Yohanes 19:22

19:22 Pilate answered, “What I have written, I have written.”

Yohanes 8:8

8:8 Then ¹  he bent over again and wrote on the ground.

Yohanes 19:20

19:20 Thus many of the Jewish residents of Jerusalem ²  read this notice, ³  because the place where Jesus was crucified was near the city, and the notice was written in Aramaic, ⁴  Latin, and Greek.

Yohanes 8:6

8:6 (Now they were asking this in an attempt to trap him, so that they could bring charges against ⁵  him.) ⁶  Jesus bent down and wrote on the ground with his finger. ⁷ 

Yohanes 19:21

19:21 Then the chief priests of the Jews ⁸  said to Pilate, “Do not write, ‘The king of the Jews,’ but rather, ‘This man said, I am king of the Jews.’”

Yohanes 19:19

19:19 Pilate also had a notice ⁹  written and fastened to the cross, ¹⁰  which read: ¹¹  “Jesus the Nazarene, the king of the Jews.”

Yohanes 5:47

5:47 But if you do not believe what Moses ¹²  wrote, how will you believe my words?”

Yohanes 5:46

5:46 If ¹³  you believed Moses, you would believe me, because he wrote about me.

Yohanes 8:17

8:17 It is written in your law that the testimony of two men is true. ¹⁴ 

Yohanes 12:14

12:14 Jesus found a young donkey ¹⁵  and sat on it, just as it is written,

Yohanes 21:25

21:25 There are many other things that Jesus did. If every one of them were written down, ¹⁶  I suppose the whole world ¹⁷  would not have room for the books that would be written. ¹⁸ 

Yohanes 2:17

2:17 His disciples remembered that it was written, “Zeal ¹⁹  for your house will devour me.” ²⁰ 

Yohanes 6:31

6:31 Our ancestors ²¹  ate the manna in the wilderness, just as it is written, ‘He gave them bread from heaven to eat.’” ²² 

Yohanes 6:45

6:45 It is written in the prophets, ‘And they will all be taught by God.’ ²³  Everyone who hears and learns from the Father ²⁴  comes to me.

Yohanes 10:34

10:34 Jesus answered, ²⁵  “Is it not written in your law, ‘I said, you are gods’? ²⁶ 

Yohanes 20:31

20:31 But these ²⁷  are recorded ²⁸  so that you may believe ²⁹  that Jesus is the Christ, ³⁰  the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name. ³¹ 

Yohanes 12:16

12:16 (His disciples did not understand these things when they first happened, ³²  but when Jesus was glorified, ³³  then they remembered that these things were written about him and that these things had happened ³⁴  to him.) ³⁵ 

Yohanes 15:25

15:25 Now this happened ³⁶  to fulfill the word that is written in their law, ‘They hated me without reason.’ ³⁷ 

Yohanes 19:36

19:36 For these things happened so that the scripture would be fulfilled, “Not a bone of his will be broken.” ³⁸ 

Yohanes 21:24

A Final Note

21:24 This is the disciple who testifies about these things and has written these things, and we know that his testimony is true.

Yohanes 19:28

Jesus’ Death

19:28 After this Jesus, realizing that by this time ³⁹  everything was completed, ⁴⁰  said (in order to fulfill the scripture), ⁴¹  “I am thirsty!” ⁴² 

Yohanes 19:37

19:37 And again another scripture says, “They will look on the one whom they have pierced.” ⁴³ 

Yohanes 1:45

1:45 Philip found Nathanael ⁴⁴  and told him, “We have found the one Moses wrote about in the law, and the prophets also ⁴⁵  wrote about – Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph.”

Yohanes 20:30

20:30 Now Jesus performed ⁴⁶  many other miraculous signs in the presence of the ⁴⁷  disciples, which are not recorded ⁴⁸  in this book. ⁴⁹ 

Yohanes 19:24

19:24 So the soldiers said to one another, “Let’s not tear it, but throw dice ⁵⁰  to see who will get it.” ⁵¹  This took place ⁵²  to fulfill the scripture that says, “They divided my garments among them, and for my clothing they threw dice.” ⁵³  So the soldiers did these things.

