¹ tn Grk “answered and said to her.”

² tn Or “if you knew.”

³ tn The phrase “some water” is supplied as the understood direct object of the infinitive πεῖν (pein).

⁴ tn This is a second class conditional sentence in Greek.

sn The word translated living is used in Greek of flowing water, which leads to the woman’s misunderstanding in the following verse. She thought Jesus was referring to some unknown source of drinkable water.

⁵ tn Grk “And the bread.”

⁶ tn Grk “a man.” See the note on “male child” in the previous verse.

⁷ tn Grk “receives circumcision.”

⁸ sn If a male child is circumcised on the Sabbath so that the law of Moses is not broken. The Rabbis counted 248 parts to a man’s body. In the Talmud (b. Yoma 85b) R. Eleazar ben Azariah (ca. a.d. 100) states: “If circumcision, which attaches to one only of the 248 members of the human body, suspends the Sabbath, how much more shall the saving of the whole body suspend the Sabbath?” So absolutely binding did rabbinic Judaism regard the command of Lev 12:3 to circumcise on the eighth day, that in the Mishnah m. Shabbat 18.3; 19.1, 2; and m. Nedarim 3.11 all hold that the command to circumcise overrides the command to observe the Sabbath.

⁹ tn Or “made an entire man well.”

¹⁰ tn Grk “Jesus answered and said to them.”

¹¹ tn The word “people” is supplied in the translation to indicate that the pronoun (“you”) and verb (“do not know”) in Greek are plural.

¹² sn You people do not know where I came from or where I am going. The ignorance of the religious authorities regarding Jesus’ origin works on two levels at once: First, they thought Jesus came from Galilee (although he really came from Bethlehem in Judea) and second, they did not know that he came from heaven (from the Father), and this is where he would return. See further John 7:52.

¹³ tn Grk “Then they were saying to him.” The imperfect verb has been translated with ingressive force here because of the introduction of a new line of questioning by the Pharisees. Jesus had just claimed his Father as a second witness; now his opponents want to know who his father is.

¹⁴ sn If you knew me you would know my Father too. Jesus’ reply is based on his identity with the Father (see also John 1:18; 14:9).

¹⁵ tn Grk “Jesus said to them.”

¹⁶ tn Or “I came from God and have arrived.”

¹⁷ tn Grk “For I.” Here γάρ (gar) has not been translated.

¹⁸ tn Grk “from myself.”

¹⁹ tn Grk “that one” (referring to God).

²⁰ tc ‡ Important and early witnesses (Ì⁶⁶ א B C W Θ 579 it) lack the conjunction here, while other witnesses read οὖν (oun, “therefore”; Ì⁷⁵ D L Ψ 070 Ë^1,13 33 Ï lat). This conjunction occurs in John some 200 times, far more than in any other NT book. Even though the most important Johannine papyrus (Ì⁷⁵) has the conjunction, the combination of Ì⁶⁶ א B for the omission is even stronger. Further, the reading seems to be a predictable scribal emendation. In particular, οὖν is frequently used with the plural of εἶπον (eipon, “they said”) in John (in this chapter alone, note vv. 13, 39, 48, 57, and possibly 41). On balance, it is probably best to consider the shorter reading as authentic, even though “Then” is virtually required in translation for English stylistic reasons. NA²⁷ has the conjunction in brackets, indicating some doubt as to its authenticity.

²¹ tn Grk “the Jews.” See the note on this term in v. 31. Here, as in vv. 31 and 48, the phrase refers to the Jewish people in Jerusalem (“Judeans”; cf. BDAG 479 s.v. ᾿Ιουδαῖος 2.e) who had been listening to Jesus’ teaching in the temple courts (8:20) and had initially believed his claim to be the Messiah (cf. 8:31).

²² tn Grk “said to him.”

²³ tn Grk “you have a demon.”

²⁴ tn “Yet” has been supplied to show the contrastive element present in the context.

²⁵ tn Grk “If anyone keeps.”

²⁶ tn Grk “my word.”

²⁷ tn Grk “will never taste.” Here the Greek verb does not mean “sample a small amount” (as a typical English reader might infer from the word “taste”), but “experience something cognitively or emotionally; come to know something” (cf. BDAG 195 s.v. γεύομαι 2).

²⁸ tn Grk “he will never taste of death forever.” The Greek negative here is emphatic.

²⁹ tn Here καί (kai) has been translated as “Yet” to indicate the contrast present in the context.

³⁰ tn Grk “If I say, ‘I do not know him.’”

³¹ tn Grk “I keep.”

³² tn Grk “his word.”

³³ tn Grk “Jesus answered.”

³⁴ tn Or “he does not trip.”

³⁵ sn What is the light of this world? On one level, of course, it refers to the sun, but the reader of John’s Gospel would recall 8:12 and understand Jesus’ symbolic reference to himself as the light of the world. There is only a limited time left (Are there not twelve hours in a day?) until the Light will be withdrawn (until Jesus returns to the Father) and the one who walks around in the dark will trip and fall (compare the departure of Judas by night in 13:30).

