KJV: There were together Simon Peter, and Thomas called Didymus, and Nathanael of Cana in Galilee, and the sons of Zebedee, and two other of his disciples.
YLT: There were together Simon Peter, and Thomas who is called Didymus, and Nathanael from Cana of Galilee, and the sons of Zebedee, and two others of his disciples.
Darby: There were together Simon Peter, and Thomas called Didymus, and Nathanael who was of Cana of Galilee, and the sons of Zebedee, and two others of his disciples.
ASV: There was together Simon Peter, and Thomas called Didymus, and Nathanael of Cana in Galilee, and the'sons of Zebedee, and two other of his disciples.
| ἦσαν | They were |
|
Parse: Verb, Imperfect Indicative Active, 3rd Person Plural Root: εἰμί Sense: to be, to exist, to happen, to be present. |
|
| ὁμοῦ | together |
|
Parse: Adverb Root: ὁμοῦ Sense: together: of persons assembled together. |
|
| Σίμων | Simon |
|
Parse: Noun, Nominative Masculine Singular Root: Σίμων Sense: Peter was one of the apostles. |
|
| Πέτρος | Peter |
|
Parse: Noun, Nominative Masculine Singular Root: Πέτρος Sense: one of the twelve disciples of Jesus. |
|
| Θωμᾶς | Thomas |
|
Parse: Noun, Nominative Masculine Singular Root: Θωμᾶς Sense: one of the apostles. |
|
| ὁ | - |
|
Parse: Article, Nominative Masculine Singular Root: ὁ Sense: this, that, these, etc. |
|
| λεγόμενος | called |
|
Parse: Verb, Present Participle Middle or Passive, Nominative Masculine Singular Root: λέγω Sense: to say, to speak. |
|
| Δίδυμος | Didymus |
|
Parse: Noun, Nominative Masculine Singular Root: Δίδυμος Sense: a surname for the apostle Thomas. |
|
| Ναθαναὴλ | Nathanael |
|
Parse: Noun, Nominative Masculine Singular Root: Ναθαναήλ Sense: an intimate disciple of Jesus Christ, he is commonly thought to be the same person as Bartholomew. |
|
| Κανᾶ | Cana |
|
Parse: Noun, Genitive Feminine Singular Root: Κανά Sense: a village in Galilee about 5 miles (8 km) NW from Nazareth. |
|
| τῆς | - |
|
Parse: Article, Genitive Feminine Singular Root: ὁ Sense: this, that, these, etc. |
|
| Γαλιλαίας | of Galilee |
|
Parse: Noun, Genitive Feminine Singular Root: Γαλιλαία Sense: the name of a region of northern Palestine, bounded on the north by Syria, on the west by Sidon, Tyre, Ptolemais and their territories and the promontory of Carmel, on the south by Samaria and on the east by the Jordan. |
|
| οἱ | the [sons] |
|
Parse: Article, Nominative Masculine Plural Root: ὁ Sense: this, that, these, etc. |
|
| τοῦ | - |
|
Parse: Article, Genitive Masculine Singular Root: ὁ Sense: this, that, these, etc. |
|
| Ζεβεδαίου | of Zebedee |
|
Parse: Noun, Genitive Masculine Singular Root: Ζεβεδαῖος Sense: a fisherman of Galilee, the father of the apostles James the Great and John, and the husband of Salome. |
|
| ἄλλοι | others |
|
Parse: Adjective, Nominative Masculine Plural Root: ἄλλος Sense: another, other. |
|
| μαθητῶν | disciples |
|
Parse: Noun, Genitive Masculine Plural Root: μαθητής Sense: a learner, pupil, disciple. |
|
| αὐτοῦ | His |
|
Parse: Personal / Possessive Pronoun, Genitive Masculine 3rd Person Singular Root: αὐτός Sense: himself, herself, themselves, itself. |
|
| δύο | two |
|
Parse: Adjective, Nominative Masculine Plural Root: δύο Sense: the two, the twain. |
|
Greek Commentary for John 21:2
These seven (Peter, Thomas, Nathanael, the sons of Zebedee, and two others). We know that the sons of Zebedee were James and John (Matthew 4:21), mentioned by name nowhere in John‘s Gospel, apparently because John is the author. We do not know who the “two others of his disciples” were, possibly Andrew and Philip. It seems to me to be crass criticism in spite of Harnack and Bernard to identify the incident here with that in Luke 5:1-11. There are a few points of similarity, but the differences are too great for such identification even with a hypothetical common source. [source]
Reverse Greek Commentary Search for John 21:2
These two words, describing the working of Joseph's mind, and evidently intended to express different phases of thought, open the question of their distinctive meanings in the New Testament, where they frequently occur ( θέλω much oftener than βούλομαι ), and where the rendering, in so many eases by the same words, furnishes no clue to the distinction. The original words are often used synonymously in eases where no distinction is emphasized; but their use in other eases reveals a radical and recognized difference. An interchange is inadmissible when the greater force of the expression requires θέλειν . For instance, βαούλεσθαι , would be entirely inappropriate at Matthew 8:3, “I will, be thou cleansed;” or at Romans 7:15. The distinction, which is abundantly illustrated in Homer, is substantially maintained by the classical writers throughout, and in the New Testament. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- Θέλειν is the stronger word, and expresses a purpose or determination or decree, the execution of which is, or is believed to be, in the power of him who wills. Βούλεσθαι expresses wish, inclination, or disposition, whether one desires to do a thing himself or wants some one else to do it. Θέλειν , therefore, denotes the active resolution, the will urging on to action. Βούλεσθαι is to have a mind, to desire, sometimes a little stronger, running into the sense of purpose. Θέλειν indicates the impulse of the will; βούλεσθαι , its tendency. Βούλεσθαι can always be rendered by θέλειν , but θέλειν cannot always be expressed by βούλεσθαι . -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- Thus, Agamemnon says, “I would not ( οὐκ ἔθελον )-DIVIDER- receive the ransom for the maid (i.e., Irefused to receive), because I greatly desire ( βούλομαι )-DIVIDER- to have her at home” (Homer, “II.,” 1:112). So Demosthenes: “It is fitting that you should be willing ( ἐθέλειν ) to listen to those who wish ( βουλομένων ) to-DIVIDER- advise” (“Olynth.,” 1:1). That is to say, It is in your power to determine whether or not you will listen to those who desire to advise you, but whose power to do so depends on your consent. Again: “If the gods will it ( θέλωσι ) and you wish it ( βούλησθε )”-DIVIDER- (Demosth., “Olynth.,” 2:20). -DIVIDER- In the New Testament, as observed above, though the words are often interchanged, the same distinction is recognized. Thus, Matthew 2:18, “Rachael would not ( ἤθελε ) be comforted;” obstinately and positively refused. Joseph, having the right and power under the (assumed) circumstances to make Mary a public example, resolved ( θέλων )-DIVIDER- to spare her this exposure. Then the question arose - What should he do? On this he thought, and, having thought ( ἐνθυμηθέντος )his mind inclined (tendency), he was minded ( ἐβουλήθη )-DIVIDER- to put her away secretly. