John 1:8

1:8 He himself was not the light, but he came to testify ¹  about the light.

John 1:16

1:16 For we have all received from his fullness one gracious gift after another. ² 

John 1:28

1:28 These things happened in Bethany ³  across the Jordan River ⁴  where John was baptizing.

John 1:34

1:34 I have both seen and testified that this man is the Chosen One of God.” ⁵ 

John 1:36

1:36 Gazing at Jesus as he walked by, he said, “Look, the Lamb of God!” ⁶ 

John 5:42

5:42 but I know you, that you do not have the love of God ⁷  within you.

John 6:28

6:28 So then they said to him, “What must we do to accomplish the deeds ⁸  God requires?” ⁹ 

John 6:62

6:62 Then what if you see the Son of Man ascending where he was before? ¹⁰ 

John 6:69

6:69 We ¹¹  have come to believe and to know ¹²  that you are the Holy One of God!” ¹³ 

John 9:5

9:5 As long as I am in the world, I am the light of the world.” ¹⁴ 

John 9:32

9:32 Never before ¹⁵  has anyone heard of someone causing a man born blind to see. ¹⁶ 

John 10:23

10:23 It was winter, ¹⁷  and Jesus was walking in the temple area ¹⁸  in Solomon’s Portico. ¹⁹ 

John 10:37

10:37 If I do not perform ²⁰  the deeds ²¹  of my Father, do not believe me.

John 12:43

12:43 For they loved praise ²²  from men more than praise ²³  from God.

John 16:11

16:11 and concerning judgment, ²⁴  because ²⁵  the ruler of this world ²⁶  has been condemned. ²⁷ 

John 16:14

16:14 He ²⁸  will glorify me, ²⁹  because he will receive ³⁰  from me what is mine ³¹  and will tell it to you. ³² 

[1:8]  ¹ tn Or “to bear witness.”

[1:16]  ² tn Grk “for from his fullness we have all received, and grace upon grace.” The meaning of the phrase χάριν ἀντὶ χάριτος (carin anti carito") could be: (1) love (grace) under the New Covenant in place of love (grace) under the Sinai Covenant, thus replacement; (2) grace “on top of” grace, thus accumulation; (3) grace corresponding to grace, thus correspondence. The most commonly held view is (2) in one sense or another, and this is probably the best explanation. This sense is supported by a fairly well-known use in Philo, Posterity 43 (145). Morna D. Hooker suggested that Exod 33:13 provides the background for this expression: “Now therefore, I pray you, if I have found χάρις (LXX) in your sight, let me know your ways, that I may know you, so that I may find χάρις (LXX) in your sight.” Hooker proposed that it is this idea of favor given to one who has already received favor which lies behind 1:16, and this seems very probable as a good explanation of the meaning of the phrase (“The Johannine Prologue and the Messianic Secret,” NTS 21 [1974/75]: 53).

[1:28]  ³ tc Many witnesses ([א²] C² K T Ψ^c 083 Ë^1,13 33 pm sa Or) read Βηθαβαρᾷ (Bhqabara, “Bethabara”) instead of Βηθανίᾳ (Bhqania, “Bethany”). But the reading Βηθανίᾳ is strongly supported by {Ì^66,75 A B C* L W^s Δ Θ Ψ* 565 579 700 1241 1424 pm latt bo as well as several fathers}. Since there is no known Bethany “beyond the Jordan,” it is likely that the name would have been changed to a more etymologically edifying one (Origen mistakenly thought the name Bethabara meant “house of preparation” and for this reason was appropriate in this context; see TCGNT 171 for discussion). On the other hand, both since Origen’s understanding of the Semitic etymology of Bethabara was incorrect, and because Bethany was at least a well-known location in Palestine, mentioned in the Gospels about a dozen times, one has to wonder whether scribes replaced Βηθαβαρᾷ with Βηθανίᾳ. However, if Origen’s understanding of the etymology of the name was representative, scribes may have altered the text in the direction of Bethabara. And even if most scribes were unfamiliar with what the name might signify, that a reading which did not contradict the Gospels’ statements of a Bethany near Jerusalem was already at hand may have been sufficient reason for them to adopt Bethabara. Further, in light of the very strong testimony for Βηθανίᾳ, this reading should be regarded as authentic.

[1:28]  ⁴ tn “River” is not in the Greek text but is supplied for clarity.

