Yohanes 13:2
Konteks13:2 The evening meal 1 was in progress, and the devil had already put into the heart 2 of Judas Iscariot, Simon’s son, that he should betray 3 Jesus. 4
Yohanes 6:71
Konteks6:71 (Now he said this about Judas son of Simon Iscariot, 5 for Judas, 6 one of the twelve, was going to betray him.) 7
Yohanes 12:4
Konteks12:4 But Judas Iscariot, one of his disciples (the one who was going to betray him) 8 said,
Yohanes 18:2
Konteks18:2 (Now Judas, the one who betrayed him, knew the place too, because Jesus had met there many times 9 with his disciples.) 10
Yohanes 13:29
Konteks13:29 Some thought that, because Judas had the money box, Jesus was telling him to buy whatever they needed for the feast, 11 or to give something to the poor.) 12
Yohanes 13:26
Konteks13:26 Jesus replied, 13 “It is the one to whom I will give this piece of bread 14 after I have dipped it in the dish.” 15 Then he dipped the piece of bread in the dish 16 and gave it to Judas Iscariot, Simon’s son.
Yohanes 18:5
Konteks18:5 They replied, 17 “Jesus the Nazarene.” He told them, “I am he.” (Now Judas, the one who betrayed him, was standing there with them.) 18
Yohanes 18:3
Konteks18:3 So Judas obtained a squad of soldiers 19 and some officers of the chief priests and Pharisees. 20 They came to the orchard 21 with lanterns 22 and torches and weapons.
Yohanes 13:27
Konteks13:27 And after Judas 23 took the piece of bread, Satan entered into him. 24 Jesus said to him, 25 “What you are about to do, do quickly.”
Yohanes 13:30-31
Konteks13:30 Judas 26 took the piece of bread and went out immediately. (Now it was night.) 27
13:31 When 28 Judas 29 had gone out, Jesus said, “Now the Son of Man is glorified, and God is glorified in him.
Yohanes 14:22
Konteks14:22 “Lord,” Judas (not Judas Iscariot) 30 said, 31 “what has happened that you are going to reveal 32 yourself to us and not to the world?”
Yohanes 12:6
Konteks12:6 (Now Judas 33 said this not because he was concerned about the poor, but because he was a thief. As keeper of the money box, 34 he used to steal what was put into it.) 35
Yohanes 13:28
Konteks13:28 (Now none of those present at the table 36 understood 37 why Jesus 38 said this to Judas. 39
Yohanes 13:1
Konteks13:1 Just before the Passover feast, Jesus knew that his time 40 had come to depart 41 from this world to the Father. Having loved his own who were in the world, he now loved them to the very end. 42
[13:2] 1 tn Or “Supper.” To avoid possible confusion because of different regional English usage regarding the distinction between “dinner” and “supper” as an evening meal, the translation simply refers to “the evening meal.”
[13:2] 2 sn At this point the devil had already put into the heart of Judas Iscariot, Simon’s son, that he should betray Jesus. C. K. Barrett (St. John, 365) thought this was a reference to the idea entering the devil’s own heart, but this does not seem likely. It is more probable that Judas’ heart is meant, since the use of the Greek article (rather than a possessive pronoun) is a typical idiom when a part of one’s own body is indicated. Judas’ name is withheld until the end of the sentence for dramatic effect (emphasis). This action must be read in light of 13:27, and appears to refer to a preliminary idea or plan.
[13:2] 3 tn Or “that he should hand over.”
[13:2] 4 tn Grk “betray him”; the referent (Jesus) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
[6:71] 5 sn At least six explanations for the name Iscariot have been proposed, but it is probably transliterated Hebrew with the meaning “man of Kerioth” (there are at least two villages that had that name). See D. A. Carson, John, 304.