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- Some instances of the interchanged use of the two words are the following: Mark 15:15, “Pilate willing ”-DIVIDER- ( βουλόμενος ); compare Luke 23:20, “Pilate willing ”-DIVIDER- ( θέλων ). Acts 27:43, “The centurion willing ”-DIVIDER- ( βουλόμενος ) Matthew 27:17, “Whom will ye that I release” ( θέλετε ); so Matthew 27:21. John 18:39, “Will ye that I release” ( βούλεσθε ); Matthew 14:5, “When he would have put him to death” ( θέλων ). Mark 6:48, “He would have passed by them” ( ἤθελε ); Acts 19:30, “Paul would have entered” ( βουλόμενος ). Acts 18:27, “He was disposed to pass” ( βουλόμενος ). Titus 3:8, “I will that thou affirm” ( βούλομαι ) Mark 6:25, “I will that thou give me” ( θέλω ), etc., etc. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- In the New Testament θέλω occurs in the following senses:1.A decree or determination of the will. (a ) Of God (Matthew 12:7; Romans 9:16, Romans 9:18; Acts 18:21; 1 Corinthians 4:19; 1 Corinthians 12:18; 1 Corinthians 15:38). (b ) Of Christ (Matthew 8:3; John 17:24; John 5:21; John 21:22). (c ) Of men (Acts 25:9). Festus, having the power to gratify the Jews, and determining to do so, says to Paul, who has the right to decide, “Wilt thou go up to Jerusalem?” John 6:67, Others of the disciples had decided to leave Jesus. Christ said to the twelve, “Will ye also go away?” Is that your determination? John 7:17, If any man sets his will, is determined to do God's will. John 8:44, The lusts of your father your will is set to do. Acts 24:6.2. A wish or desire. Very many of the passages, however, which are cited under this head (as by Grimm) may fairly be interpreted as implying something stronger than a wish; notably Mark 14:36, of Christ in Gethsemane. Our Lord would hardly have used what thou wilt in so feeble a sense as that of a desire or wish on God's part. Mark 10:43, “Whosoever will be great,” expresses more than the desire for greatness. It is the purpose of the life. Matthew 27:15, It was given to the Jews to decide what prisoner should be released. Luke 1:62, The name of the infant John was referred to Zacharias' decision. John 17:24, Surely Christ does more than desire that those whom the Father has given him shall be with him. Luke 9:54, It is for Jesus to command fire upon the Samaritan villages if he so wills. (See, also, John 15:7; 1 Corinthians 4:21; Matthew 16:25; Matthew 19:17; John 21:22; Matthew 13:28; Matthew 17:12.) In the sense of wish or desire may fairly be cited 2 Corinthians 11:12; Matthew 12:38; Luke 8:20; Luke 23:8; John 12:21; Galatians 4:20; Matthew 7:12; Mark 10:35.3. A liking (Mark 12:38; Luke 20:46; Matthew 27:43). (See note there.) Βούλομαι occurs in the following senses:1.Inclination or disposition (Acts 18:27; Acts 19:30; Acts 25:22; Acts 28:18; 2" translation="">2 Corinthians 1:15).2.Stronger, with the idea of purpose (1 Timothy 6:9; James 1:18; James 3:4; 1 Corinthians 12:11; Hebrews 6:17).In most, if not all of these cases, we might expect θέλειν ; but in this use of βούλομαι there is an implied emphasis on the element of free choice or self-determination, which imparts to the desire or inclination a decretory force. This element is in the human will by gift and consent. In the divine will it is inherent. At this point the Homeric usage may be compared in its occasional employment of βούλομαι to express determination, but only with reference to the gods, in whom to wish is to will. Thus, “Whether Apollo will ( βου.λεται ) ward off the plague” (“II.,” 1:67). “Apollo willed ( βούλετο ) victory to the Trojans” (“Il.,” 7:21).To make a public example ( δειγματίσαι )The word is kindred to δείκνυμι , to exhibit, display, point out. Here, therefore, to expose Mary to public shame (Wyc., publish her; Tynd., defame her). The word occurs in Colossians 2:15, of the victorious Saviour displaying the vanquished powers of evil as a general displays his trophies or captives in a triumphal procession. “He made a show of them openly.” A compound of the same word ( παραδειγματίζω ) appears in Hebrews 6:6, “They crucify the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame. ” [source]
Mentioned only here and in Luke 10:13. Proof of “the meagreness of our knowledge of Judaism in the time of Christ” (Plummer) and of the many things not told in our Gospels (John 21:25). We know something of Bethsaida and more about Capernaum as places of privilege. But (πλην plēn howbeit) neither of these cities repented, changed their conduct. Note condition of the second class, determined as unfulfilled in Matthew 11:21 and Matthew 11:23. [source]
A Hebrew name- Bar Tolmai, son of Tolmai. Almost certainly identical with Nathanael. Philip and Nathanael are associated by John, as are Philip and Bartholomew in the parallel passages of the synoptics. Bartholomew is not mentioned in John's list of the twelve (John 21:2), but Nathanael is; while the synoptists do not mention Nathanael in their lists, but do mention Bartholomew. Probably he had two names. [source]
This Hebrew nickname is given only by Mark and the reason for it is not clear. It may refer to the fiery temperament revealed in Luke 9:34 when James and John wanted to call down fire on the Samaritan villages that were unfriendly to them. The word literally means sons of tumult, sons of thunder in Syriac. No other epithets are given by Mark save descriptions to distinguish as Simon the Cananaean (or Zealot) and Judas Iscariot, who also betrayed him (Mark 3:19). Andrew, (from ανηρ anēr a man) and Philip (Philippos, fond of horses) are both Greek names. Bartholomew, son of Tolmai, is the Nathanael of John‘s Gospel (John 21:2). He probably had both names. Matthew is a Hebrew name meaning gift of God Thomas is Hebrew and means Twin (Didymus, John 11:16). There are two uses of the name of James Thaddeus is another name for Lebbaeus. [source]
The word for personal affection. In John 13:23; John 21:7, John 21:20, ἠγάπα is used. See on John 5:20. [source]
