Yohanes 1:31

1:31 I did not recognize ¹  him, but I came baptizing with water so that he could be revealed to Israel.” ² 

Yohanes 1:47

1:47 Jesus saw Nathanael coming toward him and exclaimed, ³  “Look, a true Israelite in whom there is no deceit!” ⁴ 

Yohanes 3:8

3:8 The wind ⁵  blows wherever it will, and you hear the sound it makes, but do not know where it comes from and where it is going. So it is with everyone who is born of the Spirit.” ⁶ 

Yohanes 3:28

3:28 You yourselves can testify that I said, ‘I am not the Christ,’ ⁷  but rather, ‘I have been sent before him.’

Yohanes 4:12

4:12 Surely you’re not greater than our ancestor ⁸  Jacob, are you? For he gave us this well and drank from it himself, along with his sons and his livestock.” ⁹ 

Yohanes 4:38

4:38 I sent you to reap what you did not work for; others have labored and you have entered into their labor.”

Yohanes 5:29

5:29 and will come out – the ones who have done what is good to the resurrection resulting in life, and the ones who have done what is evil to the resurrection resulting in condemnation. ¹⁰ 

Yohanes 6:2

6:2 A large crowd was following him because they were observing the miraculous signs he was performing on the sick.

Yohanes 6:40

6:40 For this is the will of my Father – for everyone who looks on the Son and believes in him to have eternal life, and I will raise him up ¹¹  at the last day.” ¹² 

Yohanes 6:53

6:53 Jesus said to them, “I tell you the solemn truth, ¹³  unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, ¹⁴  you have no life ¹⁵  in yourselves.

Yohanes 6:63

6:63 The Spirit is the one who gives life; human nature is of no help! ¹⁶  The words that I have spoken to you are spirit and are life. ¹⁷ 

Yohanes 7:23

7:23 But if a male child ¹⁸  is circumcised ¹⁹  on the Sabbath so that the law of Moses is not broken, ²⁰  why are you angry with me because I made a man completely well ²¹  on the Sabbath?

Yohanes 7:30-31

7:30 So then they tried to seize Jesus, ²²  but no one laid a hand on him, because his time ²³  had not yet come. 7:31 Yet many of the crowd ²⁴  believed in him and said, “Whenever the Christ ²⁵  comes, he won’t perform more miraculous signs than this man did, will he?” ²⁶ 

Yohanes 10:25

10:25 Jesus replied, ²⁷  “I told you and you do not believe. The deeds ²⁸  I do in my Father’s name testify about me.

Yohanes 10:34

10:34 Jesus answered, ²⁹  “Is it not written in your law, ‘I said, you are gods’? ³⁰ 

Yohanes 11:9

11:9 Jesus replied, ³¹  “Are there not twelve hours in a day? If anyone walks around in the daytime, he does not stumble, ³²  because he sees the light of this world. ³³ 

Yohanes 11:47

11:47 So the chief priests and the Pharisees ³⁴  called the council ³⁵  together and said, “What are we doing? For this man is performing many miraculous signs.

Yohanes 12:26

12:26 If anyone wants to serve me, he must follow ³⁶  me, and where I am, my servant will be too. ³⁷  If anyone serves me, the Father will honor him.

Yohanes 12:36

12:36 While you have the light, believe in the light, so that you may become sons of light.” ³⁸  When Jesus had said these things, he went away and hid himself from them.

Yohanes 12:40

12:40 “He has blinded their eyes

and hardened their heart, ³⁹ 

so that they would not see with their eyes

and understand with their heart, ⁴⁰ 

and turn to me, ⁴¹  and I would heal them.” ⁴² 

Yohanes 14:2

14:2 There are many dwelling places ⁴³  in my Father’s house. ⁴⁴  Otherwise, I would have told you, because ⁴⁵  I am going away to make ready ⁴⁶  a place for you. ⁴⁷ 

Yohanes 15:7

15:7 If you remain ⁴⁸  in me and my words remain ⁴⁹  in you, ask whatever you want, and it will be done for you. ⁵⁰ 

Yohanes 16:23-24

16:23 At that time ⁵¹  you will ask me nothing. I tell you the solemn truth, ⁵²  whatever you ask the Father in my name he will give you. ⁵³  16:24 Until now you have not asked for anything in my name. Ask and you will receive it, ⁵⁴  so that your joy may be complete.

Yohanes 16:30

16:30 Now we know that you know everything ⁵⁵  and do not need anyone ⁵⁶  to ask you anything. ⁵⁷  Because of this ⁵⁸  we believe that you have come from God.”

Yohanes 17:13

17:13 But now I am coming to you, and I am saying these things in the world, so they may experience ⁵⁹  my joy completed ⁶⁰  in themselves.