³⁶ tn Grk “Truly, truly, I say to you.”

³⁷ tn Or “it remains only a single kernel.”

³⁸ tn Or “bears.”

³⁹ tn Grk “much fruit.”

⁴⁰ tn Grk “And if anyone”; the conjunction καί (kai, “and”) has been left untranslated here for improved English style.

⁴¹ tn Or “guard them,” “keep them.”

⁴² sn Cf. John 3:17.

⁴³ tn Or “prepare.”

⁴⁴ tn Or “bring you.”

⁴⁵ tn Grk “to myself.”

⁴⁶ tn Grk “answered and said to him.”

⁴⁷ tn Or “will keep.”

⁴⁸ tn Grk “we will come to him and will make our dwelling place with him.” The context here is individual rather than corporate indwelling, so the masculine singular pronoun has been retained throughout v. 23. It is important to note, however, that the pronoun is used generically here and refers equally to men, women, and children.

⁴⁹ tn Or “You have heard that I said to you.”

⁵⁰ tn Or “you would rejoice.”

⁵¹ sn Jesus’ statement the Father is greater than I am has caused much christological and trinitarian debate. Although the Arians appealed to this text to justify their subordinationist Christology, it seems evident that by the fact Jesus compares himself to the Father, his divine nature is taken for granted. There have been two orthodox interpretations: (1) The Son is eternally generated while the Father is not: Origen, Tertullian, Athanasius, Hilary, etc. (2) As man the incarnate Son was less than the Father: Cyril of Alexandria, Ambrose, Augustine. In the context of the Fourth Gospel the second explanation seems more plausible. But why should the disciples have rejoiced? Because Jesus was on the way to the Father who would glorify him (cf. 17:4-5); his departure now signifies that the work the Father has given him is completed (cf. 19:30). Now Jesus will be glorified with that glory that he had with the Father before the world was (cf. 17:5). This should be a cause of rejoicing to the disciples because when Jesus is glorified he will glorify his disciples as well (17:22).

⁵² tn Or “reside.”

⁵³ sn Such branches are gathered up and thrown into the fire. The author does not tell who it is who does the gathering and throwing into the fire. Although some claim that realized eschatology is so prevalent in the Fourth Gospel that no references to final eschatology appear at all, the fate of these branches seems to point to the opposite. The imagery is almost certainly that of eschatological judgment, and recalls some of the OT vine imagery which involves divine rejection and judgment of disobedient Israel (Ezek 15:4-6, 19:12).

⁵⁴ tn Grk “they gather them up and throw them into the fire, and they are burned.”

⁵⁵ tn Grk “if you were of the world.”

⁵⁶ tn The words “you as” are not in the original but are supplied for clarity.

⁵⁷ tn Grk “because you are not of the world.”

⁵⁸ tn Or “world, therefore.”

⁵⁹ sn I chose you out of the world…the world hates you. Two themes are brought together here. In 8:23 Jesus had distinguished himself from the world in addressing his Jewish opponents: “You are from below, I am from above; you are of this world, I am not of this world.” In 15:16 Jesus told the disciples “You did not choose me, but I chose you and appointed you.” Now Jesus has united these two ideas as he informs the disciples that he has chosen them out of the world. While the disciples will still be “in” the world after Jesus has departed, they will not belong to it, and Jesus prays later in John 17:15-16 to the Father, “I do not ask you to take them out of the world, but to keep them from the evil one. They are not of the world, even as I am not of the world.” The same theme also occurs in 1 John 4:5-6: “They are from the world; therefore they speak as from the world, and the world listens to them. We are from God; he who knows God listens to us; he who is not from God does not listen to us.” Thus the basic reason why the world hates the disciples (as it hated Jesus before them) is because they are not of the world. They are born from above, and are not of the world. For this reason the world hates them.

⁶⁰ tn Or “If I had not done.”

⁶¹ tn Grk “the works.”

⁶² tn Grk “they would not have sin” (an idiom).

⁶³ tn The words “the deeds” are supplied to clarify from context what was seen. Direct objects in Greek were often omitted when clear from the context.

⁶⁴ tn Or “But now they have both seen and hated both me and my Father.” It is possible to understand both the “seeing” and the “hating” to refer to both Jesus and the Father, but this has the world “seeing” the Father, which seems alien to the Johannine Jesus. (Some point out John 14:9 as an example, but this is addressed to the disciples, not to the world.) It is more likely that the “seeing” refers to the miraculous deeds mentioned in the first half of the verse. Such an understanding of the first “both – and” construction is apparently supported by BDF §444.3.

⁶⁵ tn Grk “sought.”

