Matthew 3:17

3:17 And ¹  a voice from heaven said, ²  “This is my one dear Son; ³  in him ⁴  I take great delight.” ⁵ 

John 5:37

5:37 And the Father who sent me has himself testified about me. You people ⁶  have never heard his voice nor seen his form at any time, ⁷ 

John 12:28-30

12:28 Father, glorify your name.” Then a voice came from heaven, ⁸  “I have glorified it, ⁹  and I will glorify it ¹⁰  again.” 12:29 The crowd that stood there and heard the voice ¹¹  said that it had thundered. Others said that an angel had spoken to him. ¹²  12:30 Jesus said, ¹³  “This voice has not come for my benefit ¹⁴  but for yours.

John 12:2

12:2 So they prepared a dinner for Jesus ¹⁵  there. Martha ¹⁶  was serving, and Lazarus was among those present at the table ¹⁷  with him.

John 1:17-18

1:17 For the law was given through Moses, but ¹⁸  grace and truth came about through Jesus Christ. 1:18 No one has ever seen God. The only one, ¹⁹  himself God, who is in closest fellowship with ²⁰  the Father, has made God ²¹  known. ²² 

[3:17]  ¹ tn Grk “and behold.” The Greek word ἰδού (idou) has not been translated here.

[3:17]  ² tn Grk “behold, a voice from the cloud, saying.” This is an incomplete sentence in Greek which portrays intensity and emotion. The participle λέγουσα (legousa) was translated as a finite verb in keeping with English style.

[3:17]  ³ tn Grk “my beloved Son,” or “my Son, the beloved [one].” The force of ἀγαπητός (agaphtos) is often “pertaining to one who is the only one of his or her class, but at the same time is particularly loved and cherished” (L&N 58.53; cf. also BDAG 7 s.v. 1).

[3:17]  ⁴ tn Grk “in whom.”

[3:17]  ⁵ tn Or “with whom I am well pleased.”

[5:37]  ⁶ tn The word “people” is not in the Greek text, but is supplied to clarify that the following verbs (“heard,” “seen,” “have residing,” “do not believe”) are second person plural.

[5:37]  ⁷ sn You people have never heard his voice nor seen his form at any time. Compare Deut 4:12. Also see Deut 5:24 ff., where the Israelites begged to hear the voice no longer – their request (ironically) has by this time been granted. How ironic this would be if the feast is Pentecost, where by the 1st century a.d. the giving of the law at Sinai was being celebrated.

[12:28]  ⁸ tn Or “from the sky” (see note on 1:32).

[12:28]  ⁹ tn “It” is not in the Greek text. Direct objects were often omitted in Greek when clear from the context.

[12:28]  ¹⁰ tn “It” is not in the Greek text. Direct objects were often omitted in Greek when clear from the context.

[12:29]  ¹¹ tn “The voice” is not in the Greek text. Direct objects were often omitted in Greek when clear from the context.

[12:29]  ¹² tn Grk “Others said, “An angel has spoken to him.” The direct discourse in the second half of v. 29 was converted to indirect discourse in the translation to maintain the parallelism with the first half of the verse, which is better in keeping with English style.

[12:30]  ¹³ tn Grk “Jesus answered and said.”

[12:30]  ¹⁴ tn Or “for my sake.”

[12:2]  ¹⁵ tn Grk “him”; the referent (Jesus) has been specified in the translation for clarity and to conform with contemporary English style.

[12:2]  ¹⁶ tn Grk “And Martha.” The connective καί (kai, “and”) has been omitted in the translation because it would produce a run-on sentence in English.

[12:2]  ¹⁷ tn Grk “reclining at the table.”

[1:17]  ¹⁸ tn “But” is not in the Greek text, but has been supplied to indicate the implied contrast between the Mosaic law and grace through Jesus Christ. John 1:17 seems to indicate clearly that the Old Covenant (Sinai) was being contrasted with the New. In Jewish sources the Law was regarded as a gift from God (Josephus, Ant. 3.8.10 [3.223]; Pirqe Avot 1.1; Sifre Deut 31:4 §305). Further information can be found in T. F. Glasson, Moses in the Fourth Gospel (SBT).