Yohanes 19:28

Jesus’ Death

19:28 After this Jesus, realizing that by this time ⁶¹  everything was completed, ⁶²  said (in order to fulfill the scripture), ⁶³  “I am thirsty!” ⁶⁴ 

Yohanes 20:31

20:31 But these ⁶⁵  are recorded ⁶⁶  so that you may believe ⁶⁷  that Jesus is the Christ, ⁶⁸  the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name. ⁶⁹ 

[1:31]  ¹ tn Or “know.”

[1:31]  ² sn John the Baptist, who has been so reluctant to elaborate his own role, now more than willingly gives his testimony about Jesus. For the author, the emphasis is totally on John the Baptist as a witness to Jesus. No attention is given to the Baptist’s call to national repentance and very little to his baptizing. Everything is focused on what he has to say about Jesus: so that he could be revealed to Israel.

[1:47]  ³ tn Grk “said about him.”

[1:47]  ⁴ tn Or “treachery.”

[1:47]  sn An allusion to Ps 32:2.

[3:8]  ⁵ tn The same Greek word, πνεύματος (pneumatos), may be translated “wind” or “spirit.”

[3:8]  ⁶ sn Again, the physical illustrates the spiritual, although the force is heightened by the word-play here on wind-spirit (see the note on wind at the beginning of this verse). By the end of the verse, however, the final usage of πνεύματος (pneumatos) refers to the Holy Spirit.

[3:28]  ⁷ tn Or “the Messiah” (Both Greek “Christ” and Hebrew and Aramaic “Messiah” mean “one who has been anointed”).

[3:28]  sn See the note on Christ in 1:20.

[4:12]  ⁸ tn Or “our forefather”; Grk “our father.”

[4:12]  ⁹ 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”).

[5:29]  ¹⁰ tn Or “a resurrection resulting in judgment.”

[6:40]  ¹¹ tn Or “resurrect him,” or “make him live again.”

[6:40]  ¹² sn Notice that here the result (having eternal life and being raised up at the last day) is produced by looking on the Son and believing in him. Compare John 6:54 where the same result is produced by eating Jesus’ flesh and drinking his blood. This suggests that the phrase in 6:54 (eats my flesh and drinks my blood) is to be understood in terms of the phrase here (looks on the Son and believes in him).

[6:53]  ¹³ tn Grk “Truly, truly, I say to you.”

[6:53]  ¹⁴ sn Unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood. These words are at the heart of the discourse on the Bread of Life, and have created great misunderstanding among interpreters. Anyone who is inclined toward a sacramental viewpoint will almost certainly want to take these words as a reference to the sacrament of the Lord’s Supper, or the Eucharist, because of the reference to eating and drinking. But this does not automatically follow: By anyone’s definition there must be a symbolic element to the eating which Jesus speaks of in the discourse, and once this is admitted, it is better to understand it here, as in the previous references in the passage, to a personal receiving of (or appropriation of) Christ and his work.

[6:53]  ¹⁵ tn That is, “no eternal life” (as opposed to physical life).

[6:63]  ¹⁶ tn Grk “the flesh counts for nothing.”

[6:63]  ¹⁷ tn Or “are spirit-giving and life-producing.”

[7:23]  ¹⁸ tn Grk “a man.” See the note on “male child” in the previous verse.

[7:23]  ¹⁹ tn Grk “receives circumcision.”

[7:23]  ²⁰ sn If a male child is circumcised on the Sabbath so that the law of Moses is not broken. The Rabbis counted 248 parts to a man’s body. In the Talmud (b. Yoma 85b) R. Eleazar ben Azariah (ca. a.d. 100) states: “If circumcision, which attaches to one only of the 248 members of the human body, suspends the Sabbath, how much more shall the saving of the whole body suspend the Sabbath?” So absolutely binding did rabbinic Judaism regard the command of Lev 12:3 to circumcise on the eighth day, that in the Mishnah m. Shabbat 18.3; 19.1, 2; and m. Nedarim 3.11 all hold that the command to circumcise overrides the command to observe the Sabbath.

[7:23]  ²¹ tn Or “made an entire man well.”

[7:30]  ²² tn Grk “him”; the referent (Jesus) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[7:30]  sn Here the response is on the part of the crowd, who tried to seize Jesus. This is apparently distinct from the attempted arrest by the authorities mentioned in 7:32.

[7:30]  ²³ tn Grk “his hour.”

[7:31]  ²⁴ tn Or “The common people” (as opposed to the religious authorities).

[7:31]  ²⁵ tn Or “the Messiah” (Both Greek “Christ” and Hebrew and Aramaic “Messiah” mean “one who has been anointed”).

[7:31]  sn See the note on Christ in 1:20.