[1:34]  ⁴ tc ‡ What did John the Baptist declare about Jesus on this occasion? Did he say, “This is the Son of God” (οὗτός ἐστιν ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ θεοῦ, |outo" estin Jo Juio" tou qeou), or “This is the Chosen One of God” (οὗτός ἐστιν ὁ ἐκλεκτὸς τοῦ θεοῦ, outo" estin Jo eklekto" tou qeou)? The majority of the witnesses, impressive because of their diversity in age and locales, read “This is the Son of God” (so {Ì^66,75 A B C L Θ Ψ 0233^vid Ë^1,13 33 1241 aur c f l g bo as well as the majority of Byzantine minuscules and many others}). Most scholars take this to be sufficient evidence to regard the issue as settled without much of a need to reflect on internal evidence. On the other hand, one of the earliest mss for this verse, {Ì⁵} (3rd century), evidently read οὗτός ἐστιν ὁ ἐκλεκτὸς τοῦ θεοῦ. (There is a gap in the ms at the point of the disputed words; it is too large for υἱός especially if written, as it surely would have been, as a nomen sacrum [uMs]. The term ἐκλεκτός was not a nomen sacrum and would have therefore taken up much more space [eklektos]. Given these two variants, there is hardly any question as to what Ì⁵ read.) This papyrus has many affinities with א*, which here also has ὁ ἐκλεκτός. In addition to their combined testimony Ì^106vid b e ff^2* sy^s,c also support this reading. ̹⁰⁶ is particularly impressive, for it is a second third-century papyrus in support of ὁ ἐκλεκτός. A third reading combines these two: “the elect Son” (electus filius in ff^2c sa and a [with slight variation]). Although the evidence for ἐκλεκτός is not as impressive as that for υἱός, the reading is found in early Alexandrian and Western witnesses. Turning to the internal evidence, “the Chosen One” clearly comes out ahead. “Son of God” is a favorite expression of the author (cf. 1:49; 3:18; 5:25; 10:36; 11:4, 27; 19:7; 20:31); further, there are several other references to “his Son,” “the Son,” etc. Scribes would be naturally motivated to change ἐκλεκτός to υἱός since the latter is both a Johannine expression and is, on the surface, richer theologically in 1:34. On the other hand, there is not a sufficient reason for scribes to change υἱός to ἐκλεκτός. The term never occurs in John; even its verbal cognate (ἐκλέγω, eklegw) is never affirmed of Jesus in this Gospel. ἐκλεκτός clearly best explains the rise of υἱός. Further, the third reading (“Chosen Son of God”) is patently a conflation of the other two. It has all the earmarks of adding υἱός to ἐκλεκτός. Thus, ὁ υἱός τοῦ θεοῦ is almost certainly a motivated reading. As R. E. Brown notes (John [AB], 1:57), “On the basis of theological tendency…it is difficult to imagine that Christian scribes would change ‘the Son of God’ to ‘God’s chosen one,’ while a change in the opposite direction would be quite plausible. Harmonization with the Synoptic accounts of the baptism (‘You are [This is] my beloved Son’) would also explain the introduction of ‘the Son of God’ into John; the same phenomenon occurs in vi 69. Despite the weaker textual evidence, therefore, it seems best – with Lagrange, Barrett, Boismard, and others – to accept ‘God’s chosen one’ as original.”

[1:36]  ⁵ sn This section (1:35-51) is joined to the preceding by the literary expedient of repeating the Baptist’s testimony about Jesus being the Lamb of God (1:36, cf. 1:29). This repeated testimony (1:36) no longer has revelatory value in itself, since it has been given before; its purpose, instead, is to institute a chain reaction which will bring John the Baptist’s disciples to Jesus and make them Jesus’ own disciples.

[5:42]  ⁶ tn The genitive in the phrase τὴν ἀγάπην τοῦ θεοῦ (thn agaphn tou qeou, “the love of God”) could be translated as either a subjective genitive (“God’s love”) or an objective genitive (“love for God”). Either is grammatically possible. This is possibly an instance of a plenary genitive (see ExSyn 119-21; M. Zerwick, Biblical Greek, §§36-39). If so, the emphasis would be on the love God gives which in turn produces love for him, but Jesus’ opponents are lacking any such love inside them.

[6:28]  ⁷ tn Grk “the works.”

[6:28]  ⁸ tn Grk “What must we do to work the works of God?”

