Keluaran 20:6

20:6 and showing covenant faithfulness ¹  to a thousand generations ²  of those who love me and keep my commandments.

Ulangan 6:5

6:5 You must love ³  the Lord your God with your whole mind, ⁴  your whole being, ⁵  and all your strength. ⁶ 

Ulangan 10:12-13

An Exhortation to Love Both God and People

10:12 Now, Israel, what does the Lord your God require of you except to revere him, ⁷  to obey all his commandments, ⁸  to love him, to serve him ⁹  with all your mind and being, ¹⁰  10:13 and to keep the Lord’s commandments and statutes that I am giving ¹¹  you today for your own good?

Ulangan 11:1

Reiteration of the Call to Obedience

11:1 You must love the Lord your God and do what he requires; keep his statutes, ordinances, and commandments ¹²  at all times.

Ulangan 11:13

11:13 Now, if you pay close attention ¹³  to my commandments that I am giving you today and love ¹⁴  the Lord your God and serve him with all your mind and being, ¹⁵ 

Matius 22:37

22:37 Jesus ¹⁶  said to him, “‘Love ¹⁷  the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your mind.’ ¹⁸ 

Yohanes 14:15

Teaching on the Holy Spirit

14:15 “If you love me, you will obey ¹⁹  my commandments. ²⁰ 

Yohanes 14:21-23

14:21 The person who has my commandments and obeys ²¹  them is the one who loves me. ²²  The one ²³  who loves me will be loved by my Father, and I will love him and will reveal ²⁴  myself to him.”

14:22 “Lord,” Judas (not Judas Iscariot) ²⁵  said, ²⁶  “what has happened that you are going to reveal ²⁷  yourself to us and not to the world?” 14:23 Jesus replied, ²⁸  “If anyone loves me, he will obey ²⁹  my word, and my Father will love him, and we will come to him and take up residence with him. ³⁰ 

Yohanes 21:15-17

Peter’s Restoration

21:15 Then when they had finished breakfast, Jesus said to Simon Peter, “Simon, son of John, ³¹  do you love me more than these do?” ³²  He replied, ³³  “Yes, Lord, you know I love you.” ³⁴  Jesus ³⁵  told him, “Feed my lambs.” 21:16 Jesus ³⁶  said ³⁷  a second time, “Simon, son of John, do you love me?” He replied, ³⁸  “Yes, Lord, you know I love you.” Jesus ³⁹  told him, “Shepherd my sheep.” 21:17 Jesus ⁴⁰  said ⁴¹  a third time, “Simon, son of John, do you love me?” Peter was distressed ⁴²  that Jesus ⁴³  asked ⁴⁴  him a third time, “Do you love me?” and said, ⁴⁵  “Lord, you know everything. You know that I love you.” Jesus ⁴⁶  replied, ⁴⁷  “Feed my sheep.

Roma 8:28

8:28 And we know that all things work together ⁴⁸  for good for those who love God, who are called according to his purpose,

Yakobus 1:12

1:12 Happy is the one ⁴⁹  who endures testing, because when he has proven to be genuine, he will receive the crown of life that God ⁵⁰  promised to those who love him.

Yakobus 2:5

2:5 Listen, my dear brothers and sisters! ⁵¹  Did not God choose the poor in the world to be rich in faith and heirs of the kingdom that he promised to those who love him?

Yakobus 2:1

Prejudice and the Law of Love

2:1 My brothers and sisters, ⁵²  do not show prejudice ⁵³  if you possess faith ⁵⁴  in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ. ⁵⁵ 

Yohanes 5:2-3

5:2 Now there is ⁵⁶  in Jerusalem by the Sheep Gate ⁵⁷  a pool called Bethzatha ⁵⁸  in Aramaic, ⁵⁹  which has five covered walkways. ⁶⁰  5:3 A great number of sick, blind, lame, and paralyzed people were lying in these walkways.

[20:6]  ¹ tn Literally “doing loyal love” (עֹשֶׂה חֶסֶד, ’oseh khesed). The noun refers to God’s covenant loyalty, his faithful love to those who belong to him. These are members of the covenant, recipients of grace, the people of God, whom God will preserve and protect from evil and its effects.