[6:71] 6 tn Grk “this one”; the referent (Judas) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
[6:71] 7 sn This parenthetical statement by the author helps the reader understand Jesus’ statement one of you is the devil in the previous verse. This is the first mention of Judas in the Fourth Gospel, and he is immediately identified (as he is in the synoptic gospels, Matt 10:4, Mark 3:19, Luke 6:16) as the one who would betray Jesus.
[12:4] 8 sn This is a parenthetical note by the author.
[18:2] 10 sn This is a parenthetical note by the author.
[13:29] 11 tn Grk “telling him, ‘Buy whatever we need for the feast.’” The first clause is direct discourse and the second clause indirect discourse. For smoothness of English style, the first clause has been converted to indirect discourse to parallel the second (the meaning is left unchanged).
[13:29] 12 sn This is a parenthetical note by the author.
[13:26] 13 tn Grk “Jesus answered.”
[13:26] 14 sn The piece of bread was a broken-off piece of bread (not merely a crumb).
[13:26] 15 tn Grk “after I have dipped it.” The words “in the dish” are not in the Greek text, but the presence of a bowl or dish is implied.
[13:26] 16 tn The words “in the dish” are not in the Greek text, but the presence of a bowl or dish is implied.
[18:5] 17 tn Grk “They answered.”
[18:5] sn The author does not state precisely who from the group of soldiers and temple police replied to Jesus at this point. It may have been the commander of the Roman soldiers, although his presence is not explicitly mentioned until 18:12. It may also have been one of the officers of the chief priests. To the answer given, “Jesus the Nazarene,” Jesus replies “I am [he].”
[18:5] 18 sn This is a parenthetical note by the author. Before he states the response to Jesus’ identification of himself, the author inserts a parenthetical note that Judas, again identified as the one who betrayed him (cf. 18:2), was standing with the group of soldiers and officers of the chief priests. Many commentators have considered this to be an awkward insertion, but in fact it heightens considerably the dramatic effect of the response to Jesus’ self-identification in the following verse, and has the added effect of informing the reader that along with the others the betrayer himself ironically falls down at Jesus’ feet (18:6).
[18:3] 19 tn Grk “a cohort.” The word σπεῖραν (speiran) is a technical term for a Roman cohort, normally a force of 600 men (one tenth of a legion). It was under the command of a χιλίαρχος (ciliarco", v. 12). Because of the improbability of an entire cohort being sent to arrest a single man, some have suggested that σπεῖραν here refers only to a maniple, a force of 200. But the use of the word here does not necessarily mean the entire cohort was present on this mission, but only that it was the cohort which performed the task (for example, saying the fire department put out the fire does not mean that every fireman belonging to the department was on the scene at the time). These Roman soldiers must have been ordered to accompany the servants of the chief priests and Pharisees by Pilate, since they would have been under the direct command of the Roman prefect or procurator. It is not difficult to understand why Pilate would have been willing to assist the Jewish authorities in such a way. With a huge crowd of pilgrims in Jerusalem for the Passover, the Romans would have been especially nervous about an uprising of some sort. No doubt the chief priests and Pharisees had informed Pilate that this man Jesus was claiming to be the Messiah, or in the terms Pilate would understand, king of Israel.
[18:3] 20 tn The phrase “officers of the chief priests and Pharisees” is a comprehensive name for the groups represented in the ruling council (the Sanhedrin) as in John 7:32, 45; 18:3, 12, 18, 22; 19:6. They are different from the Levites who served as “temple police” according to K. H. Rengstorf (TDNT 8:540). In John 7:32ff. these officers had made an unsuccessful attempt to arrest Jesus, and perhaps this is part of the reason why their leaders had made sure they were accompanied by Roman soldiers this time. No more mistakes were to be tolerated.
[18:3] sn See the note on Pharisees in 1:24.
[18:3] 21 tn The words “to the orchard” are not in the Greek text but are repeated from v. 1 for clarity.
[18:3] 22 tn These were lamps that had some sort of covering to protect them from wind and rain. In earlier usage the word meant “torch” but by NT times it apparently meant a lamp designed to be used outdoors, so “lantern” is a good contemporary English equivalent.
