Yohanes 1:50

1:50 Jesus said to him, ¹  “Because I told you that I saw you under the fig tree, do you believe? You will see greater things than these.” ² 

Yohanes 2:11-12

2:11 Jesus did this as the first of his miraculous signs, ³  in Cana ⁴  of Galilee. In this way he revealed ⁵  his glory, and his disciples believed in him. ⁶ 

Cleansing the Temple

2:12 After this he went down to Capernaum ⁷  with his mother and brothers ⁸  and his disciples, and they stayed there a few days.

Yohanes 3:20

3:20 For everyone who does evil deeds hates the light and does not come to the light, so that their deeds will not be exposed.

Yohanes 3:22

Further Testimony About Jesus by John the Baptist

3:22 After this, ⁹  Jesus and his disciples came into Judean territory, and there he spent time with them and was baptizing.

Yohanes 4:6

4:6 Jacob’s well was there, so Jesus, since he was tired from the journey, sat right down beside ¹⁰  the well. It was about noon. ¹¹ 

Yohanes 4:9

4:9 So the Samaritan woman said to him, “How can you – a Jew ¹²  – ask me, a Samaritan woman, for water ¹³  to drink?” (For Jews use nothing in common ¹⁴  with Samaritans.) ¹⁵ 

Yohanes 4:11

4:11 “Sir,” ¹⁶  the woman ¹⁷  said to him, “you have no bucket and the well ¹⁸  is deep; where then do you get this ¹⁹  living water? ²⁰ 

Yohanes 4:15

4:15 The woman said to him, “Sir, give me this water, so that I will not be thirsty or have to come here to draw ²¹  water.” ²² 

Yohanes 4:34

4:34 Jesus said to them, “My food is to do the will of the one who sent me ²³  and to complete ²⁴  his work. ²⁵ 

Yohanes 6:14-15

6:14 Now when the people saw the miraculous sign that Jesus ²⁶  performed, they began to say to one another, “This is certainly the Prophet ²⁷  who is to come into the world.” ²⁸  6:15 Then Jesus, because he knew they were going to come and seize him by force to make him king, withdrew again up the mountainside alone. ²⁹ 

Yohanes 6:26

6:26 Jesus replied, ³⁰  “I tell you the solemn truth, ³¹  you are looking for me not because you saw miraculous signs, but because you ate all the loaves of bread you wanted. ³² 

Yohanes 7:12

7:12 There was ³³  a lot of grumbling ³⁴  about him among the crowds. ³⁵  Some were saying, “He is a good man,” but others, “He deceives the common people.” ³⁶ 

Yohanes 8:7

8:7 When they persisted in asking him, he stood up straight ³⁷  and replied, ³⁸  “Whoever among you is guiltless ³⁹  may be the first to throw a stone at her.”

Yohanes 9:2

9:2 His disciples asked him, ⁴⁰  “Rabbi, who committed the sin that caused him to be born blind, this man ⁴¹  or his parents?” ⁴² 

Yohanes 9:9

9:9 Some people said, ⁴³  “This is the man!” ⁴⁴  while others said, “No, but he looks like him.” ⁴⁵  The man himself ⁴⁶  kept insisting, “I am the one!” ⁴⁷ 

Yohanes 9:18

9:18 Now the Jewish religious leaders ⁴⁸  refused to believe ⁴⁹  that he had really been blind and had gained his sight until at last they summoned ⁵⁰  the parents of the man who had become able to see. ⁵¹ 

Yohanes 9:25

9:25 He replied, ⁵²  “I do not know whether he is a sinner. I do know one thing – that although I was blind, now I can see.”