Yohanes 7:38

7:38 let the one who believes in me drink. ⁵⁴  Just as the scripture says, ‘From within him ⁵⁵  will flow rivers of living water.’” ⁵⁶ 

Yohanes 7:42

7:42 Don’t the scriptures say that the Christ is a descendant ⁵⁷  of David ⁵⁸  and comes from Bethlehem, ⁵⁹  the village where David lived?” ⁶⁰ 

Yohanes 10:35

10:35 If those people to whom the word of God came were called ‘gods’ (and the scripture cannot be broken), ⁶¹ 

Yohanes 20:9

20:9 (For they did not yet understand ⁶²  the scripture that Jesus ⁶³  must rise from the dead.) ⁶⁴ 

Yohanes 17:12

17:12 When I was with them I kept them safe ⁶⁵  and watched over them ⁶⁶  in your name ⁶⁷  that you have given me. Not one ⁶⁸  of them was lost except the one destined for destruction, ⁶⁹  so that the scripture could be fulfilled. ⁷⁰ 

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 13:18

The Announcement of Jesus’ Betrayal

13:18 “What I am saying does not refer to all of you. I know the ones I have chosen. But this is to fulfill the scripture, ⁷¹  ‘The one who eats my bread ⁷²  has turned against me.’ ⁷³ 

Yohanes 2:22

2:22 So after he was raised from the dead, his disciples remembered that he had said this, and they believed the scripture ⁷⁴  and the saying ⁷⁵  that Jesus had spoken.

[8:8]  ¹ tn Here καί (kai) has been translated as “Then” to indicate the implied sequence of events within the narrative. Greek style often begins sentences or clauses with “and,” but English style generally does not.

[19:20]  ² tn Grk “the Jews.” Here the phrase refers to the residents of Jerusalem in general. See also the note on the phrase Jewish religious leaders” in v. 7.

[19:20]  map For location see Map5 B1; Map6 F3; Map7 E2; Map8 F2; Map10 B3; JP1 F4; JP2 F4; JP3 F4; JP4 F4.

[19:20]  ³ tn Or “this inscription.”

[19:20]  ⁴ tn Grk “in Hebrew.”

[8:6]  ⁵ tn Grk “so that they could accuse.”

[8:6]  ⁶ sn This is a parenthetical note by the author of 7:53–8:11.

[8:6]  ⁷ tn Or possibly “Jesus bent down and wrote an accusation on the ground with his finger.” The Greek verb καταγράφω (katagrafw) may indicate only the action of writing on the ground by Jesus, but in the overall context (Jesus’ response to the accusation against the woman) it can also be interpreted as implying that what Jesus wrote was a counteraccusation against the accusers (although there is no clue as to the actual content of what he wrote, some scribes added “the sins of each one of them” either here or at the end of v. 8 [U 264 700 al]).

[19:21]  ⁸ tn Or “the Jewish chief priests.” Nowhere else in the Fourth Gospel are the two expressions οἱ ἀρχιερεῖς τῶν ᾿Ιουδαίων (Joi arcierei" twn Ioudaiwn) combined. Earlier in 19:15 the chief priests were simply referred to as οἱ ἀρχιερεῖς. It seems likely that this is another example of Johannine irony, to be seen in contrast to the inscription on the cross which read ὁ βασιλεὺς τῶν ᾿Ιουδαίων (Jo basileu" twn Ioudaiwn). For this reason the phrase has been translated “the chief priests of the Jews” (which preserves in the translation the connection with “King of the Jews”) rather than “the Jewish chief priests.”

[19:19]  ⁹ tn Or “an inscription.”

[19:19]  sn Mention of the inscription is an important detail, because the inscription would normally give the reason for the execution. It shows that Jesus was executed for claiming to be a king. It was also probably written with irony from the executioners’ point of view.

