Yohanes 2:6

2:6 Now there were six stone water jars there for Jewish ceremonial washing, ¹  each holding twenty or thirty gallons. ² 

Yohanes 4:33

4:33 So the disciples began to say ³  to one another, “No one brought him anything ⁴  to eat, did they?” ⁵ 

Yohanes 8:56

8:56 Your father Abraham was overjoyed ⁶  to see my day, and he saw it and was glad.” ⁷ 

Yohanes 9:2

9:2 His disciples asked him, ⁸  “Rabbi, who committed the sin that caused him to be born blind, this man ⁹  or his parents?” ¹⁰ 

Yohanes 10:39

10:39 Then ¹¹  they attempted ¹²  again to seize him, but he escaped their clutches. ¹³ 

Yohanes 18:13

18:13 They ¹⁴  brought him first to Annas, for he was the father-in-law of Caiaphas, who was high priest that year. ¹⁵ 

Yohanes 19:30

19:30 When ¹⁶  he had received the sour wine, Jesus said, “It is completed!” ¹⁷  Then he bowed his head and gave up his spirit. ¹⁸ 

[2:6]  ¹ tn Grk “for the purification of the Jews.”

[2:6]  ² tn Grk “holding two or three metretes” (about 75 to 115 liters). Each of the pots held 2 or 3 μετρηταί (metrhtai). A μετρητῆς (metrhths) was about 9 gallons (40 liters); thus each jar held 18-27 gallons (80-120 liters) and the total volume of liquid involved was 108-162 gallons (480-720 liters).

[2:6]  sn Significantly, these jars held water for Jewish ceremonial washing (purification rituals). The water of Jewish ritual purification has become the wine of the new messianic age. The wine may also be, after the fashion of Johannine double meanings, a reference to the wine of the Lord’s Supper. A number have suggested this, but there does not seem to be anything in the immediate context which compels this; it seems more related to how frequently a given interpreter sees references to the sacraments in John’s Gospel as a whole.

[4:33]  ³ tn An ingressive imperfect conveys the idea that Jesus’ reply provoked the disciples’ response.

[4:33]  ⁴ tn The direct object of ἤνεγκεν (hnenken) in Greek is understood; “anything” is supplied in English.

[4:33]  ⁵ 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 it is “did they?”).

[8:56]  ⁶ tn Or “rejoiced greatly.”

[8:56]  ⁷ tn What is the meaning of Jesus’ statement that the patriarch Abraham “saw” his day and rejoiced? The use of past tenses would seem to refer to something that occurred during the patriarch’s lifetime. Genesis Rabbah 44:25ff, (cf. 59:6) states that Rabbi Akiba, in a debate with Rabbi Johanan ben Zakkai, held that Abraham had been shown not this world only but the world to come (this would include the days of the Messiah). More realistically, it is likely that Gen 22:13-15 lies behind Jesus’ words. This passage, known to rabbis as the Akedah (“Binding”), tells of Abraham finding the ram which will replace his son Isaac on the altar of sacrifice – an occasion of certain rejoicing.

[9:2]  ⁸ tn Grk “asked him, saying.”

[9:2]  ⁹ tn Grk “this one.”

[9:2]  ¹⁰ tn Grk “in order that he should be born blind.”

[9:2]  sn The disciples assumed that sin (regardless of who committed it) was the cause of the man’s blindness. This was a common belief in Judaism; the rabbis used Ezek 18:20 to prove there was no death without sin, and Ps 89:33 to prove there was no punishment without guilt (the Babylonian Talmud, b. Shabbat 55a, although later than the NT, illustrates this). Thus in this case the sin must have been on the part of the man’s parents, or during his own prenatal existence. Song Rabbah 1:41 (another later rabbinic work) stated that when a pregnant woman worshiped in a heathen temple the unborn child also committed idolatry. This is only one example of how, in rabbinic Jewish thought, an unborn child was capable of sinning.