Yohanes 9:41

9:41 Jesus replied, ⁵³  “If you were blind, you would not be guilty of sin, ⁵⁴  but now because you claim that you can see, ⁵⁵  your guilt ⁵⁶  remains.” ⁵⁷ 

Yohanes 10:32-34

10:32 Jesus said to them, ⁵⁸  “I have shown you many good deeds ⁵⁹  from the Father. For which one of them are you going to stone me?” 10:33 The Jewish leaders ⁶⁰  replied, ⁶¹  “We are not going to stone you for a good deed ⁶²  but for blasphemy, ⁶³  because ⁶⁴  you, a man, are claiming to be God.” ⁶⁵ 

10:34 Jesus answered, ⁶⁶  “Is it not written in your law, ‘I said, you are gods’? ⁶⁷ 

Yohanes 10:36

10:36 do you say about the one whom the Father set apart ⁶⁸  and sent into the world, ‘You are blaspheming,’ because I said, ‘I am the Son of God’?

Yohanes 11:4

11:4 When Jesus heard this, he said, “This sickness will not lead to death, ⁶⁹  but to God’s glory, ⁷⁰  so that the Son of God may be glorified through it.” ⁷¹ 

Yohanes 11:9

11:9 Jesus replied, ⁷²  “Are there not twelve hours in a day? If anyone walks around in the daytime, he does not stumble, ⁷³  because he sees the light of this world. ⁷⁴ 

Yohanes 12:38

12:38 so that the word ⁷⁵  of Isaiah the prophet would be fulfilled. He said, ⁷⁶  “Lord, who has believed our message, and to whom has the arm of the Lord ⁷⁷  been revealed?” ⁷⁸ 

Yohanes 14:2

14:2 There are many dwelling places ⁷⁹  in my Father’s house. ⁸⁰  Otherwise, I would have told you, because ⁸¹  I am going away to make ready ⁸²  a place for you. ⁸³ 

Yohanes 14:22-23

14:22 “Lord,” Judas (not Judas Iscariot) ⁸⁴  said, ⁸⁵  “what has happened that you are going to reveal ⁸⁶  yourself to us and not to the world?” 14:23 Jesus replied, ⁸⁷  “If anyone loves me, he will obey ⁸⁸  my word, and my Father will love him, and we will come to him and take up residence with him. ⁸⁹ 

Yohanes 16:22

16:22 So also you have sorrow ⁹⁰  now, but I will see you again, and your hearts will rejoice, and no one will take your joy away from you. ⁹¹ 

Yohanes 18:39

18:39 But it is your custom that I release one prisoner ⁹²  for you at the Passover. ⁹³  So do you want me to release for you the king of the Jews?”

Yohanes 19:15

19:15 Then they ⁹⁴  shouted out, “Away with him! Away with him! ⁹⁵  Crucify ⁹⁶  him!” Pilate asked, ⁹⁷  “Shall I crucify your king?” The high priests replied, “We have no king except Caesar!”

Yohanes 19:25-26

19:25 Now standing beside Jesus’ cross were his mother, his mother’s sister, Mary the wife of Clopas, and Mary Magdalene. ⁹⁸  19:26 So when Jesus saw his mother and the disciple whom he loved standing there, he said to his mother, “Woman, ⁹⁹  look, here is your son!”

Yohanes 20:1

The Resurrection

20:1 Now very early on the first day of the week, ¹⁰⁰  while it was still dark, Mary Magdalene ¹⁰¹  came to the tomb and saw that the stone had been moved away from the entrance. ¹⁰² 

Yohanes 21:12

21:12 “Come, have breakfast,” Jesus said. ¹⁰³  But none of the disciples dared to ask him, “Who are you?” because they knew it was the Lord.

Yohanes 21:19

21:19 (Now Jesus ¹⁰⁴  said this to indicate clearly by what kind of death Peter ¹⁰⁵  was going to glorify God.) ¹⁰⁶  After he said this, Jesus told Peter, ¹⁰⁷  “Follow me.”

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

[1:50]  ² 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.

[2:11]  ³ 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]  ⁴ map For location see Map1 C3; Map2 D2; Map3 C5.

[2:11]  ⁵ tn Grk “in Cana of Galilee, and he revealed.”

[2:11]  ⁶ tn Or “his disciples trusted in him,” or “his disciples put their faith in him.”

[2:12]  ⁷ 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]  ⁸ 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.

[3:22]  ⁹ tn This section is related loosely to the preceding by μετὰ ταῦτα (meta tauta). This constitutes an indefinite temporal reference; the intervening time is not specified.