[19:19]  ¹⁰ tn Grk “Pilate also wrote a notice and placed it on the cross.” The two verbs should be read as causatives, since it is highly unlikely that the Roman governor would perform either of these actions himself. He ordered them to be done.

[19:19]  sn John says simply that the notice was fastened to the cross. Luke 23:38 says the inscription was placed “over him” (Jesus), and Matt 27:37 that it was placed over Jesus’ head. On the basis of Matthew’s statement Jesus’ cross is usually depicted as the crux immissa, the cross which has the crossbeam set below the top of the upright beam. The other commonly used type of cross was the crux commissa, which had the crossbeam atop the upright beam. But Matthew’s statement is not conclusive, since with the crux commissa the body would have sagged downward enough to allow the placard to be placed above Jesus’ head. The placard with Pilate’s inscription is mentioned in all the gospels, but for John it was certainly ironic. Jesus really was the King of the Jews, although he was a king rejected by his own people (cf. 1:11). Pilate’s own motivation for placing the title over Jesus is considerably more obscure. He may have meant this as a final mockery of Jesus himself, but Pilate’s earlier mockery of Jesus seemed to be motivated by a desire to gain pity from the Jewish authorities in order to have him released. More likely Pilate saw this as a subtle way of getting back at the Jewish authorities who had pressured him into the execution of one he considered to be an innocent man.

[19:19]  ¹¹ tn Grk “Now it was written.”

[5:47]  ¹² tn Grk “that one” (“he”); the referent (Moses) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[5:46]  ¹³ tn Grk “For if.”

[8:17]  ¹⁴ sn An allusion to Deut 17:6.

[12:14]  ¹⁵ sn The author does not repeat the detailed accounts of the finding of the donkey recorded in the synoptic gospels. He does, however, see the event as a fulfillment of scripture, which he indicates by quoting Zech 9:9.

[21:25]  ¹⁶ tn Grk “written”; the word “down” is supplied in keeping with contemporary English idiom.

[21:25]  ¹⁷ tn Grk “the world itself.”

[21:25]  ¹⁸ tc Although the majority of mss (C² Θ Ψ Ë¹³ Ï lat) conclude this Gospel with ἀμήν (amhn, “amen”), such a conclusion is routinely added by scribes to NT books because a few of these books originally had such an ending (cf. Rom 16:27; Gal 6:18; Jude 25). A majority of Greek witnesses have the concluding ἀμήν in every NT book except Acts, James, and 3 John (and even in these books, ἀμήν is found in some witnesses). It is thus a predictable variant. Further, excellent and early witnesses, as well as a few others (א A B C*^,3 D W 1 33 pc it), lack the particle, rendering no doubt as to how this Gospel originally ended.

[21:25]  sn The author concludes the Gospel with a note concerning his selectivity of material. He makes it plain that he has not attempted to write an exhaustive account of the words and works of Jesus, for if one attempted to do so, “the whole world would not have room for the books that would be written.” This is clearly hyperbole, and as such bears some similarity to the conclusion of the Book of Ecclesiastes (12:9-12). As it turns out, the statement seems more true of the Fourth Gospel itself, which is the subject of an ever-lengthening bibliography. The statement in v. 25 serves as a final reminder that knowledge of Jesus, no matter how well-attested it may be, is still partial. Everything that Jesus did during his three and one-half years of earthly ministry is not known. This supports the major theme of the Fourth Gospel: Jesus is repeatedly identified as God, and although he may be truly known on the basis of his self-disclosure, he can never be known exhaustively. There is far more to know about Jesus than could ever be written down, or even known. On this appropriate note the Gospel of John ends.

[2:17]  ¹⁹ tn Or “Fervent devotion to your house.”

[2:17]  ²⁰ sn A quotation from Ps 69:9.

[6:31]  ²¹ tn Or “forefathers”; Grk “fathers.”

