³ tn The verb “separate, divide” here explains how God used the light to dispel the darkness. It did not do away with the darkness completely, but made a separation. The light came alongside the darkness, but they are mutually exclusive—a theme that will be developed in the Gospel of John (cf. John 1:5).

² tc Two viable variants exist at this place in the text: ἁγιότητι (hagiotēti, “holiness”) vs. ἁπλότητι (haplotēti, “pure motives”). A confusion of letters could well have produced the variant (TCGNT 507): In majuscule script the words would have been written agiothti and aplothti. This, however, does not explain which reading created the other. Overall ἁπλότητι, though largely a Western-Byzantine reading (א² D F G M lat sy), is better suited to the context; it is also a Pauline word while ἁγιότης (hagiotēs) is not. It also best explains the rise of the other variants, πραότητι (praotēti, “gentleness”) and σπλάγχνοις (splanchnois, “compassion”). On the other hand, the external evidence in favor of ἁγιότητι is extremely strong (P⁴⁶ א* A B C K P Ψ 0121 0243 33 81 1739 1881 al co). This diversity of mss provides excellent evidence for authenticity, but because of the internal evidence listed above, ἁπλότητι is to be preferred, albeit only slightly.

² tc Most mss (P^75* A D L W Θ Ψ 070 ƒ^1,13 M) have ἐρεῖ λέγω ὑμῖν (erei legō humin; “he will say, ‘I say to you’”) here, while some have only ἐρεῖ ὑμῖν (“he will say to you” in א 579 lat sa) or simply ἐρεῖ (“he will say” in 1195). The variety of readings seems to have arisen from the somewhat unusual wording of the initial text, ἐρεῖ λέγων ὑμῖν (erei legōn humin; “he will say, saying to you” found in P^75c B 892). Given the indicative λέγω, it is difficult to explain how the other readings would have arisen. But if the participle λέγων were original, the other readings can more easily be explained as arising from it. Although the external evidence is significantly stronger in support of the indicative reading, the internal evidence is on the side of the participle.

¹ tn Verses 22-23a read in Hebrew, “I did not speak with your ancestors, and I did not command them when I brought them out of Egypt, about words/matters concerning burnt offering and sacrifice, but I commanded them this word:” Some modern commentators have explained this passage as an evidence for the lateness of the Pentateuchal instruction regarding sacrifice or a denial that sacrifice was practiced during the period of the wilderness wandering. However, it is better explained as an example of what R. de Vaux calls a dialectical negative, i.e., “not so much this as that” or “not this without that” (Ancient Israel, 454-56). For other examples of this same argument see Isa 1:10-17; Hos 6:4-6; Amos 5:21-25.

¹ tn Heb “Your hand was filled.” The phrase “fill your hands” is a familiar expression having to do with commissioning and devotion to a task that is earlier used in 28:41; 29:9, 29, 33, 35. This has usually been explained as a Qal imperative. S. R. Driver explains it “Fill your hand today,” meaning, take a sacrifice to God and be installed in the priesthood (Exodus, 355). But it probably is a Piel perfect, meaning “they have filled your hands today,” or, “your hand was filled today.” This was an expression meant to say that they had been faithful to God even though it turned them against family and friends—but God would give them a blessing.

² sn U. Cassuto (Exodus, 164) explains this statement by the people as follows: “The question appears surprising at first, for we have not read previously that such words were spoken to Moses. Nor is the purport of the protest of the Israelite foremen (v 21 [5:21]) identical with that of the words uttered now. However, from a psychological standpoint the matter can be easily explained. In the hour of peril the children of Israel remember that remonstrance, and now it seems to them that it was of a sharper character and flowed from their foresight, and that the present situation justifies it, for death awaits them at this moment in the desert.” This declaration that “we told you so,” born of fright, need not have been strictly accurate or logical.

¹ tn Once again there is the (by now familiar) problem of determining whether the referent of this phrase (1) precedes or (2) follows. Here there are two ὅτι (hoti) clauses which follow, both of which are epexegetical to the phrase ἐν τούτῳ (en toutō) and explain what the love of God consists of: first, stated negatively, “not that we have loved God,” and then positively, “but that he loved us and sent his Son to be the atoning sacrifice for our sins.”

¹ tc Most later mss, including some significant ones (P 5 81 436 442 1735 2344 2492 M) have θεόν (theon, “God”) instead of Χριστόν (Christon; “Christ”) here. But Χριστόν is widely supported by excellent and early witnesses (P⁷² א A B C Ψ 33 1175 1243 1611 1739 1852 latt sy co), and as a less common idiom better explains the rise of the other reading.