[4:6]  ¹⁰ tn Grk “on (ἐπί, epi) the well.” There may have been a low stone rim encircling the well, or the reading of Ì⁶⁶ (“on the ground”) may be correct.

[4:6]  ¹¹ tn Grk “the sixth hour.”

[4:6]  sn It was about noon. The suggestion has been made by some that time should be reckoned from midnight rather than sunrise. This would make the time 6 a.m. rather than noon. That would fit in this passage but not in John 19:14 which places the time when Jesus is condemned to be crucified at “the sixth hour.”

[4:9]  ¹² tn Or “a Judean.” Here BDAG 478 s.v. ᾿Ιουδαίος 2.a states, “Judean (with respect to birth, nationality, or cult).” The same term occurs in the plural later in this verse. In one sense “Judean” would work very well in the translation here, since the contrast is between residents of the two geographical regions. However, since in the context of this chapter the discussion soon becomes a religious rather than a territorial one (cf. vv. 19-26), the translation “Jew” has been retained here and in v. 22.

[4:9]  ¹³ tn “Water” is supplied as the understood direct object of the infinitive πεῖν (pein).

[4:9]  ¹⁴ tn D. Daube (“Jesus and the Samaritan Woman: the Meaning of συγχράομαι [Jn 4:7ff],” JBL 69 [1950]: 137-47) suggests this meaning.

[4:9]  sn The background to the statement use nothing in common is the general assumption among Jews that the Samaritans were ritually impure or unclean. Thus a Jew who used a drinking vessel after a Samaritan had touched it would become ceremonially unclean.

[4:9]  ¹⁵ sn This is a parenthetical note by the author.

[4:11]  ¹⁶ tn Or “Lord.” The Greek term κύριος (kurios) means both “Sir” and “Lord.” In this passage there is probably a gradual transition from one to the other as the woman’s respect for Jesus grows throughout the conversation (4:11, 15, 19).

[4:11]  ¹⁷ tc ‡ Two early and important Greek mss along with two versional witnesses (Ì⁷⁵ B sy^s ac²) lack ἡ γυνή (Jh gunh, “the woman”) here; א* has ἐκείνη (ekeinh, “that one” or possibly “she”) instead of ἡ γυνή. It is possible that no explicit subject was in the original text and scribes added either ἡ γυνή or ἐκείνη to make the meaning clear. It is also possible that the archetype of Ì⁷⁵ א B expunged the subject because it was not altogether necessary, with the scribe of א later adding the pronoun. However, ἡ γυνή is not in doubt in any other introduction to the woman’s words in this chapter (cf. vv. 9, 15, 17, 19, 25), suggesting that intentional deletion was not the motive for the shorter reading in v. 11 (or else why would they delete the words only here?). Thus, the fact that virtually all witnesses (Ì⁶⁶ א² A C D L W^s Θ Ψ 050 083 086 Ë^1,13 Ï latt sy^c,p,h sa bo) have ἡ γυνή here may suggest that it is a motivated reading, conforming this verse to the rest of the pericope. Although a decision is difficult, it is probably best to regard the shorter reading as authentic. NA²⁷ has ἡ γυνή in brackets, indicating doubts as to their authenticity. For English stylistic reasons, the translation also includes “the woman” here.

[4:11]  ¹⁸ tn The word for “well” has now shifted to φρέαρ (frear, “cistern”); earlier in the passage it was πηγή (phgh).

[4:11]  ¹⁹ tn The anaphoric article has been translated “this.”

[4:11]  ²⁰ sn Where then do you get this living water? The woman’s reply is an example of the “misunderstood statement,” a technique appearing frequently in John’s Gospel. Jesus was speaking of living water which was spiritual (ultimately a Johannine figure for the Holy Spirit, see John 7:38-39), but the woman thought he was speaking of flowing (fresh drinkable) water. Her misunderstanding gave Jesus the opportunity to explain what he really meant.

[4:15]  ²¹ tn Grk “or come here to draw.”