[6:31]  ²² sn A quotation from Ps 78:24 (referring to the events of Exod 16:4-36).

[6:45]  ²³ sn A quotation from Isa 54:13.

[6:45]  ²⁴ tn Or “listens to the Father and learns.”

[10:34]  ²⁵ tn Grk “answered them.”

[10:34]  ²⁶ 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?

[20:31]  ²⁷ tn Grk “these things.”

[20:31]  ²⁸ tn Grk “are written.”

[20:31]  ²⁹ 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]  ³⁰ 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]  ³¹ 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.

[12:16]  ³² tn Or “did not understand these things at first”; Grk “formerly.”

[12:16]  ³³ sn When Jesus was glorified, that is, glorified through his resurrection, exaltation, and return to the Father. Jesus’ glorification is consistently portrayed this way in the Gospel of John.

[12:16]  ³⁴ tn Grk “and that they had done these things,” though the referent is probably indefinite and not referring to the disciples; as such, the best rendering is as a passive (see ExSyn 402-3; R. E. Brown, John [AB], 1:458).

[12:16]  ³⁵ sn The comment His disciples did not understand these things when they first happened (a parenthetical note by the author) informs the reader that Jesus’ disciples did not at first associate the prophecy from Zechariah with the events as they happened. This came with the later (postresurrection) insight which the Holy Spirit would provide after Jesus’ resurrection and return to the Father. Note the similarity with John 2:22, which follows another allusion to a prophecy in Zechariah (14:21).

[15:25]  ³⁶ tn The words “this happened” are not in the Greek text but are supplied to complete an ellipsis.

[15:25]  ³⁷ sn A quotation from Ps 35:19 and Ps 69:4. As a technical term law (νόμος, nomos) is usually restricted to the Pentateuch (the first five books of the OT), but here it must have a broader reference, since the quotation is from Ps 35:19 or Ps 69:4. The latter is the more likely source for the quoted words, since it is cited elsewhere in John’s Gospel (2:17 and 19:29, in both instances in contexts associated with Jesus’ suffering and death).

[19:36]  ³⁸ sn A quotation from Exod 12:46, Num 9:12, and Ps 34:20. A number of different OT passages lie behind this quotation: Exod 12:10 LXX, Exod 12:46, Num 9:12, or Ps 34:20. Of these, the first is the closest in form to the quotation here. The first three are all more likely candidates than the last, since the first three all deal with descriptions of the Passover lamb.

[19:28]  ³⁹ tn Or “that already.”

[19:28]  ⁴⁰ tn Or “finished,” “accomplished”; Grk “fulfilled.”

[19:28]  ⁴¹ sn A reference to Ps 69:21 or Ps 22:15.

[19:28]  ⁴² 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).

[19:37]  ⁴³ sn A quotation from Zech 12:10. Here a single phrase is quoted from Zech 12, but the entire context is associated with the events surrounding the crucifixion. The “Spirit of grace and of supplication” is poured out on the house of David and the inhabitants of Jerusalem in the first part of v. 10. A few verses later in 13:1 Yahweh (typically rendered as “Lord” in the OT) says “In that day a fountain will be opened for the house of David and for the inhabitants of Jerusalem, for sin and for impurity.” The blood which flowed from Jesus’ pierced side may well be what the author saw as the connection here, since as the shedding of the blood of the sacrificial victim it represents cleansing from sin. Although the Jewish authorities and Roman soldiers certainly “looked on the one whom they have pierced” as he hung on the cross, the author may also have in mind the parousia (second coming) here. The context in Zech 12-14 is certainly the second coming, so that these who crucified Jesus will look upon him in another sense when he returns in judgment.

[1:45]  ⁴⁴ sn Nathanael is traditionally identified with Bartholomew (although John never describes him as such). He appears here after Philip, while in all lists of the twelve except in Acts 1:13, Bartholomew follows Philip. Also, the Aramaic Bar-tolmai means “son of Tolmai,” the surname; the man almost certainly had another name.

