2 Raja-raja 1:1-18
Konteks1:1 After Ahab died, Moab rebelled against Israel. 1 1:2 Ahaziah fell through a window lattice in his upper chamber in Samaria 2 and was injured. He sent messengers with these orders, 3 “Go, ask 4 Baal Zebub, 5 the god of Ekron, if I will survive this injury.”
1:3 But the Lord’s angelic messenger told Elijah the Tishbite, “Get up, go to meet the messengers from the king of Samaria. Say this to them: ‘You must think there is no God in Israel! That explains why you are on your way to seek an oracle from Baal Zebub the god of Ekron. 6 1:4 Therefore this is what the Lord says, “You will not leave the bed you lie on, for you will certainly die!”’” So Elijah went on his way.
1:5 When the messengers returned to the king, 7 he asked them, “Why have you returned?” 1:6 They replied, 8 “A man came up to meet us. He told us, “Go back to the king who sent you and tell him, ‘This is what the Lord says: “You must think there is no God in Israel! That explains why you are sending for an oracle from Baal Zebub, the god of Ekron. 9 Therefore you will not leave the bed you lie on, for you will certainly die.”’” 1:7 The king 10 asked them, “Describe the appearance 11 of this man who came up to meet you and told you these things.” 1:8 They replied, 12 “He was a hairy man 13 and had a leather belt 14 tied around his waist.” The king 15 said, “He is Elijah the Tishbite.”
1:9 The king 16 sent a captain and his fifty soldiers 17 to retrieve Elijah. 18 The captain 19 went up to him, while he was sitting on the top of a hill. 20 He told him, “Prophet, 21 the king says, ‘Come down!’” 1:10 Elijah replied to the captain, 22 “If I am indeed a prophet, may fire come down from the sky and consume you and your fifty soldiers!” Fire then came down 23 from the sky and consumed him and his fifty soldiers.
1:11 The king 24 sent another captain and his fifty soldiers to retrieve Elijah. He went up and told him, 25 “Prophet, this is what the king says, ‘Come down at once!’” 26 1:12 Elijah replied to them, 27 “If I am indeed a prophet, may fire come down from the sky and consume you and your fifty soldiers!” Fire from God 28 came down from the sky and consumed him and his fifty soldiers.
1:13 The king 29 sent a third captain and his fifty soldiers. This third captain went up and fell 30 on his knees before Elijah. He begged for mercy, “Prophet, please have respect for my life and for the lives of these fifty servants of yours. 1:14 Indeed, 31 fire came down from the sky and consumed the two captains who came before me, along with their men. 32 So now, please have respect for my life.” 1:15 The Lord’s angelic messenger said to Elijah, “Go down with him. Don’t be afraid of him.” So he got up and went down 33 with him to the king.
1:16 Elijah 34 said to the king, 35 “This is what the Lord says, ‘You sent messengers to seek an oracle from Baal Zebub, the god of Ekron. You must think there is no God in Israel from whom you can seek an oracle! 36 Therefore you will not leave the bed you lie on, for you will certainly die.’” 37
1:17 He died just as the Lord had prophesied through Elijah. 38 In the second year of the reign of King Jehoram son of Jehoshaphat over Judah, Ahaziah’s brother Jehoram replaced him as king of Israel, because he had no son. 39 1:18 The rest of the events of Ahaziah’s reign, including his accomplishments, are recorded in the scroll called the Annals of the Kings of Israel. 40
Yakobus 1:1-27
Konteks1:1 From James, 41 a slave 42 of God and the Lord Jesus Christ, to the twelve tribes dispersed abroad. 43 Greetings!
1:2 My brothers and sisters, 44 consider it nothing but joy 45 when you fall into all sorts of trials, 1:3 because you know that the testing of your faith produces endurance. 1:4 And let endurance have its perfect effect, so that you will be perfect and complete, not deficient in anything. 1:5 But if anyone is deficient in wisdom, he should ask God, who gives to all generously and without reprimand, and it will be given to him. 1:6 But he must ask in faith without doubting, for the one who doubts is like a wave of the sea, blown and tossed around by the wind. 1:7 For that person must not suppose that he will receive anything from the Lord, 1:8 since he is a double-minded individual, 46 unstable in all his ways.