[4:15]  ²² tn The direct object of the infinitive ἀντλεῖν (antlein) is understood in Greek but supplied for clarity in the English translation.

[4:34]  ²³ sn The one who sent me refers to the Father.

[4:34]  ²⁴ tn Or “to accomplish.”

[4:34]  ²⁵ tn The substantival ἵνα (Jina) clause has been translated as an English infinitive clause.

[4:34]  sn No one brought him anything to eat, did they? In the discussion with the disciples which took place while the woman had gone into the city, note again the misunderstanding: The disciples thought Jesus referred to physical food, while he was really speaking figuratively and spiritually again. Thus Jesus was forced to explain what he meant, and the explanation that his food was his mission, to do the will of God and accomplish his work, leads naturally into the metaphor of the harvest. The fruit of his mission was represented by the Samaritans who were coming to him.

[6:14]  ²⁶ tn Grk “he”; the referent (Jesus) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[6:14]  ²⁷ sn The Prophet is a reference to the “prophet like Moses” of Deut 18:15, by this time an eschatological figure in popular belief.

[6:14]  ²⁸ sn An allusion to Deut 18:15.

[6:15]  ²⁹ sn Jesus, knowing that his “hour” had not yet come (and would not, in this fashion) withdrew again up the mountainside alone. The ministry of miracles in Galilee, ending with this, the multiplication of the bread (the last public miracle in Galilee recorded by John) aroused such a popular response that there was danger of an uprising. This would have given the authorities a legal excuse to arrest Jesus. The nature of Jesus’ kingship will become an issue again in the passion narrative of the Fourth Gospel (John 18:33ff.). Furthermore, the volatile reaction of the Galileans to the signs prepares for and foreshadows the misunderstanding of the miracle itself, and even the misunderstanding of Jesus’ explanation of it (John 6:22-71).

[6:26]  ³⁰ tn Grk “answered and said to them.”

[6:26]  ³¹ tn Grk “Truly, truly, I say to you.”

[6:26]  ³² tn Grk “because you ate of the loaves of bread and were filled.”

[7:12]  ³³ tn Grk “And there was.”

[7:12]  ³⁴ tn Or “complaining.”

[7:12]  ³⁵ tn Or “among the common people” (as opposed to the religious authorities mentioned in the previous verse).

[7:12]  ³⁶ tn Or “the crowd.”

[8:7]  ³⁷ tn Or “he straightened up.”

[8:7]  ³⁸ tn Grk “and said to them.”

[8:7]  ³⁹ tn Or “sinless.”

[9:2]  ⁴⁰ tn Grk “asked him, saying.”

[9:2]  ⁴¹ tn Grk “this one.”

[9:2]  ⁴² 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.

[9:9]  ⁴³ tn Grk “Others were saying.”

[9:9]  ⁴⁴ tn Grk “This is the one.”

[9:9]  ⁴⁵ tn Grk “No, but he is like him.”

[9:9]  ⁴⁶ tn Grk “That one”; the referent (the man himself) is specified in the translation for clarity.

[9:9]  ⁴⁷ tn Grk “I am he.”

[9:18]  ⁴⁸ tn Or “the Jewish religious 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 mainly to the Pharisees, mentioned by name in John 9:13, 15, 16. References in this context to Pharisees and to the synagogue (v. 22) suggest an emphasis on the religious nature of the debate which is brought out by the translation “the Jewish religious leaders.”

[9:18]  ⁴⁹ tn The Greek text contains the words “about him” at this point: “the Jewish authorities did not believe about him…”

[9:18]  ⁵⁰ tn Grk “they called.”

[9:18]  ⁵¹ tn Or “the man who had gained his sight.”

[9:25]  ⁵² tn Grk “Then that one answered.”

[9:41]  ⁵³ tn Grk “Jesus said to them.”

[9:41]  ⁵⁴ tn Grk “you would not have sin.”

[9:41]  ⁵⁵ tn Grk “now because you say, ‘We see…’”

[9:41]  ⁵⁶ tn Or “your sin.”

