Yohanes 1:22

1:22 Then they said to him, “Who are you? Tell us ¹  so that we can give an answer to those who sent us. What do you say about yourself?”

Yohanes 4:12

4:12 Surely you’re not greater than our ancestor ²  Jacob, are you? For he gave us this well and drank from it himself, along with his sons and his livestock.” ³ 

Yohanes 5:6

5:6 When Jesus saw him lying there and when he realized ⁴  that the man ⁵  had been disabled a long time already, he said to him, “Do you want to become well?”

Yohanes 6:11

6:11 Then Jesus took the loaves, and when he had given thanks, he distributed the bread to those who were seated. He then did the same with the fish, ⁶  as much as they wanted.

Yohanes 6:30

6:30 So they said to him, “Then what miraculous sign will you perform, so that we may see it and believe you? What will you do?

Yohanes 6:57

6:57 Just as the living Father sent me, and I live because of the Father, so the one who consumes ⁷  me will live because of me.

Yohanes 7:32

7:32 The Pharisees ⁸  heard the crowd ⁹  murmuring these things about Jesus, ¹⁰  so the chief priests and the Pharisees sent officers ¹¹  to arrest him. ¹² 

Yohanes 8:9

8:9 Now when they heard this, they began to drift away one at a time, starting with the older ones, ¹³  until Jesus was left alone with the woman standing before him.

Yohanes 9:6

9:6 Having said this, ¹⁴  he spat on the ground and made some mud ¹⁵  with the saliva. He ¹⁶  smeared the mud on the blind man’s ¹⁷  eyes

Yohanes 10:14

10:14 “I am the good shepherd. I ¹⁸  know my own ¹⁹  and my own know me –

Yohanes 11:28

11:28 And when she had said this, Martha ²⁰  went and called her sister Mary, saying privately, ²¹  “The Teacher is here and is asking for you.” ²² 

Yohanes 12:36

12:36 While you have the light, believe in the light, so that you may become sons of light.” ²³  When Jesus had said these things, he went away and hid himself from them.

Yohanes 12:42

12:42 Nevertheless, even among the rulers ²⁴  many believed in him, but because of the Pharisees ²⁵  they would not confess Jesus to be the Christ, ²⁶  so that they would not be put out of ²⁷  the synagogue. ²⁸ 

Yohanes 13:21

13:21 When he had said these things, Jesus was greatly distressed ²⁹  in spirit, and testified, ³⁰  “I tell you the solemn truth, ³¹  one of you will betray me.” ³² 

Yohanes 13:34

13:34 “I give you a new commandment – to love ³³  one another. Just as I have loved you, you also are to love one another. ³⁴ 

Yohanes 14:2

14:2 There are many dwelling places ³⁵  in my Father’s house. ³⁶  Otherwise, I would have told you, because ³⁷  I am going away to make ready ³⁸  a place for you. ³⁹ 

Yohanes 16:22

16:22 So also you have sorrow ⁴⁰  now, but I will see you again, and your hearts will rejoice, and no one will take your joy away from you. ⁴¹ 

Yohanes 18:31

18:31 Pilate told them, ⁴²  “Take him yourselves and pass judgment on him ⁴³  according to your own law!” ⁴⁴  The Jewish leaders ⁴⁵  replied, ⁴⁶  “We cannot legally put anyone to death.” ⁴⁷ 

Yohanes 18:38

18:38 Pilate asked, ⁴⁸  “What is truth?” ⁴⁹ 

When he had said this he went back outside to the Jewish leaders ⁵⁰  and announced, ⁵¹  “I find no basis for an accusation ⁵²  against him.

Yohanes 21:6

21:6 He told them, “Throw your net on the right side of the boat, and you will find some.” ⁵³  So they threw the net, ⁵⁴  and were not able to pull it in because of the large number of fish.

Yohanes 21:19

21:19 (Now Jesus ⁵⁵  said this to indicate clearly by what kind of death Peter ⁵⁶  was going to glorify God.) ⁵⁷  After he said this, Jesus told Peter, ⁵⁸  “Follow me.”

[1:22]  ¹ tn The words “Tell us” are not in the Greek but are implied.

[4:12]  ² tn Or “our forefather”; Grk “our father.”

[4:12]  ³ tn Questions prefaced with μή (mh) in Greek anticipate a negative answer. This can sometimes be indicated by using a “tag” at the end. In this instance all of v. 12 is one question. It has been broken into two sentences for the sake of English style (instead of “for he” the Greek reads “who”).

[5:6]  ⁴ tn Or “knew.”

[5:6]  ⁵ tn Grk “he.” The referent (the man) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[6:11]  ⁶ tn Grk “likewise also (he distributed) from the fish.”

[6:57]  ⁷ tn Or “who chews”; Grk “who eats.” Here the translation “consumes” is more appropriate than simply “eats,” because it is the internalization of Jesus by the individual that is in view. On the alternation between ἐσθίω (esqiw, “eat,” v. 53) and τρώγω (trwgw, “eats,” vv. 54, 56, 58; “consumes,” v. 57) see the note on “eats” in v. 54.