Revised version of the New Testament, more correctly, for witness: a witness would be, μάρτυρα as Acts 1:8. The sense is for witness-bearing or to bear witness. On the word, see Acts 1:22; 1 Peter 5:1. It is one of John's characteristic words, occurring nearly fifty times in various forms in his Gospel, and thirty or forty times in the Epistles and Revelation. The emphatic development of the idea of witness is peculiar to this Gospel. “It evidently belongs to a time when men had begun to reason about the faith, and to analyze the grounds on which it rested” (Westcott). He develops the idea under the following forms: The witness of the Father (John 5:31, John 5:34, John 5:37); the witness of Christ himself (John 8:14; John 18:37); the witness of works (John 5:17, John 5:36; John 10:25; John 14:11; John 15:24); the witness of Scripture (John 5:39, John 5:40, John 5:46; John 1:46); the witness of the forerunner (John 1:7; John 5:33, John 5:35); the witness of the disciples (John 15:27; John 19:35; John 21:24; 1 John 1:2; 1 John 4:14); the witness of the Spirit (John 15:26; John 16:13, John 16:14; 1 John 5:6). Note the emphasis attached to the idea here, by the twofold form in which it is put: first, generally, for witness, and then by giving the subject of the testimony. [source]
The one was Andrew (John 1:41), the other the Evangelist himself, who studiously refrains from mentioning his own name throughout the narrative. The name of James the elder also does not appear, nor that of Salome, the Evangelist's mother, who is mentioned by name in Mark's Gospel (Mark 15:40; Mark 16:1). The omission of his own name is the more significant from the fact that he is habitually exact in defining the names in his narrative. Compare the simple designation Simon (John 1:42) with subsequent occurrences of his name after his call, as John 1:42; John 13:6; John 21:15, etc. Also Thomas (John 11:16; John 20:24; John 21:2); Judas Iscariot (John 6:71; John 12:4; John 13:2, John 13:26); the other Judas (John 14:22). Note also that he never speaks of the Baptist as John the Baptist, like the other three Evangelists, but always as John. [source]
Logos. This expression is the keynote and theme of the entire gospel. Λόγος is from the root λεγ , appearing in λέγω , the primitive meaning of which is to lay: then, to pick out, gather, pick up: hence to gather or put words together, and so, to speak. Hence λόγος is, first of all, a collecting or collection both of things in the mind, and of words by which they are expressed. It therefore signifies both the outward form by which the inward thought is expressed, and the inward thought itself, the Latin oratio and ratio: compare the Italian ragionare, “to think” and “to speak.” As signifying the outward form it is never used in the merely grammatical sense, as simply the name of a thing or act ( ἔπος, ὄνομα, ῥῆμα ), but means a word as the thing referred to: the material, not the formal part: a word as embodying a conception or idea. See, for instance, Matthew 22:46; 1 Corinthians 14:9, 1 Corinthians 14:19. Hence it signifies a saying, of God, or of man (Matthew 19:21, Matthew 19:22; Mark 5:35, Mark 5:36): a decree, a precept (Romans 9:28; Mark 7:13). The ten commandments are called in the Septuagint, οἱ δέκα λόγοι , “the ten words ” (Exodus 34:28), and hence the familiar term decalogue. It is further used of discourse: either of the act of speaking (Acts 14:12), of skill and practice in speaking (Acts 18:15; 2 Timothy 4:15), specifically the doctrine of salvation through Christ (Matthew 13:20-23; Philemon 1:14); of narrative, both the relation and the thing related (Acts 1:1; John 21:23; Mark 1:45); of matter under discussion, an affair, a case in law (Acts 15:6; Acts 19:38). -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- As signifying the inward thought, it denotes the faculty of thinking and reasoning (Hebrews 4:12); regard or consideration (Acts 20:24); reckoning, account (Philemon 4:15, Philemon 4:17; Hebrews 4:13); cause or reason (Acts 10:29). -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- John uses the word in a peculiar sense, here, and in John 1:14; and, in this sense, in these two passages only. The nearest approach to it is in Revelation 19:13, where the conqueror is called the Word of God; and it is recalled in the phrases Word of Life, and the Life was manifested (1 John 1:1, 1 John 1:2). Compare Hebrews 4:12. It was a familiar and current theological term when John wrote, and therefore he uses it without explanation. Old Testament Usage of the TermThe word here points directly to Psalm href="/desk/?q=ps+33:6&sr=1">Psalm 33:6). The idea of God, who is in his own nature hidden, revealing himself in creation, is the root of the Logos-idea, in contrast with all materialistic or pantheistic conceptions of creation. This idea develops itself in the Old Testament on three lines. (1) The Word, as embodying the divine will, is personified in Hebrew poetry. Consequently divine attributes are predicated of it as being the continuous revelation of God in law and prophecy (Psalm 3:4; Isaiah 40:8; Psalm 119:105). The Word is a healer in Psalm 107:20; a messenger in Psalm 147:15; the agent of the divine decrees in Isaiah 55:11. (2) The personified wisdom (Job 28:12sq.; Job 28). Even Death, which unlocks so many secrets, and the underworld, know it only as a rumor (Job href="/desk/?q=job+28:22&sr=1">Job 28:22). It is only God who knows its way and its place (Job 28:23). He made the world, made the winds and the waters, made a decree for the rain and a way for the lightning of the thunder (Job 28:25, Job 28:26). He who possessed wisdom in the beginning of his way, before His works of old, before the earth with its depths and springs and mountains, with whom was wisdom as one brought up with Him (Proverbs 8:26-31), declared it. “It became, as it were, objective, so that He beheld it” (Job 28:27) and embodied it in His creative work. This personification, therefore, is based on the thought that wisdom is not shut up at rest in God, but is active and manifest in the world. “She standeth in the top of high places, by the way in the places of the paths. She crieth at the gates, at the entry of the city, at the coming in at the doors” (Proverbs 8:2, Proverbs 8:3). She builds a palace and prepares a banquet, and issues a general invitation to the simple and to him that wanteth understanding (Proverbs 9:1-6). It is viewed as the one guide to salvation, comprehending all revelations of God, and as an attribute embracing and combining all His other attributes. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- (3) The Angel of Jehovah. The messenger of God who serves as His agent in the world of sense, and is sometimes distinguished from Jehovah and sometimes identical with him (Genesis 16:7-13; Genesis 32:24-28; Hosea 12:4, Hosea 12:5; Exodus 23:20, Exodus 23:21; Malachi 3:1). Apocryphal UsageIn the Apocryphal writings this mediative element is more distinctly apprehended, but with a tendency to pantheism. In the Wisdom of Solomon (at least 100 b.c.), where wisdom seems to be viewed as another name for the whole divine nature, while nowhere connected with the Messiah, it is described as a being of light, proceeding essentially from God; a true image of God, co-occupant of the divine throne; a real and independent principle, revealing God in the world and mediating between it and Him, after having created it as his organ - in association with a spirit which is called μονογενές , only begotten (7:22). “She is the breath of the power of God, and a pure influence flowing from the glory of the Almighty; therefore can no defiled thing fall into her. For she is the brightness of the everlasting light, the unspotted mirror of the power of God, and the image of his goodness” (see chapter 7, throughout). Again: “Wisdom reacheth from one end to another mightily, and sweetly doth she order all things. In that she is conversant with God, she magnifieth her nobility: yea, the Lord of all things Himself loved her. For she is privy to the mysteries of the knowledge of God, and a lover of His works. Moreover, by the means of her I shall obtain immortality, and leave behind me an everlasting memorial to them that come after me” (chapter 9). In 16:12, it is said, “Thy word, O Lord, healeth all things” (compare Psalm 107:20); and in 18:15,16, “Thine almighty word leaped from heaven out of thy royal throne, as a fierce man of war into the midst of a land of destruction, and brought thine unfeigned commandment as a sharp sword, and, standing up, filled all things with death; and it touched the heaven, but it stood upon the earth.” See also Wisdom of Sirach, chapters 1,24, and Genesis href="/desk/?q=ge+39:21&sr=1">Genesis 39:21, they paraphrase, “The Memra was with Joseph in prison.” In Psalm 110:1-7Jehovah addresses the first verse to the Memra. The Memra is the angel that destroyed the first-born of Egypt, and it was the Memra that led the Israelites in the cloudy pillar. Usage in the Judaeo-Alexandrine PhilosophyFrom the time of Ptolemy I: (323-285 b.c.), there were Jews in great numbers in Egypt. Philo (a.d. 50) estimates them at a million in his time. Alexandria was their headquarters. They had their own senate and magistrates, and possessed the same privileges as the Greeks. The Septuagint translation of the Hebrew Scriptures into Greek (b.c. 280-150) was the beginning of a literary movement among them, the key-note of which was the reconciliation of Western culture and Judaism, the establishment of a connection between the Old Testament faith and the Greek philosophy. Hence they interpreted the facts of sacred history allegorically, and made them symbols of certain speculative principles, alleging that the Greek philosophers had borrowed their wisdom from Moses. Aristobulus (about 150 b.c.) asserted the existence of a previous and much older translation of the law, and dedicated to Ptolemy VI an allegorical exposition of the Pentateuch, in which he tried to show that the doctrines of the Peripatetic or Aristotelian school were derived from the Old Testament. Most of the schools of Greek philosophy were represented among the Alexandrian Jews, but the favorite one was the Platonic. The effort at reconciliation culminated in Philo, a contemporary of Christ. Philo was intimately acquainted with the Platonic philosophy, and made it the fundamental feature of his own doctrines, while availing himself likewise of ideas belonging to the Peripatetic and Stoic schools. Unable to discern the difference in the points of view from which these different doctrines severally proceeded, he jumbled together not merely discordant doctrines of the Greek schools, but also those of the East, regarding the wisdom of the Greeks as having originated in the legislation and writings of Moses. He gathered together from East and West every element that could help to shape his conception of a vicegerent of God, “a mediator between the eternal and the ephemeral. His Logos reflects light from countless facets.” According to Philo, God is the absolute Being. He calls God “that which is:” “the One and the All.” God alone exists for himself, without multiplicity and without mixture. No name can properly be ascribed to Him: He simply is. Hence, in His nature, He is unknowable. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- Outside of God there exists eternal matter, without form and void, and essentially evil; but the perfect Being could not come into direct contact with the senseless and corruptible; so that the world could not have been created by His direct agency. Hence the doctrine of a mediating principle between God and matter - the divine Reason, the Logos in whom are comprised all the ideas of finite things, and who created the sensible world by causing these ideas to penetrate into matter. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- The absolute God is surrounded by his powers ( δυνάμεις ) as a king by his servants. These powers are, in Platonic language, ideas; in Jewish, angels; but all are essentially one, and their unity, as they exist in God, as they emanate from him, as they are disseminated in the world, is expressed by Logos Hence the Logos appears under a twofold aspect: (1) As the immanent reason of God, containing within itself the world-ideal, which, while not outwardly existing, is like the immanent reason in man. This is styled Λόγος ἐνδιάθετος , i.e., the Logos conceived and residing in the mind. This was the aspect emphasized by the Alexandrians, and which tended to the recognition of a twofold personality in the divine essence. (2) As the outspoken word, proceeding from God and manifest in the world. This, when it has issued from God in creating the world, is the Λόγος προφορικός , i.e., the Logos uttered, even as in man the spoken word is the manifestation of thought. This aspect prevailed in Palestine, where the Word appears like the angel of the Pentateuch, as the medium of the outward communication of God with men, and tends toward the recognition of a divine person subordinate to God. Under the former aspect, the Logos is, really, one with God's hidden being: the latter comprehends all the workings and revelations of God in the world; affords from itself the ideas and energies by which the world was framed and is upheld; and, filling all things with divine light and life, rules them in wisdom, love, and righteousness. It is the beginning of creation, not inaugurated, like God, nor made, like the world; but the eldest son of the eternal Father (the world being the younger); God's image; the mediator between God and the world; the highest angel; the second God. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- Philo's conception of the Logos, therefore, is: the sum-total and free exercise of the divine energies; so that God, so far as he reveals himself, is called Logos; while the Logos, so far as he reveals God, is called God. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- John's doctrine and terms are colored by these preceding influences. During his residence at Ephesus he must have become familiar with the forms and terms of the Alexandrian theology. Nor is it improbable that he used the term Logos with an intent to facilitate the passage from the current theories of his time to the pure gospel which he proclaimed. “To those Hellenists and Hellenistic Jews, on the one hand, who were vainly philosophizing on the relations of the finite and infinite; to those investigators of the letter of the Scriptures, on the other, who speculated about the theocratic revelations, John said, by giving this name Logos to Jesus: 'The unknown Mediator between God and the world, the knowledge of whom you are striving after, we have seen, heard, and touched. Your philosophical speculations and your scriptural subtleties will never raise you to Him. Believe as we do in Jesus, and you will possess in Him that divine Revealer who engages your thoughts'” (Godet). -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- But John's doctrine is not Philo's, and does not depend upon it. The differences between the two are pronounced. Though both use the term Logos, they use it with utterly different meanings. In John it signifies word, as in Holy Scripture generally; in Philo, reason; and that so distinctly that when Philo wishes to give it the meaning of word, he adds to it by way of explanation, the term ῥῆμα , word. The nature of the being described by Logos is conceived by each in an entirely different spirit. John's Logos is a person, with a consciousness of personal distinction; Philo's is impersonal. His notion is indeterminate and fluctuating, shaped by the influence which happens to be operating at the time. Under the influence of Jewish documents he styles the Logos an “archangel;” under the influence of Plato, “the Idea of Ideas;” of the Stoics, “the impersonal Reason.” It is doubtful whether Philo ever meant to represent the Logos formally as a person. All the titles he gives it may be explained by supposing it to mean the ideal world on which the actual is modeled. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- In Philo, moreover, the function of the Logos is confined to the creation and preservation of the universe. He does not identify or connect him with the Messiah. His doctrine was, to a great degree, a philosophical substitute for Messianic hopes. He may have conceived of the Word as acting through the Messiah, but not as one with him. He is a universal principle. In John the Messiah is the Logos himself, uniting himself with humanity, and clothing himself with a body in order to save the world. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- The two notions differ as to origin. The impersonal God of Philo cannot pass to the finite creation without contamination of his divine essence. Hence an inferior agent must be interposed. John's God, on the other hand, is personal, and a loving personality. He is a Father (John 1:18); His essence is love (John 3:16; 1 John 4:8, 1 John 4:16). He is in direct relation with the world which He desires to save, and the Logos is He Himself, manifest in the flesh. According to Philo, the Logos is not coexistent with the eternal God. Eternal matter is before him in time. According to John, the Logos is essentially with the Father from all eternity (John 1:2), and it is He who creates all things, matter included (John 1:3). -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- Philo misses the moral energy of the Hebrew religion as expressed in its emphasis upon the holiness of Jehovah, and therefore fails to perceive the necessity of a divine teacher and Savior. He forgets the wide distinction between God and the world, and declares that, were the universe to end, God would die of loneliness and inactivity. The Meaning of Logos in JohnAs Logos has the double meaning of thought and speech, so Christ is related to God as the word to the idea, the word being not merely a name for the idea, but the idea itself expressed. The thought is the inward word (Dr. Schaff compares the Hebrew expression “I speak in my heart” for “I think”). The Logos of John is the real, personal God (John 1:1), the Word, who was originally before the creation with God. and was God, one in essence and nature, yet personally distinct (John 1:1, John 1:18); the revealer and interpreter of the hidden being of God; the reflection and visible image of God, and the organ of all His manifestations to the world. Compare Hebrews 1:3. He made all things, proceeding personally from God for the accomplishment of the act of creation (Hebrews 1:3), and became man in the person of Jesus Christ, accomplishing the redemption of the world. Compare Philemon 2:6. -DIVIDER- -DIVIDER- The following is from William Austin, “Meditation for Christmas Day,” cited by Ford on John:-DIVIDER- “The name Word is most excellently given to our Savior; for it expresses His nature in one, more than in any others. Therefore St. John, when he names the Person in the Trinity (1 John 5:7), chooses rather to call Him Word than Son; for word is a phrase more communicable than son. Son hath only reference to