[9:41]  ⁵⁷ sn Because you claim that you can see, your guilt remains. The blind man received sight physically, and this led him to see spiritually as well. But the Pharisees, who claimed to possess spiritual sight, were spiritually blinded. The reader might recall Jesus’ words to Nicodemus in 3:10, “Are you the teacher of Israel and don’t understand these things?” In other words, to receive Jesus was to receive the light of the world, to reject him was to reject the light, close one’s eyes, and become blind. This is the serious sin of which Jesus had warned before (8:21-24). The blindness of such people was incurable since they had rejected the only cure that exists (cf. 12:39-41).

[10:32]  ⁵⁸ tn Grk “Jesus answered them.”

[10:32]  ⁵⁹ tn Or “good works.”

[10:33]  ⁶⁰ tn Or “the Jewish authorities”; Grk “the Jews.” Here again the phrase refers to the Jewish leaders. See the notes on the phrase “Jewish people” in v. 19 and “Jewish leaders” in vv. 24, 31.

[10:33]  ⁶¹ tn Grk “answered him.”

[10:33]  ⁶² tn Or “good work.”

[10:33]  ⁶³ sn This is the first time the official charge of blasphemy is voiced openly in the Fourth Gospel (although it was implicit in John 8:59).

[10:33]  ⁶⁴ tn Grk “and because.”

[10:33]  ⁶⁵ tn Grk “you, a man, make yourself to be God.”

[10:34]  ⁶⁶ tn Grk “answered them.”

[10:34]  ⁶⁷ sn A quotation from Ps 82:6. Technically the Psalms are not part of the OT “law” (which usually referred to the five books of Moses), but occasionally the term “law” was applied to the entire OT, as here. The problem in this verse concerns the meaning of Jesus’ quotation from Ps 82:6. It is important to look at the OT context: The whole line reads “I say, you are gods, sons of the Most High, all of you.” Jesus will pick up on the term “sons of the Most High” in 10:36, where he refers to himself as the Son of God. The psalm was understood in rabbinic circles as an attack on unjust judges who, though they have been given the title “gods” because of their quasi-divine function of exercising judgment, are just as mortal as other men. What is the argument here? It is often thought to be as follows: If it was an OT practice to refer to men like the judges as gods, and not blasphemy, why did the Jewish authorities object when this term was applied to Jesus? This really doesn’t seem to fit the context, however, since if that were the case Jesus would not be making any claim for “divinity” for himself over and above any other human being – and therefore he would not be subject to the charge of blasphemy. Rather, this is evidently a case of arguing from the lesser to the greater, a common form of rabbinic argument. The reason the OT judges could be called gods is because they were vehicles of the word of God (cf. 10:35). But granting that premise, Jesus deserves much more than they to be called God. He is the Word incarnate, whom the Father sanctified and sent into the world to save the world (10:36). In light of the prologue to the Gospel of John, it seems this interpretation would have been most natural for the author. If it is permissible to call men “gods” because they were the vehicles of the word of God, how much more permissible is it to use the word “God” of him who is the Word of God?

[10:36]  ⁶⁸ tn Or “dedicated.”

[11:4]  ⁶⁹ 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]  ⁷⁰ tn Or “to God’s praise.”

[11:4]  ⁷¹ 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.

[11:9]  ⁷² tn Grk “Jesus answered.”

[11:9]  ⁷³ tn Or “he does not trip.”

[11:9]  ⁷⁴ sn What is the light of this world? On one level, of course, it refers to the sun, but the reader of John’s Gospel would recall 8:12 and understand Jesus’ symbolic reference to himself as the light of the world. There is only a limited time left (Are there not twelve hours in a day?) until the Light will be withdrawn (until Jesus returns to the Father) and the one who walks around in the dark will trip and fall (compare the departure of Judas by night in 13:30).

[12:38]  ⁷⁵ tn Or “message.”

[12:38]  ⁷⁶ tn Grk “who said.”