1:9 Now the believer 47 of humble means 48 should take pride 49 in his high position. 50 1:10 But the rich person’s pride should be in his humiliation, because he will pass away like a wildflower in the meadow. 51 1:11 For the sun rises with its heat and dries up the meadow; the petal of the flower falls off and its beauty is lost forever. 52 So also the rich person in the midst of his pursuits will wither away. 1:12 Happy is the one 53 who endures testing, because when he has proven to be genuine, he will receive the crown of life that God 54 promised to those who love him. 1:13 Let no one say when he is tempted, “I am tempted by God,” for God cannot be tempted by evil, 55 and he himself tempts no one. 1:14 But each one is tempted when he is lured and enticed by his own desires. 1:15 Then when desire conceives, it gives birth to sin, and when sin is full grown, it gives birth to death. 1:16 Do not be led astray, my dear brothers and sisters. 56 1:17 All generous giving and every perfect gift 57 is from above, coming down 58 from the Father of lights, with whom there is no variation or the slightest hint of change. 59 1:18 By his sovereign plan he gave us birth 60 through the message of truth, that we would be a kind of firstfruits of all he created.
1:19 Understand this, my dear brothers and sisters! 61 Let every person be quick to listen, slow to speak, slow to anger. 1:20 For human 62 anger does not accomplish God’s righteousness. 63 1:21 So put away all filth and evil excess and humbly 64 welcome the message implanted within you, which is able to save your souls. 1:22 But be sure you live out the message and do not merely listen to it and so deceive yourselves. 1:23 For if someone merely listens to the message and does not live it out, he is like someone 65 who gazes at his own face 66 in a mirror. 1:24 For he gazes at himself and then goes out and immediately forgets 67 what sort of person he was. 1:25 But the one who peers into the perfect law of liberty and fixes his attention there, 68 and does not become a forgetful listener but one who lives it out – he 69 will be blessed in what he does. 70 1:26 If someone thinks he is religious yet does not bridle his tongue, and so deceives his heart, his religion is futile. 1:27 Pure and undefiled religion before 71 God the Father 72 is this: to care for orphans and widows in their misfortune and to keep oneself unstained by the world.
Yohanes 2:1-25
Konteks2:1 Now on the third day there was a wedding at Cana 73 in Galilee. 74 Jesus’ mother 75 was there, 2:2 and Jesus and his disciples were also invited to the wedding. 76 2:3 When the wine ran out, Jesus’ mother said to him, “They have no wine left.” 77 2:4 Jesus replied, 78 “Woman, 79 why are you saying this to me? 80 My time 81 has not yet come.” 2:5 His mother told the servants, “Whatever he tells you, do it.” 82
2:6 Now there were six stone water jars there for Jewish ceremonial washing, 83 each holding twenty or thirty gallons. 84 2:7 Jesus told the servants, 85 “Fill the water jars with water.” So they filled them up to the very top. 2:8 Then he told them, “Now draw some out and take it to the head steward,” 86 and they did. 2:9 When 87 the head steward tasted the water that had been turned to wine, not knowing where it came from 88 (though the servants who had drawn the water knew), he 89 called the bridegroom 2:10 and said to him, “Everyone 90 serves the good wine first, and then the cheaper 91 wine when the guests 92 are drunk. You have kept the good wine until now!” 2:11 Jesus did this as the first of his miraculous signs, 93 in Cana 94 of Galilee. In this way he revealed 95 his glory, and his disciples believed in him. 96
2:12 After this he went down to Capernaum 97 with his mother and brothers 98 and his disciples, and they stayed there a few days. 2:13 Now the Jewish feast of Passover 99 was near, so Jesus went up to Jerusalem. 100
2:14 101 He found in the temple courts 102 those who were selling oxen and sheep and doves, and the money changers sitting at tables. 103 2:15 So he made a whip of cords 104 and drove them all out of the temple courts, 105 with the sheep and the oxen. He scattered the coins of the money changers 106 and overturned their tables. 2:16 To those who sold the doves he said, “Take these things away from here! Do not make 107 my Father’s house a marketplace!” 108 2:17 His disciples remembered that it was written, “Zeal 109 for your house will devour me.” 110
2:18 So then the Jewish leaders 111 responded, 112 “What sign can you show us, since you are doing these things?” 113 2:19 Jesus replied, 114 “Destroy 115 this temple and in three days I will raise it up again.” 2:20 Then the Jewish leaders 116 said to him, “This temple has been under construction 117 for forty-six years, 118 and are you going to raise it up in three days?” 2:21 But Jesus 119 was speaking about the temple of his body. 120 2:22 So after he was raised from the dead, his disciples remembered that he had said this, and they believed the scripture 121 and the saying 122 that Jesus had spoken.