[20:6]  ² tn Heb “to thousands” or “to thousandth.” After “tenth,” Hebrew uses cardinal numbers for ordinals also. This statement is the antithesis of the preceding line. The “thousands” or “thousandth [generation]” are those who love Yahweh and keep his commands. These are descendants from the righteous, and even associates with them, who benefit from the mercy that God extends to his people. S. R. Driver (Exodus, 195) says that this passage teaches that God’s mercy transcends his wrath; in his providence the beneficial consequences of a life of goodness extend indefinitely further than the retribution that is the penalty for persisting in sin. To say that God’s loyal love extends to thousands of generations or the thousandth generation is parallel to saying that it endures forever (Ps. 118). See also Exod 34:7; Deut 5:10; 7:9; Ps 18:51; Jer 32:18.

[6:5]  ³ tn The verb אָהַב (’ahav, “to love”) in this setting communicates not so much an emotional idea as one of covenant commitment. To love the Lord is to be absolutely loyal and obedient to him in every respect, a truth Jesus himself taught (cf. John 14:15). See also the note on the word “loved” in Deut 4:37.

[6:5]  ⁴ tn Heb “heart.” In OT physiology the heart (לֵב, לֵבָב; levav, lev) was considered the seat of the mind or intellect, so that one could think with one’s heart. See A. Luc, NIDOTTE 2:749-54.

[6:5]  ⁵ tn Heb “soul”; “being.” Contrary to Hellenistic ideas of a soul that is discrete and separate from the body and spirit, OT anthropology equated the “soul” (נֶפֶשׁ, nefesh) with the person himself. It is therefore best in most cases to translate נֶפֶשׁ (nefesh) as “being” or the like. See H. W. Wolff, Anthropology of the Old Testament, 10-25; D. Fredericks, NIDOTTE 3:133-34.

[6:5]  ⁶ sn For NT variations on the Shema see Matt 22:37-39; Mark 12:29-30; Luke 10:27.

[10:12]  ⁷ tn Heb “the Lord your God.” See note on “he” in 10:4.

[10:12]  ⁸ tn Heb “to walk in all his ways” (so KJV, NIV, NRSV); NAB “follow his ways exactly”; NLT “to live according to his will.”

[10:12]  ⁹ tn Heb “the Lord your God.” See note on “he” in 10:4.

[10:12]  ¹⁰ tn Heb “heart and soul” or “heart and being”; NCV “with your whole being.” See note on the word “being” in Deut 6:5.

[10:13]  ¹¹ tn Heb “commanding” (so NASB, NRSV). For stylistic reasons, to avoid redundancy, “giving” has been used in the translation.

[11:1]  ¹² tn This collocation of technical terms for elements of the covenant text lends support to its importance and also signals a new section of paraenesis in which Moses will exhort Israel to covenant obedience. The Hebrew term מִשְׁמָרוֹת (mishmarot, “obligations”) sums up the three terms that follow – חֻקֹּת (khuqot), מִשְׁפָּטִים (mishppatim), and מִצְוֹת (mitsot).

[11:13]  ¹³ tn Heb “if hearing, you will hear.” The Hebrew text uses the infinitive absolute to emphasize the verbal idea. The translation renders this emphasis with the word “close.”

[11:13]  ¹⁴ tn Again, the Hebrew term אָהַב (’ahav) draws attention to the reciprocation of divine love as a condition or sign of covenant loyalty (cf. Deut 6:5).

[11:13]  ¹⁵ tn Heb “heart and soul” or “heart and being.” See note on the word “being” in Deut 6:5.

[22:37]  ¹⁶ tn Grk “And he”; the referent (Jesus) has been specified in the translation for clarity. Here δέ (de) has not been translated.

[22:37]  ¹⁷ tn Grk “You will love.” The future indicative is used here with imperatival force (see ExSyn 452 and 569).

[22:37]  ¹⁸ sn A quotation from Deut 6:5. The threefold reference to different parts of the person says, in effect, that one should love God with all one’s being.

[14:15]  ¹⁹ tn Or “will keep.”

[14:15]  ²⁰ sn Jesus’ statement If you love me, you will obey my commandments provides the transition between the promises of answered prayer which Jesus makes to his disciples in vv. 13-14 and the promise of the Holy Spirit which is introduced in v. 16. Obedience is the proof of genuine love.

[14:21]  ²¹ tn Or “keeps.”

[14:21]  ²² tn Grk “obeys them, that one is the one who loves me.”

[14:21]  ²³ tn Grk “And the one.” Here the conjunction καί (kai) has not been translated to improve the English style.

[14:21]  ²⁴ tn Or “will disclose.”