[12:38]  ⁷⁷ tn “The arm of the Lord” is an idiom for “God’s great power” (as exemplified through Jesus’ miraculous signs). This response of unbelief is interpreted by the author as a fulfillment of the prophetic words of Isaiah (Isa 53:1). The phrase ὁ βραχίων κυρίου (Jo braciwn kuriou) is a figurative reference to God’s activity and power which has been revealed in the sign-miracles which Jesus has performed (compare the previous verse).

[12:38]  ⁷⁸ sn A quotation from Isa 53:1.

[14:2]  ⁷⁹ tn Many interpreters have associated μοναί (monai) with an Aramaic word that can refer to a stopping place or resting place for a traveler on a journey. This is similar to one of the meanings the word can have in secular Greek (Pausanius 10.31.7). Origen understood the use here to refer to stations on the road to God. This may well have been the understanding of the Latin translators who translated μονή (monh) by mansio, a stopping place. The English translation “mansions” can be traced back to Tyndale, but in Middle English the word simply meant “a dwelling place” (not necessarily large or imposing) with no connotation of being temporary. The interpretation put forward by Origen would have been well suited to Gnosticism, where the soul in its ascent passes through stages during which it is gradually purified of all that is material and therefore evil. It is much more likely that the word μονή should be related to its cognate verb μένω (menw), which is frequently used in the Fourth Gospel to refer to the permanence of relationship between Jesus and the Father and/or Jesus and the believer. Thus the idea of a permanent dwelling place, rather than a temporary stopping place, would be in view. Luther’s translation of μοναί by Wohnungen is very accurate here, as it has the connotation of a permanent residence.

[14:2]  ⁸⁰ sn Most interpreters have understood the reference to my Father’s house as a reference to heaven, and the dwelling places (μονή, monh) as the permanent residences of believers there. This seems consistent with the vocabulary and the context, where in v. 3 Jesus speaks of coming again to take the disciples to himself. However, the phrase in my Father’s house was used previously in the Fourth Gospel in 2:16 to refer to the temple in Jerusalem. The author in 2:19-22 then reinterpreted the temple as Jesus’ body, which was to be destroyed in death and then rebuilt in resurrection after three days. Even more suggestive is the statement by Jesus in 8:35, “Now the slave does not remain (μένω, menw) in the household forever, but the son remains (μένω) forever.” If in the imagery of the Fourth Gospel the phrase in my Father’s house is ultimately a reference to Jesus’ body, the relationship of μονή to μένω suggests the permanent relationship of the believer to Jesus and the Father as an adopted son who remains in the household forever. In this case the “dwelling place” is “in” Jesus himself, where he is, whether in heaven or on earth. The statement in v. 3, “I will come again and receive you to myself,” then refers not just to the parousia, but also to Jesus’ postresurrection return to the disciples in his glorified state, when by virtue of his death on their behalf they may enter into union with him and with the Father as adopted sons. Needless to say, this bears numerous similarities to Pauline theology, especially the concepts of adoption as sons and being “in Christ” which are prominent in passages like Eph 1. It is also important to note, however, the emphasis in the Fourth Gospel itself on the present reality of eternal life (John 5:24, 7:38-39, etc.) and the possibility of worshiping the Father “in the Spirit and in truth” (John 4:21-24) in the present age. There is a sense in which it is possible to say that the future reality is present now. See further J. McCaffrey, The House With Many Rooms (AnBib 114).

[14:2]  ⁸¹ tc A number of important mss (Ì^66c א A B C* D K L W Ψ Ë¹³ 33 565 579 892 al lat) have ὅτι (Joti) here, while the majority lack it (Ì^66* C² Θ Ï). Should the ὅτι be included or omitted? The external evidence is significantly stronger for the longer reading. Most Alexandrian and Western mss favor inclusion (it is a little unusual for the Alexandrian to favor the longer reading), while most Byzantine mss favor omission (again, a little unusual). However, the reading of Ì^66*, which aligns with the Byzantine, needs to be given some value. At the same time, the scribe of this papyrus was known for freely omitting and adding words, and the fact that the ms was corrected discounts its testimony here. But because the shorter reading is out of character for the Byzantine text, the shorter reading (omitting the ὅτι) may well be authentic. Internally, the question comes down to whether the shorter reading is more difficult or not. And here, it loses the battle, for it seems to be a clarifying omission (so TCGNT 206). R. E. Brown is certainly right when he states: “all in all, the translation without ὅτι makes the best sense” (John [AB], 2:620). But this tacitly argues for the authenticity of the word. Thus, on both external and internal grounds, the ὅτι should be regarded as authentic.

