feast.” Since according to the Mishnah (m. Sukkah 4.1) the ceremonies with water and lights did not continue after the seventh day, it seems more probable that this is the day the author mentions.

[7:37]  ³⁶ tn Grk “Jesus stood up and cried out, saying.”

[7:52]  ³⁷ tn Grk “They answered and said to him.”

[7:52]  ³⁸ 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?”).

[7:52]  ³⁹ tc At least one early and important ms (Ì^66*) places the article before “prophet” (ὁ προφήτης, Jo profhths), making this a reference to the “prophet like Moses” mentioned in Deut 18:15.

[7:52]  tn This claim by the leaders presents some difficulty, because Jonah had been from Gath Hepher, in Galilee (2 Kgs 14:25). Also the Babylonian Talmud later stated, “There was not a tribe in Israel from which there did not come prophets” (b. Sukkah 27b). Two explanations are possible: (1) In the heat of anger the members of the Sanhedrin overlooked the facts (this is perhaps the easiest explanation). (2) This anarthrous noun is to be understood as a reference to the prophet of Deut 18:15 (note the reading of Ì⁶⁶ which is articular), by this time an eschatological figure in popular belief. This would produce in the text of John’s Gospel a high sense of irony indeed, since the religious authorities by their insistence that “the Prophet” could not come from Galilee displayed their true ignorance of where Jesus came from on two levels at once (Bethlehem, his birthplace, the fulfillment of Mic 5:2, but also heaven, from which he was sent by the Father). The author does not even bother to refute the false attestation of Jesus’ place of birth as Galilee (presumably Christians knew all too well where Jesus came from).

[8:21]  ⁴⁰ tn Grk “He”; the referent (Jesus) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[8:21]  ⁴¹ tn The expression οὖν πάλιν (oun palin) indicates some sort of break in the sequence of events, but it is not clear how long. The author does not mention the interval between 8:12-20 and this next recorded dialogue. The feast of Tabernacles is past, and the next reference to time is 10:22, where the feast of the Dedication is mentioned. The interval is two months, and these discussions could have taken place at any time within that interval, as long as one assumes something of a loose chronological framework. However, if the material in the Fourth Gospel is arranged theologically or thematically, such an assumption would not apply.

[8:21]  ⁴² tn Grk “you will seek me.”

[8:21]  ⁴³ tn The expression ἐν τῇ ἁμαρτίᾳ ὑμῶν ἀποθανεῖσθε (en th Jamartia Jumwn apoqaneisqe) is similar to an expression found in the LXX at Ezek 3:18, 20 and Prov 24:9. Note the singular of ἁμαρτία (the plural occurs later in v. 24). To die with one’s sin unrepented and unatoned would be the ultimate disaster to befall a person. Jesus’ warning is stern but to the point.

[8:22]  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 authorities or leaders in Jerusalem. It was the Pharisees who had begun this line of questioning in John 8:13, and there has been no clear change since then in the identity of Jesus’ opponents.

[8:22]  ⁴⁵ tn The imperfect verb has been translated with ingressive force (“began to say”) because the comments that follow were occasioned by Jesus’ remarks in the preceding verse about his upcoming departure.

[11:4]  ⁴⁶ tn Grk “This sickness is not to death.”

[11:4]  sn Jesus plainly stated the purpose of Lazarus’ sickness in the plan of God: The end of the matter would not be death, but the glorification of the Son. Johannine double-meanings abound here: Even though death would not be the end of the matter, Lazarus is going to die; and ultimately his death and resurrection would lead to the death and resurrection of the Son of God (11:45-53). Furthermore, the glorification of the Son is not praise that comes to him for the miracle, but his death, resurrection, and return to the Father which the miracle precipitates (note the response of the Jewish authorities in 11:47-53).

[11:4]  ⁴⁷ tn Or “to God’s praise.”

[11:4]  ⁴⁸ sn So that the Son of God may be glorified through it. These statements are highly ironic: For Lazarus, the sickness did not end in his death, because he was restored to life. But for Jesus himself, the miraculous sign he performed led to his own death, because it confirmed the authorities in their plan to kill Jesus (11:47-53). In the Gospel of John, Jesus’ death is consistently portrayed as his ‘glorification’ through which he accomplishes his return to the Father.