[7:32]  ⁸ sn See the note on Pharisees in 1:24.

[7:32]  ⁹ tn Or “The common people” (as opposed to the religious authorities like the Pharisees).

[7:32]  ¹⁰ tn Grk “him”; the referent (Jesus) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[7:32]  ¹¹ tn Or “servants.” The “chief priests and Pharisees” is a comprehensive term for the groups represented in the ruling council (the Sanhedrin) as in John 7:45; 18:3; Acts 5:22, 26. As “servants” or “officers” of the Sanhedrin their representatives should be distinguished from the Levites serving as temple police (perhaps John 7:30 and 44; also John 8:20; 10:39; 19:6; Acts 4:3). Even when performing “police” duties such as here, their “officers” are doing so only as part of their general tasks (see K. H. Rengstorf, TDNT 8:540).

[7:32]  ¹² tn Grk “to seize him.” In the context of a deliberate attempt by the servants of the chief priests and Pharisees to detain Jesus, the English verb “arrest” conveys the point more effectively.

[8:9]  ¹³ tn Or “beginning from the eldest.”

[9:6]  ¹⁴ tn Grk “said these things.”

[9:6]  ¹⁵ tn Or “clay” (moistened earth of a clay-like consistency). The textual variant preserved in the Syriac text of Ephraem’s commentary on the Diatessaron (“he made eyes from his clay”) probably arose from the interpretation given by Irenaeus in Against Heresies: “that which the Artificer, the Word, had omitted to form in the womb, he then supplied in public.” This involves taking the clay as an allusion to Gen 2:7, which is very unlikely.

[9:6]  ¹⁶ tn Because of the length and complexity of the Greek sentence, the conjunction καί (kai) was replaced by a third person pronoun and a new sentence started here in the translation.

[9:6]  ¹⁷ tn Grk “on his.”

[10:14]  ¹⁸ tn Grk “And I.” Because of the difference between Greek style, which often begins sentences or clauses with “and,” and English style, which generally does not, καί (kai) has not been translated here.

[10:14]  ¹⁹ tn The direct object is frequently omitted in Greek and must be supplied from the context. Here it could be “sheep,” but Jesus was ultimately talking about “people.”

[11:28]  ²⁰ tn Grk “she”; the referent (Martha) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[11:28]  ²¹ tn Or “in secret” (as opposed to publicly, so that the other mourners did not hear).

[11:28]  ²² tn Grk “is calling you.”

[12:36]  ²³ tn The idiom “sons of light” means essentially “people characterized by light,” that is, “people of God.”

[12:36]  sn The expression sons of light refers to men and women to whom the truth of God has been revealed and who are therefore living according to that truth, thus, “people of God.”

[12:42]  ²⁴ sn The term rulers here denotes members of the Sanhedrin, the highest legal, legislative, and judicial body among the Jews. Note the same word (“ruler”) is used to describe Nicodemus in 3:1.

[12:42]  ²⁵ sn See the note on Pharisees in 1:24.

[12:42]  ²⁶ tn The words “Jesus to be the Christ” are not in the Greek text, but are implied (see 9:22). As is often the case in Greek, the direct object is omitted for the verb ὡμολόγουν (Jwmologoun). Some translators supply an ambiguous “it,” or derive the implied direct object from the previous clause “believed in him” so that the rulers would not confess “their faith” or “their belief.” However, when one compares John 9:22, which has many verbal parallels to this verse, it seems clear that the content of the confession would have been “Jesus is the Christ (i.e., Messiah).”

[12:42]  sn See the note on Christ in 1:20.

[12:42]  ²⁷ tn Or “be expelled from.”

[12:42]  ²⁸ sn Compare John 9:22. See the note on synagogue in 6:59.

[13:21]  ²⁹ tn Or “greatly troubled.”

[13:21]  ³⁰ tn Grk “and testified and said.”

[13:21]  ³¹ tn Grk “Truly, truly, I say to you.”

[13:21]  ³² tn Or “will hand me over.”

[13:34]  ³³ tn The ἵνα (Jina) clause gives the content of the commandment. This is indicated by a dash in the translation.

[13:34]  ³⁴ sn The idea that love is a commandment is interesting. In the OT the ten commandments have a setting in the covenant between God and Israel at Sinai; they were the stipulations that Israel had to observe if the nation were to be God’s chosen people. In speaking of love as the new commandment for those whom Jesus had chosen as his own (John 13:1, 15:16) and as a mark by which they could be distinguished from others (13:35), John shows that he is thinking of this scene in covenant terminology. But note that the disciples are to love “Just as I have loved you” (13:34). The love Jesus has for his followers cannot be duplicated by them in one sense, because it effects their salvation, since he lays down his life for them: It is an act of love that gives life to people. But in another sense, they can follow his example (recall to the end, 13:1; also 1 John 3:16, 4:16 and the interpretation of Jesus’ washing of the disciples’ feet). In this way Jesus’ disciples are to love one another: They are to follow his example of sacrificial service to one another, to death if necessary.