[1:45]  ⁴⁵ tn “Also” is not in the Greek text, but is implied.

[20:30]  ⁴⁶ tn Or “did.”

[20:30]  ⁴⁷ tc ‡ Although most mss, including several important ones (Ì⁶⁶ א C D L W Θ Ψ Ë^1,13 33 Ï lat), read αὐτοῦ (autou, “his”) after τῶν μαθητῶν (twn maqhtwn, “the disciples”), the pronoun is lacking in A B K Δ 0250 al. The weight of the witnesses for the inclusion is somewhat stronger than that for the exclusion. However, the addition of “his” to “disciples” is a frequent scribal emendation and as such is a predictable variant. It is thus most likely that the shorter reading is authentic. NA²⁷ puts the pronoun in brackets, indicating doubts as to its authenticity.

[20:30]  ⁴⁸ tn Grk “are not written.”

[20:30]  ⁴⁹ sn The author mentions many other miraculous signs performed by Jesus in the presence of the disciples, which are not written in the Gospel. What are these signs the author of the Gospel has in mind? One can only speculate. The author says they were performed in the presence of the disciples, which emphasizes again their role as witnesses (cf. 15:27). The point here is that the author has been selective in his use of material. He has chosen to record those incidents from the life and ministry of Jesus which supported his purpose in writing the Gospel. Much which might be of tremendous interest, but does not directly contribute to that purpose in writing, he has omitted. The author explains his purpose in writing in the following verse.

[19:24]  ⁵⁰ tn Grk “but choose by lot” (probably by using marked pebbles or broken pieces of pottery). A modern equivalent, “throw dice,” was chosen here because of its association with gambling.

[19:24]  ⁵¹ tn Grk “to see whose it will be.”

[19:24]  ⁵² tn The words “This took place” are not in the Greek text but are implied.

[19:24]  ⁵³ tn Grk “cast lots.” See the note on “throw dice” earlier in the verse.

[19:24]  sn A quotation from Ps 22:18.