[11:11]  ⁴⁹ tn Grk “He said these things, and after this he said to them.”

[11:11]  ⁵⁰ tn The verb κοιμάω (koimaw) literally means “sleep,” but it is often used in the Bible as a euphemism for death when speaking of believers. This metaphorical usage by its very nature emphasizes the hope of resurrection: Believers will one day “wake up” out of death. Here the term refers to death, but “asleep” was used in the translation to emphasize the metaphorical, rhetorical usage of the term, especially in light of the disciples’ confusion over what Jesus actually meant (see v. 13).

[11:39]  ⁵¹ tn Or “Remove the stone.”

[11:39]  ⁵² tn Grk “the sister of the one who had died.”

[11:39]  ⁵³ tn Grk “already he stinks.”

[11:39]  ⁵⁴ tn Or “been there” (in the tomb – see John 11:17).

[11:39]  ⁵⁵ sn He has been buried four days. Although all the details of the miracle itself are not given, those details which are mentioned are important. The statement made by Martha is extremely significant for understanding what actually took place. There is no doubt that Lazarus had really died, because the decomposition of his body had already begun to take place, since he had been dead for four days.

[12:3]  ⁵⁶ tn Or “half a liter”; Grk “a pound” (that is, a Roman pound, about 325 grams or 12 ounces).

[12:3]  ⁵⁷ tn Μύρον (muron) was usually made of myrrh (from which the English word is derived) but here it is used in the sense of ointment or perfumed oil (L&N 6.205). The adjective πιστικῆς (pistikh") is difficult with regard to its exact meaning; some have taken it to derive from πίστις (pistis) and relate to the purity of the oil of nard. More probably it is something like a brand name, “pistic nard,” the exact significance of which has not been discovered.

[12:3]  sn Nard or spikenard is a fragrant oil from the root and spike of the nard plant of northern India. This aromatic oil, if made of something like nard, would have been extremely expensive, costing up to a year’s pay for an average laborer.

[12:3]  ⁵⁸ tn Grk “And she.” 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.

[12:3]  ⁵⁹ sn This is a parenthetical note by the author. With a note characteristic of someone who was there and remembered, the author adds that the house was filled with the fragrance of the perfumed oil. In the later rabbinic literature, Ecclesiastes Rabbah 7.1.1 states “The fragrance of good oil is diffused from the bedroom to the dining hall, but a good name is diffused from one end of the world to the other.” If such a saying was known in the 1st century, this might be the author’s way of indicating that Mary’s act of devotion would be spoken of throughout the entire world (compare the comment in Mark 14:9).

[13:21]  ⁶⁰ tn Or “greatly troubled.”

[13:21]  ⁶¹ tn Grk “and testified and said.”

[13:21]  ⁶² tn Grk “Truly, truly, I say to you.”

[13:21]  ⁶³ tn Or “will hand me over.”

[19:26]  ⁶⁴ 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; see BDAG 208-9 s.v. γυνή 1). 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? Jesus probably used the term here to help establish Mary and the beloved disciple in a new “mother-son” relationship. Someone would soon need to provide for Mary since Jesus, her oldest son, would no longer be alive. By using this term Jesus distanced himself from Mary so the beloved disciple could take his place as her earthly son (cf. John 2:4). See D. A. Carson, John, 617-18, for discussion about symbolic interpretations of this relationship between Mary and the beloved disciple.

[19:27]  ⁶⁵ tn Grk “from that very hour.”

[20:18]  ⁶⁶ tn The words “she told them” are repeated from the first part of the same verse to improve clarity.

[20:18]  ⁶⁷ tn Grk “the things.”

[20:18]  ⁶⁸ tn Grk “he”; the referent (Jesus) is specified in the translation for clarity.

[20:18]  ⁶⁹ tn The first part of Mary’s statement, introduced by ὅτι (Joti), is direct discourse (ἑώρακα τὸν κύριον, Jewraka ton kurion), while the second clause switches to indirect discourse (καὶ ταῦτα εἶπεν αὐτῇ, kai tauta eipen auth). This has the effect of heightening the emphasis on the first part of the statement.

[20:30]  ⁷⁰ tn Or “did.”

[20:30]  ⁷¹ 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]  ⁷² tn Grk “are not written.”

[20:30]  ⁷³ 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.

[20:31]  ⁷⁴ tn Grk “these things.”

