John 6

Translator Notes

1. The double designation — 'Sea of Galilee' (the traditional Jewish name) and 'Sea of Tiberias' (the Roman name, from the city Herod Antipas built and named for Emperor Tiberius) — accommodates both Jewish and Gentile readers. A considerable time gap separates chapters 5 and 6; Jesus has moved from Jerusalem back to Galilee.

Translator Notes

1. The imperfect tenses ekolouthei ('kept following') and etheoroun ('were seeing') indicate ongoing action — the crowd's pursuit is persistent. Their motivation is the signs (semeia), confirming the pattern of sign-based faith that Jesus has questioned (2:23-25, 4:48). John mentions healing signs not described in his narrative, indicating selectivity in his account.

Translator Notes

1. The definite article to oros ('the mountain') may indicate a specific well-known hill on the eastern shore of the Sea of Galilee, or may evoke Mount Sinai, where Moses received the Torah and the manna provision was first given. Jesus's posture of sitting (ekatheto) is the position of a teacher in Jewish tradition.

Translator Notes

1. This is the second Passover in John's Gospel (cf. 2:13), providing the theological backdrop for the entire chapter. The feeding miracle and the Bread of Life discourse gain their deepest meaning against the Passover context — Jesus is the new Passover bread, the true manna from heaven. The note 'festival of the Jewish people' continues John's practice of explaining Jewish customs for a mixed audience.

Translator Notes

1. Jesus initiates the encounter with a question — as with the woman at the well (4:7), he begins from a point of human need. The question is addressed specifically to Philip, possibly because Philip was from Bethsaida (1:44), near the likely location. The word pothen ('where, from what source') echoes the theological question of origins that runs through the Gospel (cf. 2:9, 4:11, 7:27-28).

Translator Notes

1. The narrator's aside reveals that Jesus's question is not born of uncertainty but serves as a test (peirazon, 'testing, proving') of Philip's faith. The verb edei ('he knew') attributes supernatural foreknowledge to Jesus, consistent with 1:48, 2:24-25. The test exposes whether Philip will think in human or divine categories.

Translator Notes

1. Philip answers in economic terms — two hundred denarii represents roughly eight months' wages for a laborer. His calculation is practical but faithless; he evaluates the problem from a purely human resource perspective. The response fails the test: Philip sees only the impossibility rather than the one who is asking the question.

Translator Notes

1. Andrew is again identified through his relationship to Simon Peter (cf. 1:40). Andrew's contribution, while modest, at least brings available resources to Jesus's attention — a pattern consistent with his role as the disciple who brings people to Jesus (1:41-42, 12:22).

Translator Notes

1. The word paidarion ('boy, young lad') is a diminutive, emphasizing the smallness of the source. Barley loaves (artous krithinous) were the bread of the poor — wheat was more expensive. The detail echoes the Elisha miracle in 2 Kings 4:42-44, where twenty barley loaves fed a hundred men. Andrew's question 'what are these among so many?' expresses the same logic as Philip's calculation — human resources are comically inadequate.
2. [TCR Cross-Reference] Echoes 2 Kings 4:42-44. See the TCR's OT rendering for the Hebrew behind this passage and the translation rationale.

Translator Notes

1. The detail 'plenty of grass' (chortos polys) is an eyewitness memory consistent with springtime near Passover. The number five thousand (pentakischilioi) counts only the men (andres), as Matthew 14:21 explicitly notes ('besides women and children'). The verb anapesein ('to recline, to sit down') is the posture for a formal meal, suggesting Jesus is hosting a banquet — the messianic banquet prefigured.

Translator Notes

1. The verb eucharistesas ('having given thanks') is the root of 'Eucharist' and creates a clear connection to the Last Supper tradition and early Christian meal practice. In John's account, Jesus distributes directly to the crowd (unlike the Synoptics, where the disciples serve as intermediaries). The phrase hoson ethelon ('as much as they wanted') emphasizes abundance — there is no rationing.

Translator Notes

1. The verb eneplesthesan ('were satisfied, were filled') indicates complete satiation, not mere taste. The command to gather leftovers (ta perisseusanta klasmata, 'the surplus fragments') serves both a practical and symbolic function. The verb apoletai ('be lost, be wasted, perish') is the same word used in 3:16 for perishing — John may intend a deeper resonance about God's intention that nothing and no one be lost.