the Father that begot Him; but word may refer to him that conceives it; to him that speaks it; to that which is spoken by it; to the voice that it is clad in; and to the effects it raises in him that hears it. So Christ, as He is the Word, not only refers to His Father that begot Him, and from whom He comes forth, but to all the creatures that were made by Him; to the flesh that He took to clothe Him; and to the doctrine He brought and taught, and, which lives yet in the hearts of all them that obediently do hear it. He it is that is this Word; and any other, prophet or preacher, he is but a voice (Luke 3:4). Word is an inward conception of the mind; and voice is but a sign of intention. St. John was but a sign, a voice; not worthy to untie the shoe-latchet of this Word. Christ is the inner conception 'in the bosom of His Father;' and that is properly the Word. And yet the Word is the intention uttered forth, as well as conceived within; for Christ was no less the Word in the womb of the Virgin, or in the cradle of the manger, or on the altar of the cross, than he was in the beginning, 'in the bosom of his Father.' For as the intention departs not from the mind when the word is uttered, so Christ, proceeding from the Father by eternal generation, and after here by birth and incarnation, remains still in Him and with Him in essence; as the intention, which is conceived and born in the mind, remains still with it and in it, though the word be spoken. He is therefore rightly called the Word, both by His coming from, and yet remaining still in, the Father.”And the WordA repetition of the great subject, with solemn emphasis.Was with God ( ἦν πὸς τὸν Θεὸν )Anglo-Saxon vers., mid Gode. Wyc., at God. With ( πρός ) does not convey the full meaning, that there is no single English word which will give it better. The preposition πρός , which, with the accusative case, denotes motion towards, or direction, is also often used in the New Testament in the sense of with; and that not merely as being near or beside, but as a living union and communion; implying the active notion of intercourse. Thus: “Are not his sisters here with us ” ( πρὸς ἡμᾶς ), i.e., in social relations with us (Mark 6:3; Matthew 13:56). “How long shall I be with you ” ( πρὸς ὑμᾶς , Mark 9:16). “I sat daily with you ” (Matthew 26:55). “To be present with the Lord ” ( πρὸς τὸν Κύριον , 2 Corinthians 5:8). “Abide and winter with you ” (1 Corinthians 16:6). “The eternal life which was with the Father ” ( πρὸς τὸν πατέρα , 1 John 1:2). Thus John's statement is that the divine Word not only abode with the Father from all eternity, but was in the living, active relation of communion with Him.And the Word was God ( καὶ Θεὸς ἦν ὁ λόγος )In the Greek order, and God was the Word, which is followed by Anglo-Saxon, Wyc., and Tynd. But θεὸς , God, is the predicate and not the subject of the proposition. The subject must be the Word; for John is not trying to show who is God, but who is the Word. Notice that Θεὸς is without the article, which could not have been omitted if he had meant to designate the word as God; because, in that event, Θεὸς would have been ambiguous; perhaps a God. Moreover, if he had said God was the Word, he would have contradicted his previous statement by which he had distinguished (hypostatically) God from the word, and λόγος (Logos) would, further, have signified only an attribute of God. The predicate is emphatically placed in the proposition before the subject, because of the progress of the thought; this being the third and highest statement respecting the Word - the climax of the two preceding propositions. The word God, used attributively, maintains the personal distinction between God and the Word, but makes the unity of essence and nature to follow the distinction of person, and ascribes to the Word all the attributes of the divine essence. “There is something majestic in the way in which the description of the Logos, in the three brief but great propositions of John 1:1, is unfolded with increasing fullness” (Meyer). [source]
Definite event in the long darkness, same verb in John 1:3. Sent Perfect passive participle of αποστελλω apostellō to send. From God From the side of Whose name “Name to him,” nominative parenthetic and dative (Robertson, Grammar, p. 460). John One ν n in Westcott and Hort. In the giving of the name see Luke 1:59-63, Hellenized form of Jonathan, Joanan (Gift of God), used always of the Baptist in this Gospel which never mentions the name of John son of Zebedee (the sons of Zebedee once, John 21:2). [source]
The word means twin. Clearly Thomas had a twin brother or sister. Applied two other times to him (John 20:24; John 21:2). The Aramaic word for Thomas means Twin and Didymus is just the Greek equivalent of Thomas. He may even in Greek circles have been called Didymus. His fellow disciples Dative case and article use like “his.” Only use of συνματητες sunmathētes in the N.T., rare word (in Plato). Us also As well as Jesus, since he is bent on going. That we may die with him Purpose clause with ινα hina and the second aorist active subjunctive of αποτνησκω apothnēskō Die with Jesus, Thomas means. Lazarus is already dead and they will kill Jesus (John 11:8). Pessimistic courage surely. [source]
Old verb to nod, in N.T. only here and Acts 24:10. They were all looking in surprise at each other. Tell us who it is of whom he speaketh Second aorist active imperative with indirect question Peter was cautious, but could not contain his curiosity. John in front of Jesus was in a favourable position to have a whispered word with him. Breast As in John 21:20; Luke 18:13 in place of κολπον kolpon (John 13:23). This is the moment represented in Leonardo da Vinci‘s “Last Supper,” only he shows the figures like the monks for whom he painted it. [source]
The same expression applied to Thomas in John 11:16; John 21:2, but nowhere else in N.T. Old word for twin (double), “the pessimist of the apostolic band” (Bernard). The term twelve is still applied to the group, though Judas, the traitor, is dead. [source]