[1:18]  ¹⁹ tc The textual problem μονογενὴς θεός (monogenh" qeo", “the only God”) versus ὁ μονογενὴς υἱός (Jo monogenh" Juio", “the only son”) is a notoriously difficult one. Only one letter would have differentiated the readings in the mss, since both words would have been contracted as nomina sacra: thus qMs or uMs. Externally, there are several variants, but they can be grouped essentially by whether they read θεός or υἱός. The majority of mss, especially the later ones (A C³ Θ Ψ Ë^1,13 Ï lat), read ὁ μονογενὴς υἱός. Ì⁷⁵ א¹ 33 pc have ὁ μονογενὴς θεός, while the anarthrous μονογενὴς θεός is found in Ì⁶⁶ א* B C* L pc. The articular θεός is almost certainly a scribal emendation to the anarthrous θεός, for θεός without the article is a much harder reading. The external evidence thus strongly supports μονογενὴς θεός. Internally, although υἱός fits the immediate context more readily, θεός is much more difficult. As well, θεός also explains the origin of the other reading (υἱός), because it is difficult to see why a scribe who found υἱός in the text he was copying would alter it to θεός. Scribes would naturally change the wording to υἱός however, since μονογενὴς υἱός is a uniquely Johannine christological title (cf. John 3:16, 18; 1 John 4:9). But θεός as the older and more difficult reading is preferred. As for translation, it makes the most sense to see the word θεός as in apposition to μονογενής, and the participle ὁ ὤν (Jo wn) as in apposition to θεός, giving in effect three descriptions of Jesus rather than only two. (B. D. Ehrman, The Orthodox Corruption of Scripture, 81, suggests that it is nearly impossible and completely unattested in the NT for an adjective followed immediately by a noun that agrees in gender, number, and case, to be a substantival adjective: “when is an adjective ever used substantivally when it immediately precedes a noun of the same inflection?” This, however, is an overstatement. First, as Ehrman admits, μονογενής in John 1:14 is substantival. And since it is an established usage for the adjective in this context, one might well expect that the author would continue to use the adjective substantivally four verses later. Indeed, μονογενής is already moving toward a crystallized substantival adjective in the NT [cf. Luke 9:38; Heb 11:17]; in patristic Greek, the process continued [cf. PGL 881 s.v. 7]. Second, there are several instances in the NT in which a substantival adjective is followed by a noun with which it has complete concord: cf., e.g., Rom 1:30; Gal 3:9; 1 Tim 1:9; 2 Pet 2:5.) The modern translations which best express this are the NEB (margin) and TEV. Several things should be noted: μονογενής alone, without υἱός, can mean “only son,” “unique son,” “unique one,” etc. (see 1:14). Furthermore, θεός is anarthrous. As such it carries qualitative force much like it does in 1:1c, where θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος (qeo" hn Jo logo") means “the Word was fully God” or “the Word was fully of the essence of deity.” Finally, ὁ ὤν occurs in Rev 1:4, 8; 4:8, 11:17; and 16:5, but even more significantly in the LXX of Exod 3:14. Putting all of this together leads to the translation given in the text.

[1:18]  ²⁰ tn Grk “in the bosom of” (an idiom for closeness or nearness; cf. L&N 34.18; BDAG 556 s.v. κόλπος 1).

[1:18]  ²¹ tn Grk “him”; the referent (God) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[1:18]  ²² sn Has made God known. In this final verse of the prologue, the climactic and ultimate statement of the earthly career of the Logos, Jesus of Nazareth, is reached. The unique One (John 1:14), the One who has taken on human form and nature by becoming incarnate (became flesh, 1:14), who is himself fully God (the Word was God, 1:1c) and is to be identified with the ever-living One of the Old Testament revelation (Exod 3:14), who is in intimate relationship with the Father, this One and no other has fully revealed what God is like. As Jesus said to Philip in John 14:9, “The one who has seen me has seen the Father.”