[7:31]  ²⁶ tn Questions prefaced with μή (mh) in Greek anticipate a negative answer. This can sometimes be indicated by using a “tag” at the end in English (here it is “will he?”).

[10:25]  ²⁷ tn Grk “answered them.”

[10:25]  ²⁸ tn Or “the works.”

[10:34]  ²⁹ tn Grk “answered them.”

[10:34]  ³⁰ 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?

[11:9]  ³¹ tn Grk “Jesus answered.”

[11:9]  ³² tn Or “he does not trip.”

[11:9]  ³³ 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).

[11:47]  ³⁴ tn The phrase “chief priests and Pharisees” is a comprehensive name for the groups represented in the ruling council (the Sanhedrin) as in John 7:45; 18:3; Acts 5:22, 26.

[11:47]  ³⁵ tn Or “Sanhedrin” (the Sanhedrin was the highest legal, legislative, and judicial body among the Jews). The συνέδριον (sunedrion) which they gathered was probably an informal meeting rather than the official Sanhedrin. This is the only occurrence of the word συνέδριον in the Gospel of John, and the only anarthrous singular use in the NT. There are other plural anarthrous uses which have the general meaning “councils.” The fact that Caiaphas in 11:49 is referred to as “one of them” supports the unofficial nature of the meeting; in the official Sanhedrin he, being high priest that year, would have presided over the assembly. Thus it appears that an informal council was called to discuss what to do about Jesus and his activities.

[12:26]  ³⁶ tn As a third person imperative in Greek, ἀκολουθείτω (akolouqeitw) is usually translated “let him follow me.” This could be understood by the modern English reader as merely permissive, however (“he may follow me if he wishes”). In this context there is no permissive sense, but rather a command, so the translation “he must follow me” is preferred.

[12:26]  ³⁷ tn Grk “where I am, there my servant will be too.”

[12:36]  ³⁸ 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.”

[12:40]  ³⁹ tn Or “closed their mind.”

[12:40]  ⁴⁰ tn Or “their mind.”

[12:40]  ⁴¹ tn One could also translate στραφῶσιν (strafwsin) as “repent” or “change their ways,” but both of these terms would be subject to misinterpretation by the modern English reader. The idea is one of turning back to God, however. The words “to me” are not in the Greek text, but are implied.

[12:40]  ⁴² sn A quotation from Isa 6:10.

[14:2]  ⁴³ 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]  ⁴⁴ 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]  ⁴⁵ 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]  ⁴⁶ tn Or “to prepare.”

[14:2]  ⁴⁷ 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).

[15:7]  ⁴⁸ tn Or “reside.”

[15:7]  ⁴⁹ tn Or “reside.”

[15:7]  ⁵⁰ sn Once again Jesus promises the disciples ask whatever you want, and it will be done for you. This recalls 14:13-14, where the disciples were promised that if they asked anything in Jesus’ name it would be done for them. The two thoughts are really quite similar, since here it is conditioned on the disciples’ remaining in Jesus and his words remaining in them. The first phrase relates to the genuineness of their relationship with Jesus. The second phrase relates to their obedience. When both of these qualifications are met, the disciples would in fact be asking in Jesus’ name and therefore according to his will.

[16:23]  ⁵¹ tn Grk “And in that day.”

[16:23]  ⁵² tn Grk “Truly, truly, I say to you.”

[16:23]  ⁵³ sn This statement is also found in John 15:16.

[16:24]  ⁵⁴ tn The word “it” is not in the Greek text, but is implied. Direct objects were often omitted in Greek when clear from the context.

[16:30]  ⁵⁵ tn Grk “all things.”

[16:30]  ⁵⁶ tn Grk “and have no need of anyone.”

[16:30]  ⁵⁷ tn The word “anything” is not in the Greek text, but is implied. Direct objects were often omitted in Greek when clear from the context.

[16:30]  ⁵⁸ tn Or “By this.”

[17:13]  ⁵⁹ tn Grk “they may have.”

[17:13]  ⁶⁰ tn Or “fulfilled.”

[19:28]  ⁶¹ tn Or “that already.”

[19:28]  ⁶² tn Or “finished,” “accomplished”; Grk “fulfilled.”

[19:28]  ⁶³ sn A reference to Ps 69:21 or Ps 22:15.

[19:28]  ⁶⁴ sn In order to fulfill (τελειωθῇ [teleiwqh], a wordplay on the previous statement that everything was completed [τετέλεσται, tetelestai]) the scripture, he said, “I am thirsty.” The scripture referred to is probably Ps 69:21, “They also gave me gall for my food, and for my thirst they gave me vinegar to drink.” Also suggested, however, is Ps 22:15, “My tongue cleaves to the roof of my mouth, and you [God] lay me in the dust of death.” Ps 22:1 reads “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?,” a statement Jesus makes from the cross in both Matt 27:46 and Mark 15:34. In light of the connection in the Fourth Gospel between thirst and the living water which Jesus offers, it is highly ironic that here Jesus himself, the source of that living water, expresses his thirst. And since 7:39 associates the living water with the Holy Spirit, Jesus’ statement here in 19:28 amounts to an admission that at this point he has been forsaken by God (cf. Ps 22:1, Matt 27:46, and Mark 15:34).