[18:3] sn Mention of the lanterns and torches suggests a detail remembered by one who was an eyewitness, but in connection with the light/darkness motif of John’s Gospel, it is a vivid reminder that it is night; the darkness has come at last (cf. 13:30).
[13:27] 23 tn Grk “he”; the referent (Judas) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
[13:27] 24 tn Grk “into that one”; the pronoun “he” is more natural English style here.
[13:27] sn This is the only time in the Fourth Gospel that Satan is mentioned by name. Luke 22:3 uses the same terminology of Satan “entering into” Judas but indicates it happened before the last supper at the time Judas made his deal with the authorities. This is not necessarily irreconcilable with John’s account, however, because John 13:2 makes it clear that Judas had already come under satanic influence prior to the meal itself. The statement here is probably meant to indicate that Judas at this point came under the influence of Satan even more completely and finally. It marks the end of a process which, as Luke indicates, had begun earlier.
[13:27] 25 tn Grk “Then Jesus said to him.”
[13:30] 26 tn Grk “That one”; the referent (Judas) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
[13:30] 27 sn Now it was night is a parenthetical note by the author. The comment is more than just a time indicator, however. With the departure of Judas to set in motion the betrayal, arrest, trials, crucifixion, and death of Jesus, daytime is over and night has come (see John 9:5; 11:9-10; 12:35-36). Judas had become one of those who walked by night and stumbled, because the light was not in him (11:10).
[13:31] 28 tn Grk “Then when.”
[13:31] 29 tn Grk “he”; the referent (Judas) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
[14:22] 30 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] 31 tn Grk “said to him.”
[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).
[12:6] 33 tn Grk “he”; the referent (Judas) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
[12:6] 34 tn Grk “a thief, and having the money box.” Dividing the single Greek sentence improves the English style.
[12:6] 35 sn This is a parenthetical note by the author. This is one of the indications in the gospels that Judas was of bad character before the betrayal of Jesus. John states that he was a thief and had responsibility for the finances of the group. More than being simply a derogatory note about Judas’ character, the inclusion of the note at this particular point in the narrative may be intended to link the frustrated greed of Judas here with his subsequent decision to betray Jesus for money. The parallel accounts in Matthew and Mark seem to indicate that after this incident Judas went away immediately and made his deal with the Jewish authorities to deliver up Jesus. Losing out on one source of sordid gain, he immediately went out and set up another.
[13:28] 36 tn Grk “reclining at the table.” The phrase reclining at the table reflects the normal practice in 1st century Near Eastern culture of eating a meal in a semi-reclining position.
[13:28] 38 tn Grk “he”; the referent (Jesus) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
[13:28] 39 tn Grk “to him”; the referent (Judas) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
[13:1] 41 tn Grk “that he should depart.” The ἵνα (Jina) clause in Koine Greek frequently encroached on the simple infinitive (for the sake of greater clarity).
[13:1] 42 tn Or “he now loved them completely,” or “he now loved them to the uttermost” (see John 19:30). All of John 13:1 is a single sentence in Greek, although in English this would be unacceptably awkward. At the end of the verse the idiom εἰς τέλος (eis telos) was translated literally as “to the end” and the modern equivalents given in the note above, because there is an important lexical link between this passage and John 19:30, τετέλεσται (tetelestai, “It is ended”).
[13:1] sn The full extent of Jesus’ love for his disciples is not merely seen in his humble service to them in washing their feet (the most common interpretation of the passage). The full extent of his love for them is demonstrated in his sacrificial death for them on the cross. The footwashing episode which follows then becomes a prophetic act, or acting out beforehand, of his upcoming death on their behalf. The message for the disciples was that they were to love one another not just in humble, self-effacing service, but were to be willing to die for one another. At least one of them got this message eventually, though none understood it at the time (see 1 John 3:16).