[14:22]  ²⁵ 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]  ²⁶ tn Grk “said to him.”

[14:22]  ²⁷ 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]  ²⁸ tn Grk “answered and said to him.”

[14:23]  ²⁹ tn Or “will keep.”

[14:23]  ³⁰ 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.

[21:15]  ³¹ tc The majority of mss (A C² Θ Ψ Ë^1,13 33 Ï sy) read “Simon, the son of Jonah” here and in vv. 16 and 17, but these are perhaps assimilations to Matt 16:17. The reading “Simon, son of John” is better attested, being found in א¹ (א* only has “Simon” without mention of his father) B C* D L W lat co.

[21:15]  ³² tn To whom (or what) does “these” (τούτων, toutwn) refer? Three possibilities are suggested: (1) τούτων should be understood as neuter, “these things,” referring to the boats, nets, and fishing gear nearby. In light of Peter’s statement in 21:3, “I am going fishing,” some have understood Peter to have renounced his commission in light of his denials of Jesus. Jesus, as he restores Peter and forgives him for his denials, is asking Peter if he really loves his previous vocation more than he loves Jesus. Three things may be said in evaluation of this view: (a) it is not at all necessary to understand Peter’s statement in 21:3 as a renouncement of his discipleship, as this view of the meaning of τούτων would imply; (b) it would probably be more likely that the verb would be repeated in such a construction (see 7:31 for an example where the verb is repeated); and (c) as R. E. Brown has observed (John [AB], 2:1103) by Johannine standards the choice being offered to Peter between material things and the risen Jesus would seem rather ridiculous, especially after the disciples had realized whom it was they were dealing with (the Lord, see v. 12). (2) τούτων refers to the other disciples, meaning “Do you love me more than you love these other disciples?” The same objection mentioned as (c) under (1) would apply here: Could the author, in light of the realization of who Jesus is which has come to the disciples after the resurrection, and which he has just mentioned in 21:12, seriously present Peter as being offered a choice between the other disciples and the risen Jesus? This leaves option (3), that τούτων refers to the other disciples, meaning “Do you love me more than these other disciples do?” It seems likely that there is some irony here: Peter had boasted in 13:37, “I will lay down my life for you,” and the synoptics present Peter as boasting even more explicitly of his loyalty to Jesus (“Even if they all fall away, I will not,” Matt 26:33; Mark 14:29). Thus the semantic force of what Jesus asks Peter here amounts to something like “Now, after you have denied me three times, as I told you you would, can you still affirm that you love me more than these other disciples do?” The addition of the auxiliary verb “do” in the translation is used to suggest to the English reader the third interpretation, which is the preferred one.

[21:15]  ³³ tn Grk “He said to him.”

[21:15]  ³⁴ tn Is there a significant difference in meaning between the two words for love used in the passage, ἀγαπάω and φιλέω (agapaw and filew)? Aside from Origen, who saw a distinction in the meaning of the two words, most of the Greek Fathers like Chrysostom and Cyril of Alexandria, saw no real difference of meaning. Neither did Augustine nor the translators of the Itala (Old Latin). This was also the view of the Reformation Greek scholars Erasmus and Grotius. The suggestion that a distinction in meaning should be seen comes primarily from a number of British scholars of the 19th century, especially Trench, Westcott, and Plummer. It has been picked up by others such as Spicq, Lenski, and Hendriksen. But most modern scholars decline to see a real difference in the meaning of the two words in this context, among them Bernard, Moffatt, Bonsirven, Bultmann, Barrett, Brown, Morris, Haenchen, and Beasley-Murray. There are three significant reasons for seeing no real difference in the meaning of ἀγαπάω and φιλέω in these verses: (1) the author has a habit of introducing slight stylistic variations in repeated material without any significant difference in meaning (compare, for example, 3:3 with 3:5, and 7:34 with 13:33). An examination of the uses of ἀγαπάω and φιλέω in the Fourth Gospel seems to indicate a general interchangeability between the two. Both terms are used of God’s love for man (3:16, 16:27); of the Father’s love for the Son (3:35, 5:20); of Jesus’ love for men (11:5, 11:3); of the love of men for men (13:34, 15:19); and of the love of men for Jesus (8:42, 16:27). (2) If (as seems probable) the original conversation took place in Aramaic (or possibly Hebrew), there would not have been any difference expressed because both Aramaic and Hebrew have only one basic word for love. In the LXX both ἀγαπάω and φιλέω are used to translate the same Hebrew word for love, although ἀγαπάω is more frequent. It is significant that in the Syriac version of the NT only one verb is used to translate vv. 15-17 (Syriac is very similar linguistically to Palestinian Aramaic). (3) Peter’s answers to the questions asked with ἀγαπάω are ‘yes’ even though he answers using the verb φιλέω. If he is being asked to love Jesus on a higher or more spiritual level his answers give no indication of this, and one would be forced to say (in order to maintain a consistent distinction between the two verbs) that Jesus finally concedes defeat and accepts only the lower form of love which is all that Peter is capable of offering. Thus it seems best to regard the interchange between ἀγαπάω and φιλέω in these verses as a minor stylistic variation of the author, consistent with his use of minor variations in repeated material elsewhere, and not indicative of any real difference in meaning. Thus no attempt has been made to distinguish between the two Greek words in the translation.