Translator Notes

1. The twelve baskets (dodeka kophinous) likely correspond to the twelve tribes of Israel — the provision is abundant enough for all God's people with surplus to spare. The kophinos was a large wicker basket distinctively Jewish in use. Five loaves produce twelve baskets of surplus — the mathematics of divine provision inverts human calculation.

Translator Notes

1. The crowd identifies Jesus as 'the Prophet' (ho prophetes) — the Moses-like figure promised in Deuteronomy 18:15-18. The connection is logical: Moses gave manna, Jesus gives bread. But as the discourse will show, their understanding is superficial — they want a political deliverer who provides free food, not the bread of life that gives eternal sustenance.
2. [TCR Cross-Reference] Echoes Deuteronomy 18:15-18. See the TCR's OT rendering for the Hebrew behind this passage and the translation rationale.

Translator Notes

1. The verb harpazein ('to seize, to snatch, to take by force') reveals the crowd's intention to impose a political kingship on Jesus. This confirms that their identification of Jesus as 'the Prophet' (v. 14) was politically motivated. Jesus withdraws to prevent the misappropriation of his mission — he will be king, but not on their terms. The phrase 'by himself alone' (autos monos) emphasizes his solitary retreat, possibly for prayer (cf. Mark 6:46).

Translator Notes

1. The transition to the walking-on-water narrative begins. The disciples descend from the mountain to the lake shore without Jesus. The sequence — bread in the wilderness, crossing the sea — mirrors the Exodus pattern (manna in Exodus 16, Red Sea crossing in Exodus 14), though in reverse chronological order.
2. [TCR Cross-Reference] Quotes Exodus 16. The TCR rendering of that OT passage preserves the Hebrew source text and documents the translation decisions behind it.
3. [TCR Cross-Reference] Quotes Exodus 14. The TCR rendering of that OT passage preserves the Hebrew source text and documents the translation decisions behind it.

Translator Notes

1. The note that it was 'already dark' (skotia ede egegenei) carries Johannine symbolic weight — darkness represents the absence of Jesus, who is the light (1:4-5, 8:12). The phrase 'Jesus had not yet come to them' heightens the sense of vulnerability and separation.

Translator Notes

1. The Sea of Galilee (actually a large freshwater lake, about 13 miles long and 8 miles wide) is susceptible to sudden, violent storms when cool air from the surrounding hills descends onto the warm lake surface. The imperfect diegeireto ('was being stirred up, was becoming rough') describes an escalating danger.

Translator Notes

1. Twenty-five to thirty stadia equals approximately three to four miles — roughly halfway across the lake at its widest point. They are in the middle of the sea, in the dark, in a storm. The phrase peripatounta epi tes thalasses ('walking on the sea') is unambiguous — epi with the genitive means 'on, upon.' The word ephobethesan ('they were frightened') captures the terror of seeing a figure walking on water in a storm at night. The Old Testament presents walking on water as a divine prerogative (Job 9:8, Psalm 77:19).
2. [TCR Cross-Reference] Echoes Job 9:8. See the TCR's OT rendering for the Hebrew behind this passage and the translation rationale.
3. [TCR Cross-Reference] Echoes Psalm 77:19. See the TCR's OT rendering for the Hebrew behind this passage and the translation rationale.

Key Terms

Translator Notes

1. The phrase ego eimi ('I am') functions on two levels: as simple self-identification ('It is I') and as a divine self-declaration echoing the divine name (Exodus 3:14). In context — walking on water during a storm, a divine prerogative — the deeper resonance is unmistakable. The command 'do not be afraid' (me phobeisthe) echoes the Old Testament theophany pattern, where God's appearance is typically accompanied by reassurance (Genesis 15:1, Isaiah 41:10, 43:1).
2. [TCR Cross-Reference] This verse quotes Exodus 3:14 — see the TCR rendering of that passage for the Hebrew source text and translation decisions.
3. [TCR Cross-Reference] This verse quotes Genesis 15:1 — see the TCR rendering of that passage for the Hebrew source text and translation decisions.
4. [TCR Cross-Reference] This verse quotes Isaiah 41:10 — see the TCR rendering of that passage for the Hebrew source text and translation decisions.

Translator Notes

1. John adds a detail absent from the Synoptic accounts: the boat immediately (eutheos) arrived at shore. This may be another miraculous element — instantaneous transportation — or may simply mean the remainder of the crossing passed quickly once Jesus was aboard. The verb ethelon ('were willing, wanted to') suggests their fear gave way to welcome.