2:23 Now while Jesus 123 was in Jerusalem 124 at the feast of the Passover, many people believed in his name because they saw the miraculous signs he was doing. 125 2:24 But Jesus would not entrust himself to them, because he knew all people. 126 2:25 He did not need anyone to testify about man, 127 for he knew what was in man. 128
[1:1] 1 sn This statement may fit better with the final paragraph of 1 Kgs 22.
[1:2] 2 map For location see Map2 B1; Map4 D3; Map5 E2; Map6 A4; Map7 C1.
[1:2] 3 tn Heb “and he sent messengers and said to them.”
[1:2] 4 tn That is, “seek an oracle from.”
[1:2] 5 sn Apparently Baal Zebub refers to a local manifestation of the god Baal at the Philistine city of Ekron. The name appears to mean “Lord of the Flies,” but it may be a deliberate scribal corruption of Baal Zebul, “Baal, the Prince,” a title known from the Ugaritic texts. For further discussion and bibliography, see HALOT 261 s.v. זְבוּב בַּעַל and M. Cogan and H. Tadmor, II Kings (AB), 25.
[1:3] 6 tn Heb “Is it because there is no God in Israel [that] you are going to inquire of Baal Zebub, the god of Ekron?” The translation seeks to bring out the sarcastic tone of the rhetorical question.
[1:5] sn The narrative is elliptical and telescoped here. The account of Elijah encountering the messengers and delivering the Lord’s message is omitted; we only here of it as the messengers report what happened to the king.
[1:6] 9 tn Heb “Is it because there is no God in Israel [that] you are sending to inquire of Baal Zebub, the god of Ekron?” The translation seeks to bring out the sarcastic tone of the rhetorical question. In v. 3 the messengers are addressed (in the phrase “you are on your way” the second person plural pronoun is used in Hebrew), but here the king is addressed (in the phrase “you are sending” the second person singular pronoun is used).
[1:7] 10 tn Heb “he”; the referent (the king) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
[1:7] 11 tn Heb “What was the manner…?”
[1:8] 12 tn Heb “said to him.”
[1:8] 13 tn Heb “an owner of hair.” This idiomatic expression indicates that Elijah was very hairy. For other examples where the idiom “owner of” is used to describe a characteristic of someone, see HALOT 143 s.v. בַּעַל. For example, an “owner of dreams” is one who frequently has dreams (Gen 37:19) and an “owner of anger” is a hot-tempered individual (Prov 22:24).
[1:8] 14 tn Heb “belt of skin” (i.e., one made from animal hide).
[1:8] 15 tn Heb “he”; the referent (the king) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
[1:9] 16 tn Heb “he”; the referent (the king) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
[1:9] 17 tn Heb “officer of fifty and his fifty.”
[1:9] 19 tn Heb “he”; the referent (the captain) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
[1:9] 20 sn The prophet Elijah’s position on the top of the hill symbolizes his superiority to the king and his messengers.
[1:9] 21 tn Heb “man of God” (also in vv. 10, 11, 12, 13).
[1:10] 22 tn Heb “answered and said to the officer of fifty.”
[1:10] 23 tn Wordplay contributes to the irony here. The king tells Elijah to “come down” (Hebrew יָרַד, yarad), but Elijah calls fire down (יָרַד) on the arrogant king’s officer.
[1:11] 24 tn Heb “he”; the referent (the king) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
[1:11] 25 tc The MT reads, “he answered and said to him.” The verb “he answered” (וַיַּעַן, vayya’an) is probably a corruption of “he went up” (וַיַּעַל, vayya’al). See v. 9.
[1:11] 26 sn In this second panel of the three-paneled narrative, the king and his captain are more arrogant than before. The captain uses a more official sounding introduction (“this is what the king says”) and the king adds “at once” to the command.
[1:12] 27 tc Two medieval Hebrew
[1:12] 28 tn Or “intense fire.” The divine name may be used idiomatically to emphasize the intensity of the fire. Whether one translates אֱלֹהִים (’elohim) here as a proper name or idiomatically, this addition to the narrative (the name is omitted in the first panel, v. 10b) emphasizes the severity of the judgment and is appropriate given the more intense command delivered by the king to the prophet in this panel.
