Psalms 41:9

41:9 Even my close friend ¹  whom I trusted,

he who shared meals with me, has turned against me. ² 

Psalms 55:12-14

55:12 Indeed, ³  it is not an enemy who insults me,

or else I could bear it;

it is not one who hates me who arrogantly taunts me, ⁴ 

or else I could hide from him.

55:13 But it is you, ⁵  a man like me, ⁶ 

my close friend in whom I confided. ⁷ 

55:14 We would share personal thoughts with each other; ⁸ 

in God’s temple we would walk together among the crowd.

Matthew 10:4

10:4 Simon the Zealot ⁹  and Judas Iscariot, ¹⁰  who betrayed him. ¹¹ 

John 6:70

6:70 Jesus replied, ¹²  “Didn’t I choose you, the twelve, and yet one of you is the devil?” ¹³ 

[41:9]  ¹ tn Heb “man of my peace.” The phrase here refers to one’s trusted friend (see Jer 38:22; Obad 7).

[41:9]  ² tn Heb “has made a heel great against me.” The precise meaning of this phrase, which appears only here, is uncertain.

[55:12]  ³ tn Or “for.”

[55:12]  ⁴ tn Heb “[who] magnifies against me.” See Pss 35:26; 38:16.

[55:13]  ⁵ sn It is you. The psalmist addresses the apparent ringleader of the opposition, an individual who was once his friend.

[55:13]  ⁶ tn Heb “a man according to my value,” i.e., “a person such as I.”

[55:13]  ⁷ tn Heb “my close friend, one known by me.”

[55:14]  ⁸ tn Heb “who together we would make counsel sweet.” The imperfect verbal forms here and in the next line draw attention to the ongoing nature of the actions (the so-called customary use of the imperfect). Their relationship was characterized by such intimacy and friendship. See IBHS 502-3 §31.2b.

[10:4]  ⁹ 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]  ¹⁰ 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]  ¹¹ tn Grk “who even betrayed him.”

[6:70]  ¹² tn Grk “Jesus answered them.”

[6:70]  ¹³ 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.”