Dramatic present again. Philip carries on the work. One wins one. If that glorious beginning had only kept on! Now it takes a hundred to win one. Nathaniel It is a Hebrew name meaning “God has given” like the Greek Τεοδορε Theodore (Gift of God). He was from Cana of Galilee (John 21:2), not far from Bethsaida and so known to Philip. His name does not occur in the Synoptics while Bartholomew (a patronymic, ευρηκαμεν Bar Tholmai) does not appear in John. They are almost certainly two names of the same man. Philip uses Μεσσιαν heurēkamen (John 1:41) also to Nathanael and so unites himself with the circle of believers, but instead of ον Messian describes him “of whom More exactly, “Jesus, son of Joseph, the one from Nazareth.” Jesus passed as son (no article in the Greek) of Joseph, though John has just described him as “God-only Begotten” in John 1:18, but certainly Philip could not know this. Bernard terms this part “the irony of St. John” for he is sure that his readers will agree with him as to the real deity of Jesus Christ. These details were probably meant to interest Nathanael. [source]
No word for “table” in the text. Periphrastic imperfect of ανακειμαι anakeimai to lie back, to recline. Κολπος Kolpos usual word for bosom (John 1:18). Whom Jesus loved Imperfect active of αγαπαω agapaō John‘s description of himself of which he was proud (John 19:26; John 20:2; John 21:7, John 21:20), identified in John 21:24 as the author of the book and necessarily one of the twelve because of the “explicit” (Bernard) language of Mark (Mark 14:17; Luke 22:14). John son of Zebedee and brother of James. At the table John was on the right of Jesus lying obliquely so that his head lay on the bosom of Jesus. The centre, the place of honour, Jesus occupied. The next place in rank was to the left of Jesus, held by Peter (Westcott) or by Judas (Bernard) which one doubts. [source]
Imperfect active of ακολουτεω akoloutheō “was following,” picturesque and vivid tense, with associative instrumental case τωι Ιησου tōi Iēsou Another disciple Correct text without article ο ho (genuine in John 18:16). Peter‘s companion was the Beloved Disciple, the author of the book (John 21:24). Was known unto the high priest Verbal adjective from γινωσκω ginōskō to know (Acts 1:19) with dative case. How well known the word does not say, not necessarily a personal friend, well enough known for the portress to admit John. “The account of what happened to Peter might well seem to be told from the point of view of the servants‘ hall” (Sanday, Criticism of the Fourth Gospel, p. 101). Entered in with Jesus Second aorist active indicative of the double compound συνεισερχομαι suneiserchomai old verb, in N.T. here and John 6:22. With associative instrumental case. Into the court It is not clear that this word ever means the palace itself instead of the courtyard (uncovered enclosure) as always in the papyri (very common). Clearly courtyard in Mark 14:66 (Matthew 26:69; Luke 22:55). Apparently Annas had rooms in the official residence of Caiaphas. [source]
“On the day the third” (locative case), from the start to Galilee when Philip was found (John 1:43), seven days since John 1:19. There was a marriage “A wedding (or marriage festival) took place.” See Matthew 22:8. In Cana of Galilee This town, the home of Nathanael (John 21:2), is only mentioned again in John 4:46 as the home of the nobleman. There was a Cana in Coele-Syria. It is usually located at Kefr Kenna (3-1/2 miles from Nazareth), though Ain Kana and Khirbet Kana are also possible. Bernard thinks that it was probably on Wednesday afternoon the fourth day of the week (usual day for marriage of virgins), when the party of Jesus arrived. And the mother of Jesus was there When they arrived. John does not mention her name, probably because already well known in the Synoptics. Probably Joseph was already dead. Mary may have been kin to the family where the wedding took place, an intimate friend clearly. [source]
The one just mentioned in John 21:20, “the disciple whom Jesus loved.” And wrote these things Here there is a definite statement that the Beloved Disciple wrote this book. We know The plural here seems intentional as the identification and endorsement of a group of disciples who know the author and wish to vouch for his identity and for the truthfulness of his witness. Probably we see here a verse added by a group of elders in Ephesus where John had long laboured. [source]
The spiritual harvester can gather his harvest without waiting four months. Jesus is reaping a harvest right now by the conversion of this woman. The labourer is worthy of his hire (Luke 10:7; 2 Timothy 2:6). John does not use μιστος misthos (reward) again, but καρπος karpos (John 15:2-16), “fruit for life eternal” (cf. John 4:14). That he that soweth and he that reapeth may rejoice together Final use of ινα hina with present active subjunctive of χαιρω chairō to rejoice, in the singular with ο σπειρων ho speirōn (the sower) and to be repeated with ο τεριζων ho therizōn (the reaper). The adverb ομου homou (together) elsewhere in N.T. only John 20:4; John 21:2; Acts 2:1. Usually considerable time passes between the sowing and the reaping as in John 4:35. Amos (Amos 9:13) spoke of the time when “the ploughman shall overtake the reaper” and that has happened here with the joy of the harvest time (Isaiah 9:3). Jesus the Sower and the disciples as the reapers are here rejoicing simultaneously. [source]
This is undoubtedly the correct text (supported by the Neutral and Western classes) and not εμε eme (I) and με me (me) of the Syrian class nor ημας hēmas (we) and ημας hēmas (us) of the Alexandrian class. Jesus associates us with him in the task committed to him by the Father. Bernard argues vigorously, but vainly, for εμε eme me. We are not able to fathom the depth of the necessity This clause gives the note of urgency upon us all. The night cometh “Night is coming on,” and rapidly. Night was coming for Jesus (John 7:33) and for each of us. Cf. John 11:9; John 12:35. Even electric lights do not turn night into day. εως Heōs with the present indicative (John 21:22.) means “while,” not until as in John 13:38. [source]