[1:13] 29 tn Heb “he”; the referent (the king) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
[1:13] 30 tn Heb “went up and approached and kneeled.”
[1:14] 32 tn Heb “their fifty.”
[1:15] 33 sn In this third panel the verb “come down” (יָרַד, yarad) occurs again, this time describing Elijah’s descent from the hill at the Lord’s command. The moral of the story seems clear: Those who act as if they have authority over God and his servants just may pay for their arrogance with their lives; those who, like the third commander, humble themselves and show the proper respect for God’s authority and for his servants will be spared and find God quite cooperative.
[1:16] 34 tn Heb “he”; the referent (Elijah) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
[1:16] 35 tn Heb “him”; the referent (the king) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
[1:16] 36 tn Heb “Because you sent messengers to inquire of Baal Zebub, the god of Ekron, is there no God in Israel to inquire of his word?”
[1:16] 37 sn For the third time in this chapter we read the Lord’s sarcastic question to king and the accompanying announcement of judgment. The repetition emphasizes one of the chapter’s main themes. Israel’s leaders should seek guidance from their own God, not a pagan deity, for Israel’s sovereign God is the one who controls life and death.
[1:17] 38 tn Heb “according to the word of the
[1:17] 39 tn Heb “Jehoram replaced him as king…because he had no son.” Some ancient textual witnesses add “his brother,” which was likely added on the basis of the statement later in the verse that Ahaziah had no son.
[1:18] 40 tn Heb “As for the rest of the acts of Ahaziah which he did, are they not recorded in the scroll of the events of the days of the kings of Israel?”
[1:1] 41 tn Grk “James.” The word “From” is not in the Greek text, but has been supplied to indicate the sender of the letter.
[1:1] 42 tn Traditionally, “servant” or “bondservant.” Though δοῦλος (doulos) is normally translated “servant,” the word does not bear the connotation of a free individual serving another. BDAG notes that “‘servant’ for ‘slave’ is largely confined to Biblical transl. and early American times…in normal usage at the present time the two words are carefully distinguished” (BDAG 260 s.v.). The most accurate translation is “bondservant” (sometimes found in the ASV for δοῦλος), in that it often indicates one who sells himself into slavery to another. But as this is archaic, few today understand its force.
[1:1] sn Undoubtedly the background for the concept of being the Lord’s slave or servant is to be found in the Old Testament scriptures. For a Jew this concept did not connote drudgery, but honor and privilege. It was used of national Israel at times (Isa 43:10), but was especially associated with famous OT personalities, including such great men as Moses (Josh 14:7), David (Ps 89:3; cf. 2 Sam 7:5, 8) and Elijah (2 Kgs 10:10); all these men were “servants (or slaves) of the Lord.”
[1:1] 43 tn Grk “to the twelve tribes in the Diaspora.” The Greek term διασπορά (diaspora, “dispersion”) refers to Jews not living in Palestine but “dispersed” or scattered among the Gentiles.
[1:2] 44 tn Grk “brothers,” but the Greek word may be used for “brothers and sisters” or “fellow Christians” as here (cf. BDAG 18 s.v. ἀδελφός 1, where considerable nonbiblical evidence for the plural ἀδελφοί [adelfoi] meaning “brothers and sisters” is cited). Where the plural term is used in direct address, as here, “brothers and sisters” is used; where the term is singular and not direct address (as in v. 9), “believer” is preferred.
[1:2] 45 tn Grk “all joy,” “full joy,” or “greatest joy.”
[1:8] 46 tn Grk “a man of two minds,” continuing the description of the person in v. 7, giving the reason that he cannot expect to receive anything. The word for “man” or “individual” is ἀνήρ (anhr), which often means “male” or “man (as opposed to woman).” But it sometimes is used generically to mean “anyone,” “a person,” as here (cf. BDAG 79 s.v. 2).
[1:8] sn A double-minded man is one whose devotion to God is less than total. His attention is divided between God and other things, and as a consequence he is unstable and therefore unable to receive from God.
[1:9] 47 tn Grk “brother.” Here the term “brother” means “fellow believer” or “fellow Christian” (cf. TEV, NLT “Christians”; CEV “God’s people”). The term broadly connotes familial relationships within the family of God (cf. BDAG 18 s.v. ἀδελφός 2.a).
[1:9] 48 tn Grk “the lowly brother,” but “lowly/humble” is clarified in context by the contrast with “wealthy” in v. 10.
