1 Corinthians 6:13

6:13 “Food is for the stomach and the stomach is for food, but God will do away with both.” ¹  The body is not for sexual immorality, but for the Lord, and the Lord for the body.

Matthew 16:17

16:17 And Jesus answered him, ²  “You are blessed, Simon son of Jonah, because flesh and blood ³  did not reveal this to you, but my Father in heaven!

John 3:3-6

3:3 Jesus replied, ⁴  “I tell you the solemn truth, ⁵  unless a person is born from above, ⁶  he cannot see the kingdom of God.” ⁷  3:4 Nicodemus said to him, “How can a man be born when he is old? He cannot enter his mother’s womb and be born a second time, can he?” ⁸ 

3:5 Jesus answered, “I tell you the solemn truth, ⁹  unless a person is born of water and spirit, ¹⁰  he cannot enter the kingdom of God. 3:6 What is born of the flesh is flesh, ¹¹  and what is born of the Spirit is spirit.

John 3:2

3:2 came to Jesus ¹²  at night ¹³  and said to him, “Rabbi, we know that you are a teacher who has come from God. For no one could perform the miraculous signs ¹⁴  that you do unless God is with him.”

Colossians 1:1

Salutation

1:1 From Paul, ¹⁵  an apostle of Christ Jesus by the will of God, and Timothy our brother,

[6:13]  ¹ tn Grk “both this [stomach] and these [foods].”

[16:17]  ² tn Grk “answering, Jesus said to him.” The participle ἀποκριθείς (apokriqeis) is redundant, but the syntax of this phrase has been modified for clarity.

[16:17]  ³ tn The expression “flesh and blood” could refer to “any human being” (so TEV, NLT; cf. NIV “man”), but it could also refer to Peter himself (i.e., his own intuition; cf. CEV “You didn’t discover this on your own”). Because of the ambiguity of the referent, the phrase “flesh and blood” has been retained in the translation.

[3:3]  ⁴ tn Grk “answered and said to him.”

[3:3]  ⁵ tn Grk “Truly, truly, I say to you.”

[3:3]  ⁶ tn The word ἄνωθεν (anwqen) has a double meaning, either “again” (in which case it is synonymous with παλίν [palin]) or “from above” (BDAG 92 s.v. ἄνωθεν). This is a favorite technique of the author of the Fourth Gospel, and it is lost in almost all translations at this point. John uses the word 5 times, in 3:3, 7; 3:31; 19:11 and 23. In the latter 3 cases the context makes clear that it means “from above.” Here (3:3, 7) it could mean either, but the primary meaning intended by Jesus is “from above.” Nicodemus apparently understood it the other way, which explains his reply, “How can a man be born when he is old? He can’t enter his mother’s womb a second time and be born, can he?” The author uses the technique of the “misunderstood question” often to bring out a particularly important point: Jesus says something which is misunderstood by the disciples or (as here) someone else, which then gives Jesus the opportunity to explain more fully and in more detail what he really meant.

[3:3]  ⁷ sn What does Jesus’ statement about not being able to see the kingdom of God mean within the framework of John’s Gospel? John uses the word kingdom (βασιλεία, basileia) only 5 times (3:3, 5; 18:36 [3x]). Only here is it qualified with the phrase of God. The fact that John does not stress the concept of the kingdom of God does not mean it is absent from his theology, however. Remember the messianic implications found in John 2, both the wedding and miracle at Cana and the cleansing of the temple. For Nicodemus, the term must surely have brought to mind the messianic kingdom which Messiah was supposed to bring. But Nicodemus had missed precisely this point about who Jesus was. It was the Messiah himself with whom Nicodemus was speaking. Whatever Nicodemus understood, it is clear that the point is this: He misunderstood Jesus’ words. He over-literalized them, and thought Jesus was talking about repeated physical birth, when he was in fact referring to new spiritual birth.

[3:4]  ⁸ tn The grammatical structure of the question in Greek presupposes a negative reply.

[3:5]  ⁹ tn Grk “Truly, truly, I say to you.”

[3:5]  ¹⁰ tn Or “born of water and wind” (the same Greek word, πνεύματος [pneumatos], may be translated either “spirit/Spirit” or “wind”).

[3:6]  ¹¹ sn What is born of the flesh is flesh, i.e., what is born of physical heritage is physical. (It is interesting to compare this terminology with that of the dialogue in John 4, especially 4:23, 24.) For John the “flesh” (σάρξ, sarx) emphasizes merely the weakness and mortality of the creature – a neutral term, not necessarily sinful as in Paul. This is confirmed by the reference in John 1:14 to the Logos becoming “flesh.” The author avoids associating sinfulness with the incarnate Christ.

[3:2]  ¹² tn Grk “him”; the referent (Jesus) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[3:2]  ¹³ tn Or “during the night.”

[3:2]  ¹⁴ sn The reference to signs (σημεῖα, shmeia) forms a link with John 2:23-25. Those people in Jerusalem believed in Jesus because of the signs he had performed. Nicodemus had apparently seen them too. But for Nicodemus all the signs meant is that Jesus was a great teacher sent from God. His approach to Jesus was well-intentioned but theologically inadequate; he had failed to grasp the messianic implications of the miraculous signs.

[1:1]  ¹⁵ tn Grk “Paul.” The word “from” is not in the Greek text, but has been supplied to indicate the sender of the letter.