[7:38]  ⁵⁴ tn An alternate way of punctuating the Greek text of vv. 37-38 results in this translation: “If anyone is thirsty, let him come to me and drink. The one who believes in me, just as the scripture says, ‘From within him will flow rivers of living water.’” John 7:37-38 has been the subject of considerable scholarly debate. Certainly Jesus picks up on the literal water used in the ceremony and uses it figuratively. But what does the figure mean? According to popular understanding, it refers to the coming of the Holy Spirit to dwell in the believer. There is some difficulty in locating an OT text which speaks of rivers of water flowing from within such a person, but Isa 58:11 is often suggested: “The Lord will continually lead you, he will feed you even in parched regions. He will give you renewed strength, and you will be like a well-watered garden, like a spring that continually produces water.” Other passages which have been suggested are Prov 4:23 and 5:15; Isa 44:3 and 55:1; Ezek 47:1 ff.; Joel 3:18; and Zech 13:1 and 14:8. The meaning in this case is that when anyone comes to believe in Jesus the scriptures referring to the activity of the Holy Spirit in a person’s life are fulfilled. “When the believer comes to Christ and drinks he not only slakes his thirst but receives such an abundant supply that veritable rivers flow from him” (L. Morris, John [NICNT], 424-25). In other words, with this view, the believer himself becomes the source of the living water. This is the traditional understanding of the passage, often called the “Eastern interpretation” following Origen, Athanasius, and the Greek Fathers. It is supported by such modern scholars as Barrett, Behm, Bernard, Cadman, Carson, R. H. Lightfoot, Lindars, Michaelis, Morris, Odeberg, Schlatter, Schweizer, C. H. Turner, M. M. B. Turner, Westcott, and Zahn. In addition it is represented by the following Greek texts and translations: KJV, RSV, NASB, NA²⁷, and UBS⁴. D. A. Carson, John, 322-29, has a thorough discussion of the issues and evidence although he opts for the previous interpretation. There is another interpretation possible, however, called the “Western interpretation” because of patristic support by Justin, Hippolytus, Tertullian, and Irenaeus. Modern scholars who favor this view are Abbott, Beasley-Murray, Bishop, Boismard, Braun, Brown, Bullinger, Bultmann, Burney, Dodd, Dunn, Guilding, R. Harris, Hoskyns, Jeremias, Loisy, D. M. Stanley, Thüsing, N. Turner, and Zerwick. This view is represented by the translation in the RSV margin and by the NEB. It is also sometimes called the “christological interpretation” because it makes Jesus himself the source of the living water in v. 38, by punctuating as follows: (37b) ἐάν τι διψᾷ ἐρχέσθω πρός με, καὶ πινέτω (38) ὁ πιστεύων εἰς ἐμέ. Καθὼς εἶπεν ἡ γραφή, ποταμοὶ ἐκ τῆς κοιλίας αὐτοῦ ῥεύσουσιν ὕδατος ζῶντος. Three crucial questions are involved in the solution of this problem: (1) punctuation; (2) determining the antecedent of αὐτοῦ (autou); and (3) the source of the scripture quotation. With regard to (1) Ì⁶⁶ does place a full stop after πινέτω (pinetw), but this may be theologically motivated and could have been added later. Grammatical and stylistic arguments are inconclusive. More important is (2) the determination of the antecedent of αὐτοῦ. Can any other Johannine parallels be found which make the believer the source of the living water? John 4:14 is often mentioned in this regard, but unlike 4:14 the water here becomes a source for others also. Neither does 14:12 provide a parallel. Furthermore, such an interpretation becomes even more problematic in light of the explanation given in v. 39 that the water refers to the Holy Spirit, since it is extremely difficult to see the individual believer becoming the ‘source’ of the Spirit for others. On the other hand, the Gospel of John repeatedly places Jesus himself in this role as source of the living water: 4:10, of course, for the water itself; but according to 20:22 Jesus provides the Spirit (cf. 14:16). Furthermore, the symbolism of 19:34 is difficult to explain as anything other than a deliberate allusion to what is predicted here. This also explains why the Spirit cannot come to the disciples unless Jesus “departs” (16:7). As to (3) the source of the scripture quotation, M. E. Boismard has argued that John is using a targumic rendering of Ps 78:15-16 which describes the water brought forth from the rock in the wilderness by Moses (“Les citations targumiques dans le quatrième évangile,” RB 66 [1959]: 374-78). The frequency of Exodus motifs in the Fourth Gospel (paschal lamb, bronze serpent, manna from heaven) leads quite naturally to the supposition that the author is here drawing on the account of Moses striking the rock in the wilderness to bring forth water (Num 20:8 ff.). That such imagery was readily identified with Jesus in the early church is demonstrated by Paul’s understanding of the event in 1 Cor 10:4. Jesus is the Rock from which the living water – the Spirit – will flow. Carson (see note above) discusses this imagery although he favors the traditional or “Eastern” interpretation. In summary, the latter or “Western” interpretation is to be preferred.

[7:38]  ⁵⁵ tn Or “out of the innermost part of his person”; Grk “out of his belly.”

[7:38]  ⁵⁶ sn An OT quotation whose source is difficult to determine; Isa 44:3, 55:1, 58:11, and Zech 14:8 have all been suggested.

[7:42]  ⁵⁷ tn Grk “is from the seed” (an idiom for human descent).

[7:42]  ⁵⁸ sn An allusion to Ps 89:4.

[7:42]  ⁵⁹ sn An allusion to Mic 5:2.

[7:42]  map For location see Map5 B1; Map7 E2; Map8 E2; Map10 B4.

[7:42]  ⁶⁰ tn Grk “the village where David was.”