[21:15]  ³⁵ tn Grk “He”; the referent (Jesus) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[21:16]  ³⁶ tn Grk “He”; the referent (Jesus) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[21:16]  ³⁷ tn Grk “said again.” The word “again” (when used in connection with the phrase “a second time”) is redundant and has not been translated.

[21:16]  ³⁸ tn Grk “He said to him.”

[21:16]  ³⁹ tn Grk “He”; the referent (Jesus) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[21:17]  ⁴⁰ tn Grk “He”; the referent (Jesus) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[21:17]  ⁴¹ tn Grk “said to him.” The words “to him” are clear from the context and slightly redundant in English.

[21:17]  ⁴² tn Or “was sad.”

[21:17]  ⁴³ tn Grk “he”; the referent (Jesus) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[21:17]  ⁴⁴ tn Grk “said to.”

[21:17]  ⁴⁵ tn Grk “and said to him.” The words “to him” are clear from the context and slightly redundant in English.

[21:17]  ⁴⁶ tc ‡ Most witnesses, especially later ones (A Θ Ψ Ë¹³ Ï), read ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς (Jo Ihsou", “Jesus”) here, while B C have ᾿Ιησοῦς without the article and א D W ˹ 33 565 al lat lack both. Because of the rapid verbal exchange in this pericope, “Jesus” is virtually required for clarity, providing a temptation to scribes to add the name. Further, the name normally occurs with the article. Although it is possible that B C accidentally omitted the article with the name, it is just as likely that they added the simple name to the text for clarity’s sake, while other witnesses added the article as well. The omission of ὁ ᾿Ιησοῦς thus seems most likely to be authentic. NA²⁷ includes the words in brackets, indicating some doubts as to their authenticity.

[21:17]  tn Grk “he”; the referent (Jesus) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[21:17]  ⁴⁷ tn Grk “Jesus said to him.”

[8:28]  ⁴⁸ tc ὁ θεός (Jo qeos, “God”) is found after the verb συνεργεῖ (sunergei, “work”) in v. 28 by Ì⁴⁶ A B 81 sa; the shorter reading is found in א C D F G Ψ 33 1739 1881 Ï latt sy bo. Although the inclusion is supported by a significant early papyrus, the alliance of significant Alexandrian and Western witnesses favors the shorter reading. As well, the longer reading is evidently motivated by a need for clarification. Since ὁ θεός is textually suspect, it is better to read the text without it. This leaves two good translational options: either “he works all things together for good” or “all things work together for good.” In the first instance the subject is embedded in the verb and “God” is clearly implied (as in v. 29). In the second instance, πάντα (panta) becomes the subject of an intransitive verb. In either case, “What is expressed is a truly biblical confidence in the sovereignty of God” (C. E. B. Cranfield, Romans [ICC], 1:427).

[1:12]  ⁴⁹ 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]  ⁵⁰ tc Most mss ([C] P 0246 Ï) read ὁ κύριος (Jo kurio", “the Lord”) here, while others have ὁ θεός (Jo qeo", “God”; 4 33^vid 323 945 1739 al). However, several important and early witnesses (̲³ א A B Ψ 81 co) have no explicit subject. In light of the scribal tendency toward clarification, and the fact that both κύριος and θεός are well represented, there can be no doubt that the original text had no explicit subject. The referent (God) has been specified in the translation for clarity, not because of textual basis.

[2:5]  ⁵¹ tn Grk “brothers.” See note on the phrase “brothers and sisters” in 1:2.