[20:31]  ⁷⁵ tn Grk “are written.”

[20:31]  ⁷⁶ tc ‡ A difficult textual variant is present at this point in the Greek text. Some mss (Ì^66vid א* B Θ 0250 pc) read the present subjunctive πιστεύητε (pisteuhte) after ἵνα (Jina; thus NEB text, “that you may hold the faith”) while others (א² A C D L W Ψ Ë^1,13 33 Ï) read the aorist subjunctive πιστεύσητε (pisteushte) after ἵνα (cf. NEB margin, “that you may come to believe”). As reflected by the renderings of the NEB text and margin, it is often assumed that the present tense would suggest ongoing belief (i.e., the Fourth Gospel primarily addressed those who already believed, and was intended to strengthen their faith), while the aorist tense would speak of coming to faith (i.e., John’s Gospel was primarily evangelistic in nature). Both textual variants enjoy significant ms support, although the present subjunctive has somewhat superior witnesses on its behalf. On internal grounds it is hard to decide which is more likely the original. Many resolve this issue on the basis of a reconstruction of the overall purpose of the Gospel, viz., whether it is addressed to unbelievers or believers. However, since elsewhere in the Gospel of John (1) the present tense can refer to both initial faith and continuation in the faith and (2) the aorist tense simply refrains from commenting on the issue, it is highly unlikely that the distinction here would be determinative for the purpose of the Fourth Gospel. The question of purpose cannot be resolved by choosing one textual variant over the other in 20:31, but must be decided on other factors. Nevertheless, if a choice has to be made, the present subjunctive is the preferred reading. NA²⁷ puts the aorist’s sigma in brackets, thus representing both readings virtually equally (so TCGNT 220).

[20:31]  ⁷⁷ tn Or “Jesus is the Messiah” (Both Greek “Christ” and Hebrew and Aramaic “Messiah” mean “one who has been anointed”).

[20:31]  sn See the note on Christ in 1:20.

[20:31]  ⁷⁸ sn John 20:31. A major question concerning this verse, the purpose statement of the Gospel of John, is whether the author is writing primarily for an audience of unbelievers, with purely evangelistic emphasis, or whether he envisions an audience of believers, whom he wants to strengthen in their faith. Several points are important in this discussion: (1) in the immediate context (20:30), the other signs spoken of by the author were performed in the presence of disciples; (2) in the case of the first of the signs, at Cana, the author makes a point of the effect the miracle had on the disciples (2:11); (3) if the primary thrust of the Gospel is toward unbelievers, it is difficult to see why so much material in chaps. 13-17 (the last meal and Farewell Discourse, concluding with Jesus’ prayer for the disciples), which deals almost exclusively with the disciples, is included; (4) the disciples themselves were repeatedly said to have believed in Jesus throughout the Gospel, beginning with 2:11, yet they still needed to believe after the resurrection (if Thomas’ experience in 20:27-28 is any indication); and (5) the Gospel appears to be written with the assumption that the readers are familiar with the basic story (or perhaps with one or more of the synoptic gospel accounts, although this is less clear). Thus no account of the birth of Jesus is given at all, and although he is identified as being from Nazareth, the words of the Pharisees and chief priests to Nicodemus (7:52) are almost certainly to be taken as ironic, assuming the reader knows where Jesus was really from. Likewise, when Mary is identified in 11:2 as the one who anointed Jesus’ feet with oil, it is apparently assumed that the readers are familiar with the story, since the incident involved is not mentioned in the Fourth Gospel until 12:3. These observations must be set over against the clear statement of purpose in the present verse, 20:31, which seems to have significant evangelistic emphasis. In addition to this there is the repeated emphasis on witness throughout the Fourth Gospel (cf. the witness of John the Baptist in 1:7, 8, 15, 32, and 34, along with 5:33; the Samaritan woman in 4:39; Jesus’ own witness, along with that of the Father who sent him, in 8:14, 18, and 18:37; the disciples themselves in 15:27; and finally the testimony of the author himself in 19:35 and 21:24). In light of all this evidence it seems best to say that the author wrote with a dual purpose: (1) to witness to unbelievers concerning Jesus, in order that they come to believe in him and have eternal life; and (2) to strengthen the faith of believers, by deepening and expanding their understanding of who Jesus is.