[6:62]  ⁸ tn Or “he was formerly?”

[6:69]  ⁹ tn Grk “And we.”

[6:69]  ¹⁰ sn See 1 John 4:16.

[6:69]  ¹¹ tc The witnesses display a bewildering array of variants here. Instead of “the Holy One of God” (ὁ ἅγιος τοῦ θεοῦ, Jo {agio" tou qeou), Tertullian has ὁ Χριστός (Jo Cristo", “the Christ”); C³ Θ* ˹ 33 565 lat read ὁ Χριστὸς ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ θεοῦ (Jo Cristo" Jo Juio" tou qeou, “the Christ, the Son of God”); two versional witnesses (b sy^c) have ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ θεοῦ (“the Son of God”); the Byzantine text as well as many others (Ψ 0250 ˹³ 33 Ï) read ὁ Χριστὸς ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ θεοῦ τοῦ ζῶντος (Jo Cristo" Jo Juio" tou qeou tou zwnto", “the Christ, the Son of the living God”); and Ì⁶⁶ as well as a few versions have ὁ Χριστὸς ὁ ἅγιος τοῦ θεοῦ (“the Christ, the Holy One of God”). The reading ὁ ἅγιος τοῦ θεοῦ is, however, well supported by Ì⁷⁵ א B C* D L W as well as versional witnesses. It appears that Peter’s confession in the Synoptic Gospels (especially Matt 16:16) supplied the motivation for the variations. Although the witnesses in Matt 16:16; Mark 8:29; and Luke 9:20 vary considerably, the readings are all intra-synoptic, that is, they do not pull in “the Holy One of God” but reflect various permutations of “Christ”/“Christ of God”/“Christ, the Son of God”/“Christ, the Son of the living God.” The wording “the Holy One of God” (without “Christ”) in important witnesses here is thus unique among Peter’s confessions, and best explains the rise of the other readings.

[9:5]  ¹⁰ sn Jesus’ statement I am the light of the world connects the present account with 8:12. Here (seen more clearly than at 8:12) it is obvious what the author sees as the significance of Jesus’ statement. “Light” is not a metaphysical definition of the person of Jesus but a description of his effect on the world, forcing everyone in the world to ‘choose up sides’ for or against him (cf. 3:19-21).

[9:32]  ¹¹ tn Or “Never from the beginning of time,” Grk “From eternity.”

[9:32]  ¹² tn Grk “someone opening the eyes of a man born blind” (“opening the eyes” is an idiom referring to restoration of sight).

[10:23]  ¹² sn It was winter. The feast began on 25 Kislev, in November-December of the modern Gregorian calendar.

[10:23]  ¹³ tn Grk “in the temple.”

[10:23]  ¹⁴ tn Or “portico,” “colonnade”; Grk “stoa.”

[10:37]  ¹³ tn Or “do.”

[10:37]  ¹⁴ tn Or “works.”

[12:43]  ¹⁴ tn Grk “the glory.”

[12:43]  ¹⁵ tn Grk “the glory.”

[16:11]  ¹⁵ sn The world is proven wrong concerning judgment, because the ruler of this world has been judged. Jesus’ righteousness before the Father, as proven by his return to the Father, his glorification, constitutes a judgment against Satan. This is parallel to the judgment of the world which Jesus provokes in 3:19-21: Jesus’ presence in the world as the Light of the world provokes the judgment of those in the world, because as they respond to the light (either coming to Jesus or rejecting him) so are they judged. That judgment is in a sense already realized. So it is here, where the judgment of Satan is already realized in Jesus’ glorification. This does not mean that Satan does not continue to be active in the world, and to exercise some power over it, just as in 3:19-21 the people in the world who have rejected Jesus and thus incurred judgment continue on in their opposition to Jesus for a time. In both cases the judgment is not immediately executed. But it is certain.

[16:11]  ¹⁶ tn Or “that.”

[16:11]  ¹⁷ sn The ruler of this world is a reference to Satan.

[16:11]  ¹⁸ tn Or “judged.”

[16:14]  ¹⁶ tn Grk “That one.”

[16:14]  ¹⁷ tn Or “will honor me.”

[16:14]  ¹⁸ tn Or “he will take.”

[16:14]  ¹⁹ tn The words “what is mine” are not in the Greek text, but are implied. Direct objects were often omitted in Greek when clear from the context.

[16:14]  ²⁰ tn Or “will announce it to you.”