[20:31]  ⁶⁵ tn Grk “these things.”

[20:31]  ⁶⁶ tn Grk “are written.”

[20:31]  ⁶⁷ tc ‡ A difficult textual variant is present at this point in the Greek text. Some mss (Ì^66vid א* B Θ 0250 pc) read the present subjunctive πιστεύητε (pisteuhte) after ἵνα (Jina; thus NEB text, “that you may hold the faith”) while others (א² A C D L W Ψ Ë^1,13 33 Ï) read the aorist subjunctive πιστεύσητε (pisteushte) after ἵνα (cf. NEB margin, “that you may come to believe”). As reflected by the renderings of the NEB text and margin, it is often assumed that the present tense would suggest ongoing belief (i.e., the Fourth Gospel primarily addressed those who already believed, and was intended to strengthen their faith), while the aorist tense would speak of coming to faith (i.e., John’s Gospel was primarily evangelistic in nature). Both textual variants enjoy significant ms support, although the present subjunctive has somewhat superior witnesses on its behalf. On internal grounds it is hard to decide which is more likely the original. Many resolve this issue on the basis of a reconstruction of the overall purpose of the Gospel, viz., whether it is addressed to unbelievers or believers. However, since elsewhere in the Gospel of John (1) the present tense can refer to both initial faith and continuation in the faith and (2) the aorist tense simply refrains from commenting on the issue, it is highly unlikely that the distinction here would be determinative for the purpose of the Fourth Gospel. The question of purpose cannot be resolved by choosing one textual variant over the other in 20:31, but must be decided on other factors. Nevertheless, if a choice has to be made, the present subjunctive is the preferred reading. NA²⁷ puts the aorist’s sigma in brackets, thus representing both readings virtually equally (so TCGNT 220).

[20:31]  ⁶⁸ tn Or “Jesus is the Messiah” (Both Greek “Christ” and Hebrew and Aramaic “Messiah” mean “one who has been anointed”).

[20:31]  sn See the note on Christ in 1:20.

[20:31]  ⁶⁹ sn John 20:31. A major question concerning this verse, the purpose statement of the Gospel of John, is whether the author is writing primarily for an audience of unbelievers, with purely evangelistic emphasis, or whether he envisions an audience of believers, whom he wants to strengthen in their faith. Several points are important in this discussion: (1) in the immediate context (20:30), the other signs spoken of by the author were performed in the presence of disciples; (2) in the case of the first of the signs, at Cana, the author makes a point of the effect the miracle had on the disciples (2:11); (3) if the primary thrust of the Gospel is toward unbelievers, it is difficult to see why so much material in chaps. 13-17 (the last meal and Farewell Discourse, concluding with Jesus’ prayer for the disciples), which deals almost exclusively with the disciples, is included; (4) the disciples themselves were repeatedly said to have believed in Jesus throughout the Gospel, beginning with 2:11, yet they still needed to believe after the resurrection (if Thomas’ experience in 20:27-28 is any indication); and (5) the Gospel appears to be written with the assumption that the readers are familiar with the basic story (or perhaps with one or more of the synoptic gospel accounts, although this is less clear). Thus no account of the birth of Jesus is given at all, and although he is identified as being from Nazareth, the words of the Pharisees and chief priests to Nicodemus (7:52) are almost certainly to be taken as ironic, assuming the reader knows where Jesus was really from. Likewise, when Mary is identified in 11:2 as the one who anointed Jesus’ feet with oil, it is apparently assumed that the readers are familiar with the story, since the incident involved is not mentioned in the Fourth Gospel until 12:3. These observations must be set over against the clear statement of purpose in the present verse, 20:31, which seems to have significant evangelistic emphasis. In addition to this there is the repeated emphasis on witness throughout the Fourth Gospel (cf. the witness of John the Baptist in 1:7, 8, 15, 32, and 34, along with 5:33; the Samaritan woman in 4:39; Jesus’ own witness, along with that of the Father who sent him, in 8:14, 18, and 18:37; the disciples themselves in 15:27; and finally the testimony of the author himself in 19:35 and 21:24). In light of all this evidence it seems best to say that the author wrote with a dual purpose: (1) to witness to unbelievers concerning Jesus, in order that they come to believe in him and have eternal life; and (2) to strengthen the faith of believers, by deepening and expanding their understanding of who Jesus is.