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

[14:2]  ⁸² tn Or “to prepare.”

[14:2]  ⁸³ tn Or “If not, would I have told you that I am going to prepare a place for you?” What is the meaning of the last clause with or without the ὅτι? One of the questions that must be answered here is whether or not τόπος (topos) is to be equated with μονή (monh). In Rev 12:8 τόπος is used to refer to a place in heaven, which would suggest that the two are essentially equal here. Jesus is going ahead of believers to prepare a place for them, a permanent dwelling place in the Father’s house (see the note on this phrase in v. 2).

[14:22]  ⁸⁴ tn Grk “(not Iscariot).” The proper noun (Judas) has been repeated for clarity and smoothness in English style.

[14:22]  sn This is a parenthetical comment by the author.

[14:22]  ⁸⁵ tn Grk “said to him.”

[14:22]  ⁸⁶ tn Or “disclose.”

[14:22]  sn The disciples still expected at this point that Jesus, as Messiah, was going to reveal his identity as such to the world (cf. 7:4).

[14:23]  ⁸⁷ tn Grk “answered and said to him.”

[14:23]  ⁸⁸ tn Or “will keep.”

[14:23]  ⁸⁹ tn Grk “we will come to him and will make our dwelling place with him.” The context here is individual rather than corporate indwelling, so the masculine singular pronoun has been retained throughout v. 23. It is important to note, however, that the pronoun is used generically here and refers equally to men, women, and children.

[16:22]  ⁹⁰ tn Or “distress.”

[16:22]  ⁹¹ sn An allusion to Isa 66:14 LXX, which reads: “Then you will see, and your heart will be glad, and your bones will flourish like the new grass; and the hand of the Lord will be made known to his servants, but he will be indignant toward his enemies.” The change from “you will see [me]” to I will see you places more emphasis on Jesus as the one who reinitiates the relationship with the disciples after his resurrection, but v. 16 (you will see me) is more like Isa 66:14. Further support for seeing this allusion as intentional is found in Isa 66:7, which uses the same imagery of the woman giving birth found in John 16:21. In the context of Isa 66 the passages refer to the institution of the messianic kingdom, and in fact the last clause of 66:14 along with the following verses (15-17) have yet to be fulfilled. This is part of the tension of present and future eschatological fulfillment that runs throughout the NT, by virtue of the fact that there are two advents. Some prophecies are fulfilled or partially fulfilled at the first advent, while other prophecies or parts of prophecies await fulfillment at the second.

[18:39]  ⁹² tn The word “prisoner” is not in the Greek text but is implied.

[18:39]  ⁹³ sn Pilate then offered to release Jesus, reminding the Jewish authorities that they had a custom that he release one prisoner for them at the Passover. There is no extra-biblical evidence alluding to the practice. It is, however, mentioned in Matthew and Mark, described either as a practice of Pilate (Mark 15:6) or of the Roman governor (Matt 27:15). These references may explain the lack of extra-biblical attestation: The custom to which Pilate refers here (18:39) is not a permanent one acknowledged by all the Roman governors, but one peculiar to Pilate as a means of appeasement, meant to better relations with his subjects. Such a limited meaning is certainly possible and consistent with the statement here.

[19:15]  ⁹⁴ tn Grk “Then these.”

[19:15]  ⁹⁵ tn The words “with him” (twice) are not in the Greek text. Direct objects were often omitted in Greek when clear from the context.

[19:15]  ⁹⁶ sn See the note on Crucify in 19:6.

[19:15]  ⁹⁷ tn Grk “Pilate said to them.” The words “to them” are not translated because it is clear in English who Pilate is addressing.