Translator Notes

1. This complicated verse establishes the crowd's perplexity — they know Jesus did not board the only available boat with his disciples. How then did he get to Capernaum? John leaves the question unanswered for the crowd, letting the mystery of the sea-walking remain implicit rather than narrated publicly.

Translator Notes

1. This parenthetical explains how the crowd was able to follow Jesus across the lake — additional boats arrived from the city of Tiberias. The phrase 'after the Lord had given thanks' (eucharistesantos tou kyriou) recalls 6:11 and is the narrator's characteristic use of the title kyrios ('Lord') for Jesus.

Translator Notes

1. The crowd pursues Jesus across the lake, motivated by the sign they witnessed. The verb zetountes ('seeking, looking for') will be picked up by Jesus in verse 26 — they seek him, but for the wrong reasons.

Translator Notes

1. The crowd's question 'when did you get here?' implicitly asks 'how did you get here?' — since they know he did not take the only boat. Jesus does not answer their question but redirects the conversation to their true motivations.

Translator Notes

1. Jesus exposes their motivation: they did not come because they understood the signs (semeia, pointing to Jesus's identity) but because they got a free meal. They saw 'signs' but did not truly 'see' them — the miraculous provision did not lead them to perceive who Jesus is. The verb echortasthete ('were filled, were satisfied') is the same word used for feeding animals in some contexts, suggesting consumption without comprehension.

Translator Notes

1. Jesus redirects their effort (ergazesthe, 'work, labor') from temporal food to eternal food. The contrast between 'food that perishes' (ten brosin ten apollymenen) and 'food that endures' (ten brosin ten menousan) echoes the water conversation with the Samaritan woman (4:13-14). The Son of Man is both the giver and the gift. The 'seal' (esphragisen) is a mark of authentication and ownership — God has certified Jesus as the authorized source of eternal nourishment.

Translator Notes

1. The crowd's question assumes that obtaining this food requires human effort — 'works of God' (ta erga tou theou) means 'the works God requires.' They think in terms of religious performance. Jesus's answer will subvert their entire framework.

Translator Notes

1. Jesus reduces the plural 'works' to a single 'work' (to ergon) — faith. The many required works collapse into one: believing in Jesus. The present subjunctive pisteuete ('that you believe, keep believing') suggests ongoing faith, not a one-time decision. This answer redefines the entire religious economy: the 'work' God requires is not human effort but receptive trust in God's sent one.

Translator Notes

1. The demand for a sign is remarkable — they have just witnessed the feeding of five thousand and crossed the lake to find Jesus because of it. Yet they ask for another sign. The logic seems to be: Moses gave manna for forty years; you gave bread once. If you claim to surpass Moses, prove it with an ongoing provision. Their faith is transactional: they will believe if given sufficient evidence, on their terms.

Translator Notes

1. The crowd cites Psalm 78:24 (or possibly Exodus 16:4, 15; Nehemiah 9:15). The quotation becomes the text for Jesus's discourse — he will offer a rabbinic-style commentary on 'bread from heaven.' The crowd uses the manna tradition to challenge Jesus: Moses gave bread from heaven for decades; what can you offer that compares?
2. [TCR Cross-Reference] Quotes Exodus 16:4. The TCR rendering of that OT passage preserves the Hebrew source text and documents the translation decisions behind it.
3. [TCR Cross-Reference] Quotes Psalm 78:24. The TCR rendering of that OT passage preserves the Hebrew source text and documents the translation decisions behind it.
4. [TCR Cross-Reference] Quotes Nehemiah 9:15. The TCR rendering of that OT passage preserves the Hebrew source text and documents the translation decisions behind it.

Translator Notes

1. Jesus corrects two errors in their argument: (1) Moses was not the source — God was; (2) the manna was not the true bread from heaven — it was a pointer to the reality now being revealed. The shift from past tense dedoken ('gave') to present tense didosin ('gives') is significant: the true bread is being given now, in the present moment. The adjective alethinon ('true, genuine, real') distinguishes the ultimate reality from the type that foreshadowed it.

Translator Notes

1. The participle katabainon ('the one coming down') shifts from neuter ('that which comes down') to masculine — the bread is a person, not a substance. The scope is again universal: 'life to the world' (zoen to kosmo), not merely to Israel. The manna fed Israel in the wilderness; this bread gives life to the entire world.

Translator Notes

1. Like the Samaritan woman's 'give me this water' (4:15), the crowd requests the gift while still understanding it physically. The adverb pantote ('always, at all times') reveals their desire for a permanent food supply. They will soon learn that the bread Jesus offers is himself — a claim that will divide them.