[1:9] 49 tn Grk “let him boast.”
[1:9] 50 tn Grk “his height,” “his exaltation.”
[1:10] 51 tn Grk “a flower of grass.”
[1:11] 52 tn Or “perishes,” “is destroyed.”
[1:12] 53 tn The word for “man” or “individual” here is ἀνήρ (anhr), which often means “male” or “man (as opposed to woman).” However, as BDAG 79 s.v. 2 says, here it is “equivalent to τὶς someone, a person.”
[1:12] 54 tc Most
[1:13] 55 tn Or “God must not be tested by evil people.”
[1:16] 56 tn Grk “brothers.” See note on the phrase “brothers and sisters” in 1:2.
[1:17] 57 tn The first phrase refers to the action of giving and the second to what is given.
[1:17] 58 tn Or “All generous giving and every perfect gift from above is coming down.”
[1:17] 59 tn Grk “variation or shadow of turning” (referring to the motions of heavenly bodies causing variations of light and darkness).
[1:18] 60 tn Grk “Having willed, he gave us birth.”
[1:19] 61 tn Grk “brothers.” See note on the phrase “brothers and sisters” in 1:2.
[1:20] 62 tn The word translated “human” here is ἀνήρ (anhr), which often means “male” or “man (as opposed to woman).” But it sometimes is used generically to mean “anyone,” “a person” (cf. BDAG 79 s.v. 2), and in this context, contrasted with “God’s righteousness,” the point is “human” anger (not exclusively “male” anger).
[1:20] 63 sn God’s righteousness could refer to (1) God’s righteous standard, (2) the righteousness God gives, (3) righteousness before God, or (4) God’s eschatological righteousness (see P. H. Davids, James [NIGTC], 93, for discussion).
[1:21] 64 tn Or “with meekness.”
[1:23] 65 tn The word for “man” or “individual” is ἀνήρ (anhr), which often means “male” or “man (as opposed to woman).” However, as BDAG 79 s.v. 2 says, here it is “equivalent to τὶς someone, a person.”
[1:23] 66 tn Grk “the face of his beginning [or origin].”
[1:24] 67 tn Grk “and he has gone out and immediately has forgotten.”
[1:25] 70 tn Grk “in his doing.”
[1:27] 71 tn Or “in the sight of”; Grk “with.”
[1:27] 72 tn Grk “the God and Father.”
[2:1] 73 map For location see Map1 C3; Map2 D2; Map3 C5.
[2:1] 74 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] 75 tn Grk “in Galilee, and Jesus’ mother.”
[2:2] 76 sn There is no clue to the identity of the bride and groom, but in all probability either relatives or friends of Jesus’ family were involved, since Jesus’ mother and both Jesus and his disciples were invited to the celebration. The attitude of Mary in approaching Jesus and asking him to do something when the wine ran out also suggests that familial obligations were involved.
[2:3] 77 tn The word “left” is not in the Greek text but is implied.
[2:3] sn They have no wine left. On the backgrounds of this miracle J. D. M. Derrett pointed out among other things the strong element of reciprocity about weddings in the Ancient Near East. It was possible in certain circumstances to take legal action against the man who failed to provide an appropriate wedding gift. The bridegroom and family here might have been involved in a financial liability for failing to provide adequately for their guests (“Water into Wine,” BZ 7 [1963]: 80-97). Was Mary asking for a miracle? There is no evidence that Jesus had worked any miracles prior to this (although this is an argument from silence). Some think Mary was only reporting the situation, or (as Calvin thought) asking Jesus to give some godly exhortations to the guests and thus relieve the bridegroom’s embarrassment. But the words, and the reply of Jesus in v. 4, seem to imply more. It is not inconceivable that Mary, who had probably been witness to the events of the preceding days, or at least was aware of them, knew that her son’s public career was beginning. She also knew the supernatural events surrounding his birth, and the prophetic words of the angel, and of Simeon and Anna in the temple at Jesus’ dedication. In short, she had good reason to believe Jesus to be the Messiah, and now his public ministry had begun. In this kind of context, her request does seem more significant.
[2:4] 78 tn Grk “and Jesus said to her.”
[2:4] 79 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). 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? It probably indicates that a new relationship existed between Jesus and his mother once he had embarked on his public ministry. He was no longer or primarily only her son, but the “Son of Man.” This is also suggested by the use of the same term in 19:26 in the scene at the cross, where the beloved disciple is “given” to Mary as her “new” son.