[10:35]  ⁶¹ sn The parenthetical note And the scripture cannot be broken belongs to Jesus’ words rather than the author’s. Not only does Jesus appeal to the OT to defend himself against the charge of blasphemy, but he also adds that the scripture cannot be “broken.” In this context he does not explain precisely what is meant by “broken,” but it is not too hard to determine. Jesus’ argument depended on the exact word used in the context of Ps 82:6. If any other word for “judge” had been used in the psalm, his argument would have been meaningless. Since the scriptures do use this word in Ps 82:6, the argument is binding, because they cannot be “broken” in the sense of being shown to be in error.

[20:9]  ⁶² tn Or “yet know.”

[20:9]  ⁶³ tn Grk “he”; the referent (Jesus) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[20:9]  ⁶⁴ sn Verse 9 is a parenthetical note by the author. The author does not explicitly mention what OT scripture is involved (neither does Paul in 1 Cor 15:4, for that matter). The resurrection of the Messiah in general terms may have been seen in Isa 53:10-12 and Ps 16:10. Specific references may have been understood in Jonah 1:17 and Hos 6:2 because of the mention of “the third day.” Beyond this it is not possible to be more specific.

[17:12]  ⁶⁵ tn Or “I protected them”; Grk “I kept them.”

[17:12]  ⁶⁶ tn Grk “and guarded them.”

[17:12]  ⁶⁷ tn Or “by your name.”

[17:12]  ⁶⁸ tn Grk And not one.” The conjunction καί (kai, “and”) has not been translated here in keeping with the tendency of contemporary English style to use shorter sentences.

[17:12]  ⁶⁹ tn Grk “the son of destruction” (a Semitic idiom for one appointed for destruction; here it is a reference to Judas).

[17:12]  sn The one destined to destruction refers to Judas. Clearly in John’s Gospel Judas is portrayed as a tool of Satan. He is described as “the devil” in 6:70. In 13:2 Satan put into Judas’ heart the idea of betraying Jesus, and 13:27 Satan himself entered Judas. Immediately after this Judas left the company of Jesus and the other disciples and went out into the realm of darkness (13:30). Cf. 2 Thess 2:3, where this same Greek phrase (“the son of destruction”; see tn above) is used to describe the man through whom Satan acts to rebel against God in the last days.

[17:12]  ⁷⁰ sn A possible allusion to Ps 41:9 or Prov 24:22 LXX. The exact passage is not specified here, but in John 13:18, Ps 41:9 is explicitly quoted by Jesus with reference to the traitor, suggesting that this is the passage to which Jesus refers here. The previous mention of Ps 41:9 in John 13:18 probably explains why the author felt no need for an explanatory parenthetical note here. It is also possible that the passage referred to here is Prov 24:22 LXX, where in the Greek text the phrase “son of destruction” appears.

[13:18]  ⁷¹ tn Grk “But so that the scripture may be fulfilled.”

[13:18]  ⁷² tn Or “The one who shares my food.”

[13:18]  ⁷³ tn Or “has become my enemy”; Grk “has lifted up his heel against me.” The phrase “to lift up one’s heel against someone” reads literally in the Hebrew of Ps 41 “has made his heel great against me.” There have been numerous interpretations of this phrase, but most likely it is an idiom meaning “has given me a great fall,” “has taken cruel advantage of me,” or “has walked out on me.” Whatever the exact meaning of the idiom, it clearly speaks of betrayal by a close associate. See E. F. F. Bishop, “‘He that eateth bread with me hath lifted up his heel against me’ – Jn xiii.18 (Ps xli.9),” ExpTim 70 (1958-59): 331-33.

[13:18]  sn A quotation from Ps 41:9.

[2:22]  ⁷⁴ sn They believed the scripture is probably an anaphoric reference to Ps 69:9 (69:10 LXX), quoted in John 2:17 above. Presumably the disciples did not remember Ps 69:9 on the spot, but it was a later insight.

[2:22]  ⁷⁵ tn Or “statement”; Grk “word.”