John 6:70-71

6:70 Jesus replied, ¹  “Didn’t I choose you, the twelve, and yet one of you is the devil?” ²  6:71 (Now he said this about Judas son of Simon Iscariot, ³  for Judas, ⁴  one of the twelve, was going to betray him.) ⁵ 

John 13:2

13:2 The evening meal ⁶  was in progress, and the devil had already put into the heart ⁷  of Judas Iscariot, Simon’s son, that he should betray ⁸  Jesus. ⁹ 

John 13:26

13:26 Jesus replied, ¹⁰  “It is the one to whom I will give this piece of bread ¹¹  after I have dipped it in the dish.” ¹²  Then he dipped the piece of bread in the dish ¹³  and gave it to Judas Iscariot, Simon’s son.

John 18:2-5

18:2 (Now Judas, the one who betrayed him, knew the place too, because Jesus had met there many times ¹⁴  with his disciples.) ¹⁵  18:3 So Judas obtained a squad of soldiers ¹⁶  and some officers of the chief priests and Pharisees. ¹⁷  They came to the orchard ¹⁸  with lanterns ¹⁹  and torches and weapons.

18:4 Then Jesus, because he knew everything that was going to happen to him, ²⁰  came and asked them, “Who are you looking for?” ²¹  18:5 They replied, ²²  “Jesus the Nazarene.” He told them, “I am he.” (Now Judas, the one who betrayed him, was standing there with them.) ²³ 

Matthew 10:4

10:4 Simon the Zealot ²⁴  and Judas Iscariot, ²⁵  who betrayed him. ²⁶ 

Luke 6:16

6:16 Judas the son of James, and Judas Iscariot, ²⁷  who became a traitor.

[6:70]  ¹ tn Grk “Jesus answered them.”

[6:70]  ² tn Although most translations render this last phrase as “one of you is a devil,” such a translation presupposes that there is more than one devil. This finds roots in the KJV in which the Greek word for demon was often translated “devil.” In fact, the KJV never uses the word “demon.” (Sixty-two of the 63 NT instances of δαιμόνιον [daimonion] are translated “devil” [in Acts 17:18 the plural has been translated “gods”]. This can get confusing in places where the singular “devil” is used: Is Satan or one of the demons in view [cf. Matt 9:33 (demon); 13:39 (devil); 17:18 (demon); Mark 7:26 (demon); Luke 4:2 (devil); etc.]?) Now regarding John 6:70, both the construction in Greek and the technical use of διάβολος (diabolos) indicate that the one devil is in view. To object to the translation “the devil” because it thus equates Judas with Satan does not take into consideration that Jesus often spoke figuratively (e.g., “destroy this temple” [John 2:19]; “he [John the Baptist] is Elijah” [Matt 11:14]), even equating Peter with the devil on one occasion (Mark 8:33). According to ExSyn 249, “A curious phenomenon has occurred in the English Bible with reference to one particular monadic noun, διάβολος. The KJV translates both διάβολος and δαιμόνιον as ‘devil.’ Thus in the AV translators’ minds, ‘devil’ was not a monadic noun. Modern translations have correctly rendered δαιμόνιον as ‘demon’ and have, for the most part, recognized that διάβολος is monadic (cf., e.g., 1 Pet 5:8; Rev 20:2). But in John 6:70 modern translations have fallen into the error of the King James translators. The KJV has ‘one of you is a devil.’ So does the RSV, NRSV, ASV, NIV, NKJV, and the JB [Jerusalem Bible]. Yet there is only one devil…The legacy of the KJV still lives on, then, even in places where it ought not.”

[6:71]  ³ 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]  ⁴ tn Grk “this one”; the referent (Judas) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[6:71]  ⁵ 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.

[13:2]  ⁶ 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]  ⁷ 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]  ⁸ tn Or “that he should hand over.”

[13:2]  ⁹ tn Grk “betray him”; the referent (Jesus) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[13:26]  ¹⁰ tn Grk “Jesus answered.”

[13:26]  ¹¹ sn The piece of bread was a broken-off piece of bread (not merely a crumb).

[13:26]  ¹² 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]  ¹³ tn The words “in the dish” are not in the Greek text, but the presence of a bowl or dish is implied.

[18:2]  ¹⁴ tn Or “often.”

[18:2]  ¹⁵ sn This is a parenthetical note by the author.

[18:3]  ¹⁶ 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]  ¹⁷ 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]  ¹⁸ tn The words “to the orchard” are not in the Greek text but are repeated from v. 1 for clarity.

[18:3]  ¹⁹ 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.

[18:4]  ²⁰ tn Grk “knowing all things that were coming upon him.”

[18:4]  ²¹ tn Grk “Whom do you seek?”

[18:5]  ²² tn Grk “They answered.”

[18:5]  ²³ 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).

[10:4]  ²⁴ tn Grk “the Cananean,” but according to both BDAG 507 s.v. Καναναῖος and L&N 11.88, this term has no relation at all to the geographical terms for Cana or Canaan, but is derived from the Aramaic term for “enthusiast, zealot” (see Luke 6:15; Acts 1:13), possibly because of an earlier affiliation with the party of the Zealots. He may not have been technically a member of the particular Jewish nationalistic party known as “Zealots” (since according to some scholars this party had not been organized at that time), but simply someone who was zealous for Jewish independence from Rome, in which case the term would refer to his temperament.

[10:4]  ²⁵ sn There is some debate about what the name Iscariot means. It probably alludes to a region in Judea and thus might make Judas the only non-Galilean in the group. Several 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). For further discussion see D. L. Bock, Luke (BECNT), 1:546; also D. A. Carson, John, 304.

[10:4]  ²⁶ tn Grk “who even betrayed him.”

[6:16]  ²⁷ sn There is some debate about what the name Iscariot means. It probably alludes to a region in Judea and thus might make Judas the only non-Galilean in the group. Several 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). For further discussion see D. L. Bock, Luke (BECNT), 1:546; also D. A. Carson, John, 304.