[2:4] 80 tn Grk “Woman, what to me and to you?” (an idiom). The phrase τί ἐμοὶ καὶ σοί, γύναι (ti emoi kai soi, gunai) is Semitic in origin. The equivalent Hebrew expression in the Old Testament had two basic meanings: (1) When one person was unjustly bothering another, the injured party could say “What to me and to you?” meaning, “What have I done to you that you should do this to me?” (Judg 11:12, 2 Chr 35:21, 1 Kgs 17:18). (2) When someone was asked to get involved in a matter he felt was no business of his, he could say to the one asking him, “What to me and to you?” meaning, “That is your business, how am I involved?” (2 Kgs 3:13, Hos 14:8). Option (1) implies hostility, while option (2) implies merely disengagement. Mere disengagement is almost certainly to be understood here as better fitting the context (although some of the Greek Fathers took the remark as a rebuke to Mary, such a rebuke is unlikely).
[2:4] 81 tn Grk “my hour” (referring to the time of Jesus’ crucifixion and return to the Father).
[2:4] sn The Greek word translated time (ὥρα, Jwra) occurs in John 2:4; 4:21, 23; 5:25, 28, 29; 7:30; 8:20; 12:23, 27; 13:1; 16:25; and 17:1. It is a reference to the special period in Jesus’ life when he was to leave this world and return to the Father (13:1); the hour when the Son of man is glorified (17:1). This is accomplished through his suffering, death, resurrection (and ascension – though this last is not emphasized by John). John 7:30 and 8:20 imply that Jesus’ arrest and death are included. John 12:23 and 17:1, referring to the glorification of the Son, imply that the resurrection and ascension are included as part of the “hour.” In John 2:4 Jesus’ remark to his mother indicates that the time for this self-manifestation has not yet arrived; his identity as Messiah is not yet to be publicly revealed.
[2:5] 82 tn The pronoun “it” is not in the Greek text, but has been supplied. Direct objects in Greek were often omitted when clear from the context.
[2:6] 83 tn Grk “for the purification of the Jews.”
[2:6] 84 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.
[2:7] 85 tn Grk “them” (it is clear from the context that the servants are addressed).
[2:8] 86 tn Or “the master of ceremonies.”
[2:9] 87 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] 88 tn Grk “and he did not know where it came from.”
[2:9] 89 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] 90 tn Grk “every man” (in a generic sense).
[2:10] 92 tn Grk “when they”; the referent (the guests) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
[2:11] 93 tn This sentence in Greek involves an object-complement construction. The force can be either “Jesus did this as,” or possibly “Jesus made this to be.” The latter translation accents not only Jesus’ power but his sovereignty too. Cf. also 4:54 where the same construction occurs.
[2:11] 94 map For location see Map1 C3; Map2 D2; Map3 C5.
[2:11] 95 tn Grk “in Cana of Galilee, and he revealed.”
[2:11] 96 tn Or “his disciples trusted in him,” or “his disciples put their faith in him.”
[2:12] 97 sn Verse 12 is merely a transitional note in the narrative (although Capernaum does not lie on the direct route to Jerusalem from Cana). Nothing is mentioned in John’s Gospel at this point about anything Jesus said or did there (although later his teaching is mentioned, see 6:59). From the synoptics it is clear that Capernaum was a center of Jesus’ Galilean ministry and might even be called “his own town” (Matt 9:1). The royal official whose son Jesus healed (John 4:46-54) was from Capernaum. He may have heard Jesus speak there, or picked up the story about the miracle at Cana from one of Jesus’ disciples.
[2:12] map For location see Map1 D2; Map2 C3; Map3 B2.
[2:12] 98 sn With respect to Jesus’ brothers, the so-called Helvidian view is to be preferred (named after Helvidius, a 4th-century theologian). This view holds that the most natural way to understand the phrase is as a reference to children of Joseph and Mary after the birth of Jesus. Other views are that of Epiphanius (they were children of Joseph by a former marriage) or Jerome (they were cousins). The tradition of Mary’s perpetual virginity appeared in the 2nd century and is difficult to explain (as J. H. Bernard, St. John [ICC], 1:85, points out) if some of her other children were prominent members of the early church (e.g., James of Jerusalem). But this is outweighed by the natural sense of the words.