[10:39]  ¹¹ tc It is difficult to decide between ἐζήτουν οὖν (ezhtoun oun, “then they were seeking”; Ì⁶⁶ א A L W Ψ Ë^1,13 33 pm lat), ἐζήτουν δέ (ezhtoun de, “now they were seeking”; Ì⁴⁵ and a few versional witnesses), καὶ ἐζήτουν (kai ezhtoun, “and they were seeking”; D), and ἐζήτουν (Ì^75vid B Γ Θ 700 pm). Externally, the most viable readings are ἐζήτουν οὖν and ἐζήτουν. Transcriptionally, the οὖν could have dropped out via haplography since the verb ends in the same three letters. On the other hand, it is difficult to explain the readings with δέ or καί if ἐζήτουν οὖν is original; such readings would more likely have arisen from the simple ἐζήτουν. Intrinsically, John is fond of οὖν, using it some 200 times. Further, this Gospel begins relatively few sentences without some conjunction. The minimal support for the δέ and καί readings suggests that they arose either from the lone verb reading (which would thus be prior to their respective Vorlagen but not necessarily the earliest reading) or through carelessness on the part of the scribes. Indeed, the ancestors of Ì⁴⁵ and D may have committed haplography, leaving later scribes in the chain to guess at the conjunction needed. In sum, the best reading appears to be ἐζήτουν οὖν.

[10:39]  ¹² tn Grk “they were seeking.”

[10:39]  ¹³ tn Grk “he departed out of their hand.”

[10:39]  sn It is not clear whether the authorities simply sought to “arrest” him, or were renewing their attempt to stone him (cf. John 10:31) by seizing him and taking him out to be stoned. In either event, Jesus escaped their clutches. Nor is it clear whether Jesus’ escape is to be understood as a miracle. If so, the text gives little indication and even less description. What is clear is that until his “hour” comes, Jesus is completely safe from the hands of men: His enemies are powerless to touch him until they are permitted to do so.

[18:13]  ¹⁴ tn Grk “up, and brought.” Because of the length and complexity of the Greek sentence, a new sentence was started here in the translation.

[18:13]  ¹⁵ sn Jesus was taken first to Annas. Only the Gospel of John mentions this pretrial hearing before Annas, and that Annas was the father-in-law of Caiaphas, who is said to be high priest in that year. Caiaphas is also mentioned as being high priest in John 11:49. But in 18:15, 16, 19, and 22 Annas is called high priest. Annas is also referred to as high priest by Luke in Acts 4:6. Many scholars have dismissed these references as mistakes on the part of both Luke and John, but as mentioned above, John 11:49 and 18:13 indicate that John knew that Caiaphas was high priest in the year that Jesus was crucified. This has led others to suggest that Annas and Caiaphas shared the high priesthood, but there is no historical evidence to support this view. Annas had been high priest from a.d. 6 to a.d. 15 when he was deposed by the Roman prefect Valerius Gratus (according to Josephus, Ant. 18.2.2 [18.34]). His five sons all eventually became high priests. The family was noted for its greed, wealth, and power. There are a number of ways the references in both Luke and John to Annas being high priest may be explained. Some Jews may have refused to recognize the changes in high priests effected by the Roman authorities, since according to the Torah the high priesthood was a lifetime office (Num 25:13). Another possibility is that it was simply customary to retain the title after a person had left the office as a courtesy, much as retired ambassadors are referred to as “Mr. Ambassador” or ex-presidents as “Mr. President.” Finally, the use of the title by Luke and John may simply be a reflection of the real power behind the high priesthood of the time: Although Annas no longer technically held the office, he may well have managed to control those relatives of his who did hold it from behind the scenes. In fact this seems most probable and would also explain why Jesus was brought to him immediately after his arrest for a sort of “pretrial hearing” before being sent on to the entire Sanhedrin.

[19:30]  ¹⁶ tn Grk “Then when.” Here οὖν (oun) has not been translated for stylistic reasons.

[19:30]  ¹⁷ tn Or “It is accomplished,” “It is finished,” or “It is ended.” See tn on John 13:1.

[19:30]  ¹⁸ tn Or “he bowed his head and died”; Grk “he bowed his head and gave over the spirit.”