⁶⁶ tn Or “the Jewish authorities”; Grk “the Jews.” Here the phrase refers to the Jewish leaders, especially members of the Sanhedrin, and their servants (mentioned specifically as “the chief priests and their servants” in John 19:6). See the note on the phrase “Jewish leaders” in v. 7.

⁶⁷ tn Grk “shouted out, saying.”

⁶⁸ tn Grk “this one.”

⁶⁹ sn Is the author using the phrase Friend of Caesar in a technical sense, as a title bestowed on people for loyal service to the Emperor, or in a more general sense merely describing a person as loyal to the Emperor? L. Morris (John [NICNT], 798) thinks it is “unlikely” that the title is used in the technical sense, and J. H. Bernard (St. John [ICC], 2:621) argues that the technical sense of the phrase as an official title was not used before the time of Vespasian (a.d. 69-79). But there appears to be significant evidence for much earlier usage. Some of this is given in BDAG 498-99 s.v. Καῖσαρ. E. Bammel (“φίλος τοῦ καίσαρος (John 19:12),” TLZ 77 [1952]: 205-10) listed significant and convincing arguments that the official title was indeed in use at the time. Granting that the title was in use during this period, what is the likelihood that it had been bestowed on Pilate? Pilate was of the equestrian order, that is, of lower nobility as opposed to senatorial rank. As such he would have been eligible to receive such an honor. It also appears that the powerful Sejanus was his patron in Rome, and Sejanus held considerable influence with Tiberius. Tacitus (Annals 6.8) quotes Marcus Terentius in his defense before the Senate as saying that close friendship with Sejanus “was in every case a powerful recommendation to the Emperor’s friendship.” Thus it is possible that Pilate held this honor. Therefore it appears that the Jewish authorities were putting a good deal of psychological pressure on Pilate to convict Jesus. They had, in effect, finally specified the charge against Jesus as treason: “Everyone who makes himself to be king opposes Caesar.” If Pilate now failed to convict Jesus the Jewish authorities could complain to Rome that Pilate had released a traitor. This possibility carried more weight with Pilate than might at first be evident: (1) Pilate’s record as governor was not entirely above reproach; (2) Tiberius, who lived away from Rome as a virtual recluse on the island of Capri, was known for his suspicious nature, especially toward rivals or those who posed a political threat; and (3) worst of all, Pilate’s patron in Rome, Sejanus, had recently come under suspicion of plotting to seize the imperial succession for himself. Sejanus was deposed in October of a.d. 31. It may have been to Sejanus that Pilate owed his appointment in Judea. Pilate was now in a very delicate position. The Jewish authorities may have known something of this and deliberately used it as leverage against him. Whether or not they knew just how potent their veiled threat was, it had the desired effect. Pilate went directly to the judgment seat to pronounce his judgment.

⁷⁰ tn Grk “who makes himself out to be a king.”

⁷¹ tn Or “the Jewish authorities”; Grk “the Jews.” Here the phrase refers to the Jewish leaders, especially the Pharisees (see John 12:42). See also the note on the phrase “Jewish leaders” in v. 7.

⁷² sn This is a parenthetical note by the author.

⁷³ tn Grk “And Pilate.” The conjunction καί (kai, “and”) has not been translated here in keeping with the tendency of contemporary English style to use shorter sentences.

⁷⁴ tn Grk “took away his body.”

⁷⁵ tn Grk “written”; the word “down” is supplied in keeping with contemporary English idiom.

⁷⁶ tn Grk “the world itself.”

⁷⁷ tc Although the majority of mss (C² Θ Ψ Ë¹³ Ï lat) conclude this Gospel with ἀμήν (amhn, “amen”), such a conclusion is routinely added by scribes to NT books because a few of these books originally had such an ending (cf. Rom 16:27; Gal 6:18; Jude 25). A majority of Greek witnesses have the concluding ἀμήν in every NT book except Acts, James, and 3 John (and even in these books, ἀμήν is found in some witnesses). It is thus a predictable variant. Further, excellent and early witnesses, as well as a few others (א A B C*^,3 D W 1 33 pc it), lack the particle, rendering no doubt as to how this Gospel originally ended.

sn The author concludes the Gospel with a note concerning his selectivity of material. He makes it plain that he has not attempted to write an exhaustive account of the words and works of Jesus, for if one attempted to do so, “the whole world would not have room for the books that would be written.” This is clearly hyperbole, and as such bears some similarity to the conclusion of the Book of Ecclesiastes (12:9-12). As it turns out, the statement seems more true of the Fourth Gospel itself, which is the subject of an ever-lengthening bibliography. The statement in v. 25 serves as a final reminder that knowledge of Jesus, no matter how well-attested it may be, is still partial. Everything that Jesus did during his three and one-half years of earthly ministry is not known. This supports the major theme of the Fourth Gospel: Jesus is repeatedly identified as God, and although he may be truly known on the basis of his self-disclosure, he can never be known exhaustively. There is far more to know about Jesus than could ever be written down, or even known. On this appropriate note the Gospel of John ends.