[2:13] 99 tn Grk “the Passover of the Jews.” This is first of at least three (and possibly four) Passovers mentioned in John’s Gospel. If it is assumed that the Passovers appear in the Gospel in their chronological order (and following a date of
[2:13] 100 map For location see Map5 B1; Map6 F3; Map7 E2; Map8 F2; Map10 B3; JP1 F4; JP2 F4; JP3 F4; JP4 F4.
[2:14] 101 sn John 2:14-22. Does John’s account of the temple cleansing describe the same event as the synoptic gospels describe, or a separate event? The other accounts of the cleansing of the temple are Matt 21:12-13; Mark 11:15-17; and Luke 19:45-46. None are as long as the Johannine account. The fullest of the synoptic accounts is Mark’s. John’s account differs from Mark’s in the mention of sheep and oxen, the mention of the whip of cords, the Greek word κερματιστῆς (kermatisths) for money changer (the synoptics use κολλυβιστῆς [kollubisths], which John mentions in 2:15), the scattering of the coins (2:15), and the command by Jesus, “Take these things away from here!” The word for overturned in John is ἀναστρεφω (anastrefw), while Matthew and Mark use καταστρεφω (katastrefw; Luke does not mention the moneychangers at all). The synoptics all mention that Jesus quoted Isa 56:7 followed by Jer 7:11. John mentions no citation of scripture at all, but says that later the disciples remembered Ps 69:9. John does not mention, as does Mark, Jesus’ prohibition on carrying things through the temple (i.e., using it for a shortcut). But the most important difference is one of time: In John the cleansing appears as the first great public act of Jesus’ ministry, while in the synoptics it is virtually the last. The most common solution of the problem, which has been endlessly discussed among NT scholars, is to say there was only one cleansing, and that it took place, as the synoptics record it, at the end of Jesus’ ministry. In the synoptics it appears to be the event that finalized the opposition of the high priest, and precipitated the arrest of Jesus. According to this view, John’s placing of the event at the opening of Jesus’ ministry is due to his general approach; it was fitting ‘theologically’ for Jesus to open his ministry this way, so this is the way John records it. Some have overstated the case for one cleansing and John’s placing of it at the opening of Jesus’ public ministry, however. For example W. Barclay stated: “John, as someone has said, is more interested in the truth than in the facts. He was not interested to tell men when Jesus cleansed the Temple; he was supremely interested in telling men that Jesus did cleanse the Temple” (John [DSBS], 94). But this is not the impression one gets by a reading of John’s Gospel: The evangelist seems to go out of his way to give details and facts, including notes of time and place. To argue as Barclay does that John is interested in truth apart from the facts is to set up a false dichotomy. Why should one have to assume, in any case, that there could have been only one cleansing of the temple? This account in John is found in a large section of nonsynoptic material. Apart from the work of John the Baptist – and even this is markedly different from the references in the synoptics – nothing else in the first five chapters of John’s Gospel is found in any of the synoptics. It is certainly not impossible that John took one isolated episode from the conclusion of Jesus’ earthly ministry and inserted it into his own narrative in a place which seemed appropriate according to his purposes. But in view of the differences between John and the synoptics, in both wording and content, as well as setting and time, it is at least possible that the event in question actually occurred twice (unless one begins with the presupposition that the Fourth Gospel is nonhistorical anyway). In support of two separate cleansings of the temple, it has been suggested that Jesus’ actions on this occasion were not permanent in their result, and after (probably) 3 years the status quo in the temple courts had returned to normal. And at this time early in Jesus’ ministry, he was virtually unknown. Such an action as he took on this occasion would have created a stir, and evoked the response John records in 2:18-22, but that is probably about all, especially if Jesus’ actions met with approval among part of the populace. But later in Jesus’ ministry, when he was well-known, and vigorously opposed by the high-priestly party in Jerusalem, his actions might have brought forth another, harsher response. It thus appears possible to argue for two separate cleansings of the temple as well as a single one relocated by John to suit his own purposes. Which then is more probable? On the whole, more has been made of the differences between John’s account and the synoptic accounts than perhaps should have been. After all, the synoptic accounts also differ considerably from one another, yet few scholars would be willing to posit four cleansings of the temple as an explanation for this. While it is certainly possible that the author did not intend by his positioning of the temple cleansing to correct the synoptics’ timing of the event, but to highlight its significance for the course of Jesus’ ministry, it still appears somewhat more probable that John has placed the event he records in the approximate period of Jesus’ public ministry in which it did occur, that is, within the first year or so of Jesus’ public ministry. The statement of the Jewish authorities recorded by the author (this temple has been under construction for forty-six years) would tend to support an earlier rather than a later date for the temple cleansing described by John, since 46 years from the beginning of construction on Herod’s temple in ca. 19
[2:14] 102 tn Grk “in the temple.”