¹ tc Most mss (א* D² H 33^vid 1241 M al) have ἐν Χριστῷ (en Christō) after λέγω (legō) to read “I am telling the truth in Christ,” but this is probably an assimilation to Rom 9:1. Further, the witnesses that lack this phrase are early, significant, and well distributed (א² A D* F G P Ψ 6 81 1175 1739 1881 al lat sy co). It is difficult to explain the shorter reading if it is not authentic.

³ tc Most Western and Byzantine witnesses, along with a few others (א² D F G Ψ 0278 1505 1881 2464 M lat sy), have “of our Lord Jesus Christ” after “Father,” but such an edifying phrase cannot explain the rise of the reading that lacks it, especially when the shorter reading is attested by early and significant witnesses such as P⁴⁶ א* A B C P 6 33 81 365 1175 1739 co Or Hier.

⁴ sn The faith that is through Jesus. Note how this verse explains how the claim to “faith in Jesus’ name” works and what it means. To appeal to the name is to point to the person. It is not clear that the man expressed faith before the miracle. This could well be a “grace-faith miracle” where God grants power through the apostles to picture how much a gift life is (Luke 17:11-19). Christology and grace are emphasized here.

⁵ sn Where then do you get this living water? The woman’s reply is an example of the “misunderstood statement,” a technique appearing frequently in John’s Gospel. Jesus was speaking of living water which was spiritual (ultimately a Johannine figure for the Holy Spirit, see John 7:38-39), but the woman thought he was speaking of flowing (fresh drinkable) water. Her misunderstanding gave Jesus the opportunity to explain what he really meant.

¹ sn Although the author thought of the town as in Galilee (12:21), Bethsaida technically was in Gaulanitis (Philip the Tetrarch’s territory) across from Herod’s Galilee. There may have been two places called Bethsaida, or this may merely reflect popular imprecision—locally it was considered part of Galilee, even though it was just east of the Jordan river. This territory was heavily Gentile (which may explain why Andrew and Philip both have Gentile names).

¹ tc The text reads either “two other criminals” or “others, two criminals.” The first reading (found in P⁷⁵ א B) could be read as describing Jesus as a criminal, while the second (found in A C D L W Θ Ψ 070 0250 ƒ^1,13 33 M) looks like an attempt to prevent this identification. The first reading, more difficult to explain from the other, is likely autographic.

⁴ tc Most mss (א A C D W Θ Ψ 070 ƒ¹³ 33^vid M it) read at the end of the verse “may your will be done on earth as [it is] in heaven,” making this version parallel to Matt 6:10. The shorter reading is found, however, in weighty mss (P⁷⁵ B L), and cannot be easily explained as arising from the longer reading.

³ tc ‡ αὐτόν (auton, “him”) is found after πείσομεν (peisomen, “we will satisfy”) in the majority of witnesses, though it seems to be motivated by a need for clarification and cannot therefore easily explain the rise of the shorter reading (which is found in א B Θ 33 pc). Nevertheless, English style requires the pronoun. NA²⁸ includes the word in brackets, indicating doubts as to its authenticity.

² tc For the MT reading לָכֵן עֲנִיֵּי (lakhen ʿaniyye, “therefore the [most] afflicted of”) the LXX presupposes לִכְנַעֲנִיֵּי (likh^enaʿaniyye, “to the merchants of”). The line would then read “So I began to shepherd the flock destined for slaughter for the sheep merchants” (cf. NAB). This helps to explain the difficult לָכֵן (lakhen) here but otherwise has no attestation or justification, so the MT is followed by most modern English versions.

³ tc The MT reads, “we will not die,” but an ancient scribal tradition has “you [i.e., God] will not die.” This is preferred as a more difficult reading that can explain the rise of the other variant. Later scribes who copied the manuscripts did not want to associate the idea of death with God in any way, so they softened the statement to refer to humanity.

² sn The following verses explain what it meant to seek the Lord. Israel was to abandon the mere formalism and distorted view of God and reality that characterized religious activity at the worship sites, as well as the social injustice that permeated Israelite society. Instead the people were to repent and promote justice in the land. This call to seek the Lord echoes the challenge in 4:13 to prepare to meet him as he truly is.

¹ sn Dan 8:1 marks the switch from Aramaic (= 2:4b-7:28) back to Hebrew as the language in which the book is written in its present form. The remainder of the book from this point on (8:1-12:13) is in Hebrew. The bilingual nature of the book has been variously explained, but it most likely has to do with the book’s transmission history; see the note at 2:4.