¹ tc The words οἱ περιλειπόμενοι (hoi perileipomenoi, “[the ones] who are left”) are lacking in F G 0226^vid ar b as well as a few fathers, but the rest of the textual tradition has the words. Most likely, the Western mss omitted the words because of perceived redundancy with οἱ ζῶντες (hoi zōntes, “[the ones] who are alive”).

¹ tn The use of the article τά (ta) with τέκνα (tekna) functions in a generic way to distinguish this group from husbands, wives, fathers and slaves and is left, therefore, untranslated. The generic article is used with γύναῖκες (gunaikes) in 5:22, ἄνδρες (andres) in 5:25, δοῦλοι (douloi) in 6:5, and κύριοι (kurioi) in 6:9.

¹ tn Grk “just as.” Eph 1:3-14 are one long sentence in Greek that must be broken up in English translation. Verse 4 expresses the reason why God the Father is blessed (cf. BDAG 494 s.v. καθώς 3).

⁴ sn In Christ. KJV has “in himself” as though the antecedent were God the Father. Although possible, the notion of the verb set forth (Greek προτίθημι, protithēmi) implies a plan that is carried out in history (cf. Rom 1:13; 3:25) and thus more likely refers to Christ.

¹ tc The phrase “in Christ Jesus” is found after “For” in some mss (א A C D F G 0278 1881 2464 M lat bo), but lacking in P⁴⁶ B Ψ 33 1175 1505 1739* and several fathers. The longer reading probably represents a scribal harmonization to Gal 5:6.

⁵ sn His father was Greek. Under Jewish law at least as early as the 2nd century, a person was considered Jewish if his or her mother was Jewish. It is not certain whether such a law was in effect in the 1st century, but even if it was, Timothy would not have been accepted as fully Jewish because he was not circumcised.

⁵ sn His father was a Greek. Timothy was the offspring of a mixed marriage between a Jewish woman (see 2 Tim 1:5) and a Gentile man. On mixed marriages in Judaism, see Neh 13:23-27; Ezra 9:1-10:44; Mal 2:10-16; Jub. 30:7-17; m. Qiddushin 3.12; m. Yevamot 7.5.

³ sn You are my Son. The key to how the quotation is used is the naming of Jesus as “Son” to the Father. The language is that of kingship, as Ps 2 indicates. Here is the promise about what the ultimate Davidic heir would be.

⁴ tn Grk “I have begotten you.” The traditional translation for γεγέννηκα (gegennēka, “begotten”) is misleading to the modern English reader because it is no longer in common use. Today one speaks of “fathering” a child in much the same way speakers of English formerly spoke of “begetting a child.”

³ sn Our. Stephen spoke of “our” ancestors (Grk “fathers”) in an inclusive sense throughout the speech until his rebuke in v. 51, where the nation does what “your” ancestors did, at which point an exclusive pronoun is used. This serves to emphasize the rebuke.

³ tn The aorist participle λαβών (labōn) could be taken temporally: “So then, after he was exalted…and received from the Father the promised Holy Spirit.” In the translation the more neutral “having received” was used to preserve the ambiguity of the original Greek.

¹ sn The promise refers to the promise of the Holy Spirit that Jesus received from the Father in 2:33 and which he now pours out on others. The promise consists of the Holy Spirit (see note in 2:33). Jesus is the active mediator of God’s blessing.

⁷ tn Grk “While he was with them, he ordered them not to leave Jerusalem, but to wait there for ‘what my Father promised, which you heard about from me.’” This verse moves from indirect to direct discourse. This abrupt change is very awkward, so the entire quotation has been rendered as direct discourse in the translation.

³ sn The Farewell Discourse proper closes on the triumphant note I have conquered the world, which recalls 1:5 (in the prologue): “the light shines on in the darkness, but the darkness has not mastered it.” Jesus’ words which follow in chap. 17 are addressed not to the disciples but to his Father, as he prays for the consecration of the disciples.

¹ tn Grk “his”; the referent (Christ) has been specified in the translation for clarity. The referent supplied here is “Christ” rather than “Jesus” because it involves what Isaiah saw. It is clear that the author presents Isaiah as having seen the preincarnate glory of Christ, which was the very revelation of the Father (see John 1:18; John 14:9).

¹ sn Jesus says that in the final analysis, the deeds he did should indicate whether he was truly from the Father. If the authorities could not believe in him, it would be better to believe in the deeds he did than not to believe at all.

² tn The phrase ἕν ἐσμεν (hen esmen) is a significant assertion with trinitarian implications. ἕν is neuter, not masculine, so the assertion is not that Jesus and the Father are one person, but one “thing.” Identity of the two persons is not what is asserted, but essential unity (unity of essence).

² sn This is a parenthetical note by the author. Why does he comment on the meaning of the name of the pool? Here, the significance is that the Father sent the Son, and the Son sent the man born blind. The name of the pool is applicable to the man, but also to Jesus himself, who was sent from heaven.

¹ sn Do not work for the food that disappears. Note the wordplay on “work” here. This does not imply “working” for salvation, since the “work” is later explained (in John 6:29) as “to believe in the one whom he (the Father) sent.”

¹ sn To whom does another refer? To John the Baptist or to the Father? In the nearer context, v. 33, it would seem to be John the Baptist. But v. 34 seems to indicate that Jesus does not receive testimony from men. Probably it is better to view v. 32 as identical to v. 37, with the comments about the Baptist as a parenthetical digression.