[2:14] sn The merchants (those who were selling) would have been located in the Court of the Gentiles.
[2:14] 103 tn Grk “the money changers sitting”; the words “at tables” are not in the Greek text, but are implied.
[2:15] 104 tc Several witnesses, two of which are quite ancient (Ì66,75 L N Ë1 33 565 892 1241 al lat), have ὡς (Jws, “like”) before φραγέλλιον (fragellion, “whip”). A decision based on external evidence would be difficult to make because the shorter reading also has excellent witnesses, as well as the majority, on its side (א A B Θ Ψ Ë13 Ï co). Internal evidence, though, leans toward the shorter reading. Scribes tended to add to the text, and the addition of ὡς here clearly softens the assertion of the evangelist: Instead of making a whip of cords, Jesus made “[something] like a whip of cords.”
[2:15] 105 tn Grk “the temple.”
[2:15] 106 sn Because of the imperial Roman portraits they carried, Roman denarii and Attic drachmas were not permitted to be used in paying the half-shekel temple-tax (the Jews considered the portraits idolatrous). The money changers exchanged these coins for legal Tyrian coinage at a small profit.
[2:16] 107 tn Or (perhaps) “Stop making.”
[2:16] 108 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.
[2:17] 109 tn Or “Fervent devotion to your house.”
[2:17] 110 sn A quotation from Ps 69:9.
[2:18] 111 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. Here the author refers to the authorities or leaders in Jerusalem. (For further information see R. G. Bratcher, “‘The Jews’ in the Gospel of John,” BT 26 [1975]: 401-9.)
[2:18] 112 tn Grk “answered and said to him.”
[2:18] 113 sn The request “What sign can you show us” by Jesus’ adversaries was a request for a defense of his actions – a mark of divine authentication. Whether this was a request for a miracle is not entirely clear. Jesus never obliged such a request. Yet, ironically, the only sign the Jewish leadership will get is that predicted by Jesus in 2:19 – his crucifixion and resurrection. Cf. the “sign of Jonah” in the synoptics (Matt 12:39, 40; Luke 11:29-32).
[2:19] 114 tn Grk “answered and said to them.”
[2:19] 115 tn The imperative here is really more than a simple conditional imperative (= “if you destroy”); its semantic force here is more like the ironical imperative found in the prophets (Amos 4:4, Isa 8:9) = “Go ahead and do this and see what happens.”
[2:20] 116 tn See the note on this phrase in v. 18.
[2:20] 117 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] 118 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
[2:21] 119 tn Grk “that one”; the referent (Jesus) has been specified in the translation for clarity. This Greek term is frequently used as a way of referring to Jesus in the Johannine letters (cf. 1 John 2:6; 3:3, 5, 7, 16; 4:17).
[2:21] 120 tn The genitive “of his body” (τοῦ σώματος αὐτοῦ, tou swmato" autou) is a genitive of apposition, clarifying which temple Jesus was referring to. Thus, Jesus not only was referring to his physical resurrection, but also to his participation in the resurrection process. The New Testament thus records the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit as all performing the miracle of Christ's resurrection.
[2:21] sn Jesus was speaking about the temple of his body. For the author, the temple is not just the building, it is Jesus’ resurrected body. Compare the nonlocalized worship mentioned in John 4:21-23, and also Rev 21:22 (there is to be no temple in the New Jerusalem; the Lord and the Lamb are its temple). John points to the fact that, as the place where men go in order to meet God, the temple has been supplanted and replaced by Jesus himself, in whose resurrected person people may now encounter God (see John 1:18, 14:6).
[2:22] 121 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] 122 tn Or “statement”; Grk “word.”
[2:23] 123 tn Grk “he”; the referent (Jesus) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
[2:23] 124 map For location see Map5 B1; Map6 F3; Map7 E2; Map8 F2; Map10 B3; JP1 F4; JP2 F4; JP3 F4; JP4 F4.
[2:23] 125 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.
[2:24] 126 tn Grk “all.” The word “people” has been supplied for clarity, since the Greek word πάντας (pantas) is masculine plural (thus indicating people rather than things).
[2:25] 127 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.