[14:2]  ³⁵ 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]  ³⁶ 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]  ³⁷ 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]  ³⁸ tn Or “to prepare.”

[14:2]  ³⁹ 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).

[16:22]  ⁴⁰ tn Or “distress.”

[16:22]  ⁴¹ 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.

[18:31]  ⁴² tn Grk “Then Pilate said to them.”

[18:31]  ⁴³ tn Or “judge him.” For the translation “pass judgment on him” see R. E. Brown (John [AB], 2:848).

[18:31]  ⁴⁴ sn Pilate, as the sole representative of Rome in a troubled area, was probably in Jerusalem for the Passover because of the danger of an uprising (the normal residence for the Roman governor was in Caesarea as mentioned in Acts 23:35). At this time on the eve of the feast he would have been a busy and perhaps even a worried man. It is not surprising that he offered to hand Jesus back over to the Jewish authorities to pass judgment on him. It may well be that Pilate realized when no specific charge was mentioned that he was dealing with an internal dispute over some religious matter. Pilate wanted nothing to do with such matters, as the statement “Pass judgment on him according to your own law!” indicates. As far as the author is concerned, this points out who was really responsible for Jesus’ death: The Roman governor Pilate would have had nothing to do with it if he had not been pressured by the Jewish religious authorities, upon whom the real responsibility rested.

[18:31]  ⁴⁵ tn Or “the Jewish authorities”; Grk “the Jews.” Here the phrase refers to the Jewish leaders, especially members of the Sanhedrin. See the note on the phrase “Jewish leaders” in v. 12.

[18:31]  ⁴⁶ tn Grk “said to him.”

[18:31]  ⁴⁷ tn Grk “It is not permitted to us to kill anyone.”

[18:31]  sn The historical background behind the statement We cannot legally put anyone to death is difficult to reconstruct. Scholars are divided over whether this statement in the Fourth Gospel accurately reflects the judicial situation between the Jewish authorities and the Romans in 1st century Palestine. It appears that the Roman governor may have given the Jews the power of capital punishment for specific offenses, some of them religious (the death penalty for Gentiles caught trespassing in the inner courts of the temple, for example). It is also pointed out that the Jewish authorities did carry out a number of executions, some of them specifically pertaining to Christians (Stephen, according to Acts 7:58-60; and James the Just, who was stoned in the 60s according to Josephus, Ant. 20.9.1 [20.200]). But Stephen’s death may be explained as a result of “mob violence” rather than a formal execution, and as Josephus in the above account goes on to point out, James was executed in the period between two Roman governors, and the high priest at the time was subsequently punished for the action. Two studies by A. N. Sherwin-White (Roman Society and Roman Law in the New Testament, 1-47; and “The Trial of Christ,” Historicity and Chronology in the New Testament [SPCKTC], 97-116) have tended to support the accuracy of John’s account. He concluded that the Romans kept very close control of the death penalty for fear that in the hands of rebellious locals such power could be used to eliminate factions favorable or useful to Rome. A province as troublesome as Judea would not have been likely to be made an exception to this.

[18:38]  ⁴⁸ tn Grk “Pilate said.”

[18:38]  ⁴⁹ sn With his reply “What is truth?” Pilate dismissed the matter. It is not clear what Pilate’s attitude was at this point, as in 18:33. He may have been sarcastic, or perhaps somewhat reflective. The author has not given enough information in the narrative to be sure. Within the narrative, Pilate’s question serves to make the reader reflect on what truth is, and that answer (in the narrative) has already been given (14:6).

[18:38]  ⁵⁰ tn Or “the Jewish authorities”; Grk “the Jews.” Here the phrase refers to the Jewish leaders, especially members of the Sanhedrin. See the note on the phrase “Jewish leaders” in v. 12. The term also occurs in v. 31, where it is clear the Jewish leaders are in view, because they state that they cannot legally carry out an execution. Although it is likely (in view of the synoptic parallels) that the crowd here in 18:38 was made up not just of the Jewish leaders, but of ordinary residents of Jerusalem and pilgrims who were in Jerusalem for the Passover, nevertheless in John’s Gospel Pilate is primarily in dialogue with the leadership of the nation, who are expressly mentioned in 18:35 and 19:6.

[18:38]  ⁵¹ tn Grk “said to them.”

[18:38]  ⁵² tn Grk “find no cause.”

[21:6]  ⁵³ tn The word “some” is not in the Greek text but is implied. Direct objects were often omitted in Greek when clear from the context.

[21:6]  ⁵⁴ tn The words “the net” are not in the Greek text but are implied. Direct objects were often omitted in Greek when clear from the context.

[21:19]  ⁵⁵ tn Grk “he”; the referent (Jesus) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[21:19]  ⁵⁶ tn Grk “he”; the referent (Peter) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[21:19]  ⁵⁷ 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]  ⁵⁸ tn Grk “After he said this, he said to him”; the referents (first Jesus, second Peter) have been specified in the translation for clarity.