[2:1]  ⁵² tn Grk “brothers.” See note on the phrase “brothers and sisters” in 1:2.

[2:1]  ⁵³ tn Or “partiality.”

[2:1]  ⁵⁴ tn Grk “do not have faith with personal prejudice,” with emphasis on the last phrase.

[2:1]  ⁵⁵ tn Grk “our Lord Jesus Christ of glory.” Here δόξης (doxhs) has been translated as an attributive genitive.

[5:2]  ⁵⁶ tn Regarding the use of the present tense ἐστιν (estin) and its implications for the dating of the Gospel of John, see the article by D. B. Wallace, “John 5,2 and the Date of the Fourth Gospel,” Bib 71 (1990): 177-205.

[5:2]  ⁵⁷ tn The site of the miracle is also something of a problem: προβατικῇ (probatikh) is usually taken as a reference to the Sheep Gate near the temple. Some (R. E. Brown and others) would place the word κολυμβήθρα (kolumbhqra) with προβατικῇ to read “in Jerusalem, by the Sheep Pool, there is (another pool) with the Hebrew name.” This would imply that there is reference to two pools in the context rather than only one. This does not seem necessary (although it is a grammatical possibility). The gender of the words does not help since both are feminine (as is the participle ἐπιλεγομένη [epilegomenh]). Note however that Brown’s suggestion would require a feminine word to be supplied (for the participle ἐπιλεγομένη to modify). The traditional understanding of the phrase as a reference to the Sheep Gate near the temple appears more probably correct.

[5:2]  ⁵⁸ tc Some mss (א [L] 33 it) read Bethzatha, while others read Bethsaida (Ì^[66],75 B T W^s [Ψ] pc vg); codex D has Belzetha. A lot of controversy has surrounded the name of the pool itself: The reading of the Byzantine (or majority) text (A C Θ 078 Ë^1,13 Ï), Bethesda, has been virtually discarded by scholars in favor of what is thought to be the more primitive Bethzatha, even though many recent translations continue to employ Bethesda, the traditional reading. The latter is attested by Josephus as the name of a quarter of the city near the northeast corner of the temple area. He reports that the Syrian Legate Cestius burned this suburb in his attack on Jerusalem in October a.d. 68 (J. W. 2.19.4 [2.530]). However, there is some new archaeological evidence for this problem. 3Q15 (Copper Scroll) from Qumran seems to indicate that in the general area of the temple, on the eastern hill of Jerusalem, a treasure was buried in Bet áEsdatayin, in the pool at the entrance to the smaller basin. The name of the region or pool itself seems then to have been Bet ᾿Esda, “house of the flowing.” It appears with the dual ending in the scroll because there were two basins. Bethesda seems to be an accurate Greek rendition of the name, while J. T. Milik suggests Bethzatha is a rendition of the Aramaic intensive plural Bet áEsdata (DJDJ 3, 271). As for the text of John 5:2, the fundamental problems with the Bethesda reading are that it looks motivated (with an edifying Semitic etymology, meaning “House of Mercy” [TCGNT 178]), and is minimally attested. Apart from the Copper Scroll, the evidence for Bethesda is almost entirely shut up to the Byzantine text (C being the most notable exception, but it often has Byzantine encroachments). On the one hand, this argues the Byzantine reading here had ancient, semitic roots; on the other hand, since both readings are attested as historically accurate, a decision has to be based on the better witnesses. The fact that there are multiple readings here suggests that the original was not well understood. Which reading best explains the rise of the others? It seems that Bethzatha is the best choice.

[5:2]  sn On the location of the pool called Bethzatha, the double-pool of St. Anne is the probable site, and has been excavated; the pools were trapezoidal in shape, 165 ft (49.5 m) wide at one end, 220 ft (66 m) wide at the other, and 315 ft (94.5 m) long, divided by a central partition. There were colonnades (rows of columns) on all 4 sides and on the partition, thus forming the five covered walkways mentioned in John 5:2. Stairways at the corners permitted descent to the pool.

[5:2]  ⁵⁹ tn Grk “in Hebrew.”

[5:2]  ⁶⁰ tn Or “porticoes,” or “colonnades”; Grk “stoas.”

[5:2]  sn The pool had five porticoes. These were covered walkways formed by rows of columns supporting a roof and open on the side facing the pool. People could stand, sit, or walk on these colonnaded porches, protected from the weather and the heat of the sun.