Key Terms

Translator Notes

1. This is the first of the seven great 'I am' statements with a predicate in John's Gospel: ego eimi ho artos tes zoes ('I am the bread of life'). Jesus does not merely provide bread — he is the bread. 'Coming' and 'believing' are parallel actions describing the same movement of faith. The double negative ou me ('never') is the strongest possible assurance of permanent satisfaction.

Translator Notes

1. Seeing and not believing is the persistent failure of the crowd. They have seen both the sign (feeding) and the sign-giver (Jesus himself), yet refuse the faith that seeing should produce. This verse transitions into the theological section about the Father's drawing and the Son's preservation of those who come.

Translator Notes

1. This verse holds two realities in tension: divine initiative (the Father 'gives' people to the Son) and human responsibility (the one who 'comes'). The neuter pan ('everything, all') in the first clause treats those given as a collective whole; the masculine ton erchomenon ('the one coming') in the second clause treats each person individually. The double negative ou me ekbalo ('I will never cast out') is an absolute guarantee of reception.

Translator Notes

1. The perfect tense katabebeka ('I have come down') indicates a completed descent with ongoing presence. Jesus's will is entirely submitted to the Father's will — a claim of perfect obedience that echoes 4:34 and 5:30. This verse provides the theological basis for the assurance of verse 37: Jesus will never reject anyone the Father sends because rejecting them would be disobeying the Father.

Translator Notes

1. The Father's will is stated with crystalline clarity: zero loss and final resurrection. The verb apoleso ('lose, destroy') is the same word as 'perish' in 3:16 — what God wills is that none of his given ones perish. The phrase te eschate hemera ('on the last day') introduces future eschatology alongside the realized eschatology of verse 24. The resurrection promise will be repeated four times in this discourse (vv. 39, 40, 44, 54).

Translator Notes

1. Verse 39 stated the Father's will in terms of preservation (not losing any); verse 40 states it in terms of human response (seeing and believing). Both perspectives are true simultaneously — divine keeping and human believing are not alternatives but complementary. The verb theoron ('seeing, beholding') implies more than glancing — it means perceiving, contemplating, recognizing Jesus for who he is.

Translator Notes

1. The verb egongyzon ('were grumbling, were murmuring') deliberately echoes Israel's murmuring against Moses in the wilderness (Exodus 16:2, 7-9; Numbers 11:1). The typological parallel is precise: as Israel grumbled against Moses when given bread from heaven, so these leaders grumble against Jesus when he claims to be the bread from heaven. History repeats its pattern of unbelief.
2. [TCR Cross-Reference] Quotes Exodus 16:2. The TCR rendering of that OT passage preserves the Hebrew source text and documents the translation decisions behind it.
3. [TCR Cross-Reference] Quotes Numbers 11:1. The TCR rendering of that OT passage preserves the Hebrew source text and documents the translation decisions behind it.

Translator Notes

1. The objection is based on familiarity — they know his human family and therefore reject his heavenly origin. The question 'whose father and mother we know' assumes that known parentage excludes divine origin. The irony is thick: they think they know his father (Joseph), but they do not know his true Father (God). This is the same stumbling block Nathanael initially faced ('Can anything good come from Nazareth?' 1:46).

Translator Notes

1. The command me goggyzete ('stop grumbling') directly echoes Moses's rebuke of Israel in Exodus 16:8-9. Jesus assumes Moses's role in the wilderness narrative, further establishing the typological parallel.
2. [TCR Cross-Reference] References Exodus 16:8-9 — the TCR OT rendering of that text provides the Hebrew source and explains the translation decisions involved.

Translator Notes

1. The verb helkyse ('draws, attracts, drags') is a strong word — it is used for drawing a net (21:6), drawing a sword (18:10), and drawing Paul through the streets (Acts 16:19). This is not gentle persuasion but decisive, powerful attraction. The claim is that coming to Jesus requires divine initiative — apart from the Father's drawing, no one can come. The third repetition of 'I will raise them up on the last day' reinforces the resurrection promise.

Translator Notes

1. The quotation is from Isaiah 54:13, part of the new covenant vision. Being 'taught by God' (didaktoi theou) means direct divine instruction — those who are open to God's teaching recognize Jesus. The logic is: if you have truly heard and learned from the Father, you will come to the Son, because the Father's teaching leads to the Son.
2. [TCR Cross-Reference] This verse quotes Isaiah 54:13 — see the TCR rendering of that passage for the Hebrew source text and translation decisions.

