John 5:1
Context5:1 After this 1 there was a Jewish feast, 2 and Jesus went up to Jerusalem. 3
John 6:4
Context6:4 (Now the Jewish feast of the Passover 4 was near.) 5
John 7:2
Context7:2 Now the Jewish feast of Tabernacles 6 was near. 7
John 12:20
Context12:20 Now some Greeks 8 were among those who had gone up to worship at the feast.
John 7:11
Context7:11 So the Jewish leaders 9 were looking for him at the feast, asking, “Where is he?” 10
John 2:23
Context2:23 Now while Jesus 11 was in Jerusalem 12 at the feast of the Passover, many people believed in his name because they saw the miraculous signs he was doing. 13
John 4:45
Context4:45 So when he came to Galilee, the Galileans welcomed him because they had seen all the things he had done in Jerusalem 14 at the feast 15 (for they themselves had gone to the feast). 16


[5:1] 1 sn The temporal indicator After this is not specific, so it is uncertain how long after the incidents at Cana this occurred.
[5:1] 2 tc The textual variants ἑορτή or ἡ ἑορτή (Jeorth or Jh Jeorth, “a feast” or “the feast”) may not appear significant at first, but to read ἑορτή with the article would almost certainly demand a reference to the Jewish Passover. The article is found in א C L Δ Ψ Ë1 33 892 1424 pm, but is lacking in {Ì66,75 A B D T Ws Θ Ë13 565 579 700 1241 pm}. Overall, the shorter reading has somewhat better support. Internally, the known proclivity of scribes to make the text more explicit argues compellingly for the shorter reading. Thus, the verse refers to a feast other than the Passover. The incidental note in 5:3, that the sick were lying outside in the porticoes of the pool, makes Passover an unlikely time because it fell toward the end of winter and the weather would not have been warm. L. Morris (John [NICNT], 299, n. 6) thinks it impossible to identify the feast with certainty.
[5:1] 3 map For location see Map5 B1; Map6 F3; Map7 E2; Map8 F2; Map10 B3; JP1 F4; JP2 F4; JP3 F4; JP4 F4.
[6:4] 4 sn Passover. According to John’s sequence of material, considerable time has elapsed since the feast of 5:1. If the feast in 5:1 was Pentecost of
[6:4] 5 sn This is a parenthetical note by the author.
[7:2] 7 tn Or “feast of the Tents” (the feast where people lived in tents or shelters, which was celebrated in the autumn after harvest). John’s use of σκηνοπηγία (skhnophgia) for the feast of Tabernacles constitutes the only use of this term in the New Testament.
[7:2] 8 sn Since the present verse places these incidents at the feast of Tabernacles (
[12:20] 10 sn These Greeks (῞Ελληνές τινες, {ellhne" tine") who had come up to worship at the feast were probably “God-fearers” rather than proselytes in the strict sense. Had they been true proselytes, they would probably not have been referred to as Greeks any longer. Many came to worship at the major Jewish festivals without being proselytes to Judaism, for example, the Ethiopian eunuch in Acts 8:27, who could not have been a proselyte if he were physically a eunuch.
[7:11] 13 tn Or “the Jewish authorities”; Grk “the Jews.” Here the phrase refers to the Jewish authorities or leaders who were Jesus’ primary opponents. See the note on the phrase “the Jewish leaders” in v. 1.
[7:11] 14 tn Grk “Where is that one?”
[2:23] 16 tn Grk “he”; the referent (Jesus) has been specified in the translation for clarity.
[2:23] 17 map For location see Map5 B1; Map6 F3; Map7 E2; Map8 F2; Map10 B3; JP1 F4; JP2 F4; JP3 F4; JP4 F4.
[2:23] 18 sn Because they saw the miraculous signs he was doing. The issue here is not whether their faith was genuine or not, but what its object was. These individuals, after seeing the miracles, believed Jesus to be the Messiah. They most likely saw in him a political-eschatological figure of some sort. That does not, however, mean that their concept of “Messiah” was the same as Jesus’ own, or the author’s.
[4:45] 19 sn All the things he had done in Jerusalem probably refers to the signs mentioned in John 2:23.
[4:45] 20 sn See John 2:23-25.
[4:45] 21 sn John 4:44-45. The last part of v. 45 is a parenthetical note by the author. The major problem in these verses concerns the contradiction between the proverb stated by Jesus in v. 44 and the reception of the Galileans in v. 45. Origen solved the problem by referring his own country to Judea (which Jesus had just left) and not Galilee. But this runs counter to the thrust of John’s Gospel, which takes pains to identify Jesus with Galilee (cf. 1:46) and does not even mention his Judean birth. R. E. Brown typifies the contemporary approach: He regards v. 44 as an addition by a later redactor who wanted to emphasize Jesus’ unsatisfactory reception in Galilee. Neither expedient is necessary, though, if honor is understood in its sense of attributing true worth to someone. The Galileans did welcome him, but their welcome was to prove a superficial response based on what they had seen him do at the feast. There is no indication that the signs they saw brought them to place their faith in Jesus any more than Nicodemus did on the basis of the signs. But a superficial welcome based on enthusiasm for miracles is no real honor at all.