[19:25]  ⁹⁸ sn Several women are mentioned, but it is not easy to determine how many. It is not clear whether his mother’s sister and Mary the wife of Clopas are to be understood as the same individual (in which case only three women are mentioned: Jesus’ mother, her sister Mary, and Mary Magdalene) or as two different individuals (in which case four women are mentioned: Jesus’ mother, her sister, Mary Clopas’ wife, and Mary Magdalene). It is impossible to be certain, but when John’s account is compared to the synoptics it is easier to reconcile the accounts if four women were present than if there were only three. It also seems that if there were four women present, this would have been seen by the author to be in juxtaposition to the four soldiers present who performed the crucifixion, and this may explain the transition from the one incident in 23-24 to the other in 25-27. Finally, if only three were present, this would mean that both Jesus’ mother and her sister were named Mary, and this is highly improbable in a Jewish family of that time. If there were four women present, the name of the second, the sister of Jesus’ mother, is not mentioned. It is entirely possible that the sister of Jesus’ mother mentioned here is to be identified with the woman named Salome mentioned in Mark 15:40 and also with the woman identified as “the mother of the sons of Zebedee” mentioned in Matt 27:56. If so, and if John the Apostle is to be identified as the beloved disciple, then the reason for the omission of the second woman’s name becomes clear; she would have been John’s own mother, and he consistently omitted direct reference to himself or his brother James or any other members of his family in the Fourth Gospel.

[19:26]  ⁹⁹ 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.

[20:1]  ¹⁰⁰ sn The first day of the week would be early Sunday morning. The Sabbath (and in this year the Passover) would have lasted from 6 p.m. Friday until 6 p.m. Saturday. Sunday would thus mark the first day of the following week.

[20:1]  ¹⁰¹ sn John does not mention that Mary Magdalene was accompanied by any of the other women who had been among Jesus’ followers. The synoptic accounts all mention other women who accompanied her (although Mary Magdalene is always mentioned first). Why John does not mention the other women is not clear, but Mary probably becomes the focus of the author’s attention because it was she who came and found Peter and the beloved disciple and informed them of the empty tomb (20:2). Mary’s use of the plural in v. 2 indicates there were others present, in indirect agreement with the synoptic accounts.

[20:1]  ¹⁰² tn Grk “from the tomb.”

[21:12]  ¹⁰³ tn Grk “said to them.” The words “to them” are omitted because it is clear in context to whom Jesus was speaking, and the words are slightly redundant in English.

[21:19]  ¹⁰⁴ tn Grk “he”; the referent (Jesus) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[21:19]  ¹⁰⁵ tn Grk “he”; the referent (Peter) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[21:19]  ¹⁰⁶ sn This is a parenthetical note by the author. The phrase by what kind of death Peter was going to glorify God almost certainly indicates martyrdom (cf. 1 Pet 4:16), and it may not predict anything more than that. But the parallelism of this phrase to similar phrases in John 12:33 and 18:32 which describe Jesus’ own death by crucifixion have led many to suggest that the picture Jesus is portraying for Peter looks not just at martyrdom but at death by crucifixion. This seems to be confirmed by the phrase you will stretch out your hands in the preceding verse. There is some evidence that the early church understood this and similar phrases (one of them in Isa 65:2) to refer to crucifixion (for a detailed discussion of the evidence see L. Morris, John [NICNT], 876, n. 52). Some have objected that if this phrase does indeed refer to crucifixion, the order within v. 18 is wrong, because the stretching out of the hands in crucifixion precedes the binding and leading where one does not wish to go. R. E. Brown (John [AB], 2:1108) sees this as a deliberate reversal of the normal order (hysteron proteron) intended to emphasize the stretching out of the hands. Another possible explanation for the unusual order is the Roman practice in crucifixions of tying the condemned prisoner’s arms to the crossbeam (patibulum) and forcing him to carry it to the place of execution (W. Bauer as cited by O. Cullmann in Peter: Disciple, Apostle, Martyr [LHD], 88).

[21:19]  ¹⁰⁷ tn Grk “After he said this, he said to him”; the referents (first Jesus, second Peter) have been specified in the translation for clarity.