Translator Notes

1. Jesus qualifies verse 45: being 'taught by God' does not mean anyone has seen God directly. Only the one who is 'from God' (para tou theou) — Jesus himself — has seen the Father (cf. 1:18). All human knowledge of God is mediated through the Son.

Translator Notes

1. The statement is stark in its simplicity: belief equals eternal life, present tense. The SBLGNT does not include 'in me' (eis eme) though some manuscripts add it; the object of belief is clear from context. This is a restatement of 3:16 and 5:24 in its most compressed form.

Translator Notes

1. The 'I am' statement from verse 35 is repeated, now functioning as the transition to the more scandalous claims that follow. The repetition creates emphasis and marks the beginning of the discourse's intensification.

Translator Notes

1. The manna's limitation is stated bluntly: those who ate it died. Physical bread, even miraculously given, cannot prevent death. This establishes the need for a different kind of bread — one that conquers death itself.

Translator Notes

1. The bread from heaven surpasses the manna in its essential quality: it prevents death. The phrase me apothane ('not die') refers to spiritual/eternal death, not physical death — Jesus's followers still die physically, but death no longer has the final word.

Translator Notes

1. The discourse reaches its most provocative claim: the bread is his flesh (he sarx mou). The word sarx ('flesh') echoes 1:14 ('the Word became flesh') and now receives a sacrificial dimension — this flesh is given 'for the life of the world' (hyper tes tou kosmou zoes). The preposition hyper ('for, on behalf of') indicates substitutionary sacrifice. The shift from metaphor to shocking literalism sets up the controversy of the next verses.

Translator Notes

1. The verb emachonto ('were fighting, were disputing') indicates heated argument, not merely questioning. Their question 'How can this man give us his flesh to eat?' takes Jesus's words at face value and finds them absurd and offensive. Eating human flesh would violate every dietary and moral law they knew. Jesus does not soften the claim in response — he intensifies it.

Translator Notes

1. Rather than moderating the offensive claim, Jesus escalates it by adding 'drink his blood' — an absolute prohibition in Jewish law (Genesis 9:4, Leviticus 17:10-14). The double requirement (eating flesh and drinking blood) and the negative conditional (unless... you have no life) make this the most scandalous statement in Jesus's public ministry. Whether understood sacramentally (Eucharist), metaphorically (total appropriation of Jesus's sacrificial death by faith), or both, the language is deliberately confrontational.
2. [TCR Cross-Reference] References Genesis 9:4 — the TCR OT rendering of that text provides the Hebrew source and explains the translation decisions involved.
3. [TCR Cross-Reference] References Leviticus 17:10-14 — the TCR OT rendering of that text provides the Hebrew source and explains the translation decisions involved.

Translator Notes

1. The verb shifts from phago ('to eat,' used earlier) to trogo ('to chew, to munch, to gnaw') — a more visceral, physical word that intensifies the scandal. This is the fourth occurrence of 'I will raise them up on the last day' (cf. vv. 39, 40, 44), making the resurrection promise the drumbeat of the entire discourse.

Translator Notes

1. The adjective alethes ('true, genuine') in the SBLGNT (some manuscripts read alethōs, 'truly') means that Jesus's flesh and blood are the authentic reality of which all other food and drink are shadows. This is not metaphor diminishing into symbol but reality claiming its full weight.

Translator Notes

1. The mutual indwelling language — 'remains in me and I in them' (en emoi menei kago en auto) — introduces the abiding theme that will be fully developed in the Farewell Discourse (chapters 14-17, especially 15:1-11). Eating and drinking create a relationship of mutual inhabitation between the believer and Christ.

Translator Notes

1. The chain of life is explicit: the Father (source of life) gives life to the Son, and the Son gives life to the believer. The phrase 'the living Father' (ho zon pater) is unique in the New Testament and identifies the Father as the ultimate source of all life. The preposition dia ('because of, through') indicates that Jesus's life is derived from the Father, and the believer's life is derived from Jesus.

Translator Notes

1. The discourse concludes by returning to its starting point — the contrast with the manna — creating an inclusio. The manna sustained life temporarily; this bread gives life forever. The verb trogo ('feeds on') maintains the visceral language to the end. The final promise — zesei eis ton aiona ('will live forever') — is the discourse's ultimate claim.

Translator Notes

1. The narrator identifies the setting: a synagogue in Capernaum. This context confirms that the Bread of Life discourse is a formal teaching, delivered in a liturgical setting where Scripture would have been read and expounded. The synagogue setting makes the desertion that follows even more dramatic — these are not casual listeners but members of the worshiping community.

Translator Notes

1. The word skleros ('hard, harsh, offensive') does not mean difficult to understand but difficult to accept. They understand the claim well enough — and find it intolerable. The 'disciples' (mathetai) here are the broader group of followers, not just the Twelve. The question 'who can hear it?' (tis dynatai autou akouein) means 'who can bear to listen to this?'

Translator Notes

1. The verb skandalizei ('offend, cause to stumble, shock') is strong — the teaching is a stumbling block, an obstacle to continued following. Jesus knows their reaction before they express it (cf. 2:25) and addresses it directly without softening the teaching.

Translator Notes

1. The sentence is deliberately incomplete — Jesus leaves the conclusion unstated. Will the ascension confirm or resolve their offense? The phrase 'where he was before' (hopou en to proteron) asserts pre-existence: the Son of Man was in heaven before his descent. The ascension will prove that his heavenly origin claims are true.

Translator Notes

1. This verse is the interpretive key to the entire discourse. 'The flesh is of no help' (he sarx ouk ophelei ouden) does not retract the flesh-eating language but clarifies the mode of reception: the discourse cannot be understood at the level of flesh (human reasoning, physical consumption) but only through the Spirit. Jesus's words are 'spirit and life' — they carry the Spirit's life-giving power and must be received in the Spirit.

Translator Notes

1. The narrator's aside reveals that Jesus's knowledge extends to the identity of the unbelievers within his own circle and to the identity of his future betrayer. The phrase ex arches ('from the beginning') indicates this was not a gradual discovery but foreknowledge. The first mention of betrayal (paradoson, 'the one who would hand over') in John's Gospel — an ominous foreshadowing.

Translator Notes

1. Jesus restates the divine initiative of verse 44 — coming to him is not a human achievement but a divine gift. The perfect passive participle dedomenon ('having been given, granted') emphasizes that the ability to come is God's prior work. The 'therefore' (dia touto) connects unbelief to the absence of this divine enablement.

Translator Notes

1. The phrase apelthon eis ta opiso ('went back, turned away') is the language of apostasy — they reverse course and abandon discipleship. The imperfect periepatoun ('were walking') with the negative ouketi ('no longer') indicates a permanent departure, not a temporary wavering. This is the greatest crisis of faith in Jesus's ministry as John narrates it.

Translator Notes

1. This is the only place in John's Gospel where 'the Twelve' (tois dodeka) are mentioned as a distinct group. The question me kai hymeis thelete ('you don't want to go too, do you?') uses the particle me, which expects a negative answer, but the possibility is real. Jesus does not compel anyone to stay — he offers the freedom to leave.

Translator Notes

1. Peter's response is not a triumphant confession but an honest acknowledgment of having no alternative. The question 'to whom would we go?' admits the difficulty of the teaching while recognizing that there is no other source of 'words of eternal life' (remata zoes aioniou). Peter does not say 'we understand' but 'we have nowhere else to go.' This is faith in the face of incomprehension.

Translator Notes

1. The SBLGNT reads 'the Holy One of God' (ho hagios tou theou) rather than 'the Christ, the Son of the living God' found in some manuscripts (influenced by Matthew 16:16). The title 'Holy One of God' appears in Mark 1:24 on the lips of a demon. The perfect tenses pepistukamen ('we have believed') and egnokamen ('we have known') indicate settled, ongoing conviction. The order is significant: belief leads to knowledge, not the reverse.

Translator Notes

1. The word diabolos ('devil, accuser, slanderer') is shocking when applied to a disciple. Jesus affirms that he chose all twelve deliberately (exelexamen, 'I selected'), including the one who will betray him. The divine foreknowledge of verse 64 is now applied directly. The presence of a betrayer within the chosen circle is a mystery Jesus acknowledges but does not explain.

Translator Notes

1. The narrator identifies the betrayer by full name: Judas, son of Simon Iscariot. The designation 'Iscariot' (Iskariōtou) may derive from the Hebrew ish-Qeriyyot ('man of Kerioth'), indicating Judas's origin in a Judean town — making him possibly the only non-Galilean among the Twelve. The phrase 'one of the Twelve' (heis on ek ton dodeka) emphasizes the insider nature of the betrayal. The imperfect emellen ('was going to') indicates this was settled in advance.