Originally, order, and hence the order of the world; the ordered universe. So in classical Greek. In the Septuagint, never the world, but the ordered total of the heavenly bodies; the host of heaven (17:3; Isaiah 24:21; 40:26). Compare, also, Proverbs href="/desk/?q=pr+17:6&sr=1">Proverbs 17:6, and see note on James 3:6. In the apocryphal books, of the universe, and mainly in the relation between God and it arising out of the creation. Thus, the king of the world (2 Maccabees 7:9); the creator or founder of the world (2 Maccabees 12:15). In the New Testament: 1. In the classical and physical sense, the universe (John href="/desk/?q=joh+17:5&sr=1">John 17:5; John 21:25.; Romans 1:20; Ephesians 1:4, etc.). 2. As the order of things of which man is the centre (Matthew 13:38; Mark 16:15; Luke 9:25; John 16:21; Ephesians 2:12; 1 Timothy 6:7). 3. Humanity as it manifests itself in and through this order (Matthew 18:7; 2 Peter 2:5; 2 Peter 3:6; Romans 3:19). Then, as sin has entered and disturbed the order of things, and made a breach between the heavenly and the earthly order, which are one in the divine ideal - 4. The order of things which is alienated from God, as manifested in and by the human race: humanity as alienated from God, and acting in opposition to him (John 1:10; John 12:31; John 15:18, John 15:19; 1 Corinthians 1:21; 1 John 2:15, etc.). The word is used here in the classical sense of the visible creation, which would appeal to the Athenians. Stanley, speaking of the name by which the Deity is known in the patriarchal age, the plural Elohim, notes that Abraham, in perceiving that all the Elohim worshipped by the numerous clans of his race meant one God, anticipated the declaration of Paul in this passage (“Jewish Church,” i., 25). Paul's statement strikes at the belief of the Epicureans, that the world was made by “a fortuitous concourse of atoms,” and of the Stoics, who denied the creation of the world by God, holding either that God animated the world, or that the world itself was God. [source]
An indirect question with the aorist indicative retained. Αρα Ara adds a syllogism (therefore) to the problem as in Luke 1:66. The use of the neuter τι tōi (as in Acts 13:25) is different from τις tis though nominative like Πετρος Petros literally, “what then Peter had become,” “what had happened to Peter” (in one idiom). See the same idiom in John 21:21 (ουτος δε τι houtos de tōi). [source]
Litotes Furneaux suggests that Manaen, the king‘s foster-brother and a Christian (Acts 13:1), was the “angel” who rescued Peter from the prison. That is not the way that Peter looked at it. What was become of Peter (τι αρα ο Πετρος εγενετο tōi ara ho Petros egeneto). An indirect question with the aorist indicative retained. Αρα Ara adds a syllogism (therefore) to the problem as in Luke 1:66. The use of the neuter τι tōi (as in Acts 13:25) is different from τις tis though nominative like Πετρος Petros literally, “what then Peter had become,” “what had happened to Peter” (in one idiom). See the same idiom in John 21:21 (ουτος δε τι houtos de tōi). But this one what (verb γενησεται genēsetai not used). [source]
Literally, “This already a second epistle I am writing to you.” For ηδη ēdē see John 21:24. It is the predicate use of δευτεραν επιστολην deuteran epistolēn in apposition with ταυτην tautēn not “this second epistle.” Reference apparently to 1 Peter.And in both of them (εν αις en hais). “In which epistles.”I stir up Present active indicative, perhaps conative, “I try to stir up.” See 2 Peter 1:13.Mind (διανοιαν dianoian). Understanding (Plato) as in 1 Peter 1:13.Sincere Old adjective of doubtful etymology (supposed to be ειλη heilē sunlight, and κρινω krinō to judge by it). Plato used it of ethical purity As in 2 Peter 1:13. [source]
The prophetic present, equivalent to is about to come. The same term is used of Christ (John 14:3; John 21:22; Revelation 22:20). [source]
Note fourfold repetition of ο ho (that which) without connectives (asyndeton). The perfect tense (active indicative of ακουω akouō) stresses John‘s equipment to speak on this subject so slowly revealed. It is the literary plural unless John associates the elders of Ephesus with himself (Lightfoot) the men who certified the authenticity of the Gospel (John 21:24). [source]
His fellow-Christian. The singular, brother, is characteristic of this Epistle. See 1 John 2:10, 1 John 2:11; 1 John 3:10, 1 John 3:15, 1 John 3:17; 1 John 4:20, 1 John 4:21; 1 John 5:16. Christians are called in the New Testament, Christians (Acts 11:26; Acts 26:28; 1 Peter 4:16), mainly by those outside of the Christian circle. Disciples, applied to all followers of Christ (John 2:11; John 6:61) and strictly to the twelve (John 13:5sqq.). In Acts 19:1, to those who had received only John's baptism. Not found in John's Epistles nor in Revelation. Brethren. The first title given to the body of believers after the Ascension (Acts 1:15, where the true reading is ἀδελφῶν brethrenfor μαθητῶν disciples). See Acts 9:30; Acts 10:23; Acts 11:29; 1 Thessalonians 4:10; 1 Thessalonians 5:26; 1 John 3:14; 3 John 1:5, 3 John 1:10; John 21:23. Peter has ἡ ἀδελφότης thebrotherhood (1 Peter 2:17; 1 Peter 5:9). The believers. Under three forms: The believers ( οἱ πιστοί ; Acts 10:45; 1 Timothy 4:12); they that believe ( οἱ πιστεύοντες ; 1 Peter 2:7; 1 Thessalonians 1:7; Ephesians 1:19); they that believed ( οἱ πιστεύσαντες ; Acts 2:44; Acts 4:32; Hebrews 4:3). The saints ( οἱ ἅγιοι ); characteristic of Paul and Revelation. Four times in the Acts (Acts 9:13, Acts 9:32, Acts 9:41; Acts 26:10), and once in Jude (Judges 1:3). Also Hebrews 6:10; Hebrews 13:24. In Paul, 1 Corinthians 6:1; 1 Corinthians 14:33; Ephesians 1:1, Ephesians 1:15, etc. In Revelation 5:8; Revelation 8:3, Revelation 8:4; Revelation 11:18, etc.|Until now ( ἕως ἄρτι )|Though the light has been increasing, and though he may claim that he has been in the light from the first. The phrase occurs in John 2:10; John 5:17; John 16:24; and is used by Paul, 1 Corinthians 4:13; 1 Corinthians 8:7; 1 Corinthians 15:6.| [source]
Anarthrous as in John 1:1; John 6:64; John 16:4. See same phrase in 1 John 2:7. The reference goes beyond the Christian dispensation, beyond the Incarnation, to the eternal purpose of God in Christ (John 3:16), “coeval in some sense with creation” (Westcott).That which we have heard (ο ακηκοαμεν ho akēkoamen). Note fourfold repetition of ο ho (that which) without connectives (asyndeton). The perfect tense (active indicative of ακουω akouō) stresses John‘s equipment to speak on this subject so slowly revealed. It is the literary plural unless John associates the elders of Ephesus with himself (Lightfoot) the men who certified the authenticity of the Gospel (John 21:24).That which we have seen Perfect active, again, of οραω horaō with the same emphasis on the possession of knowledge by John.With our eyes (τοις οπταλμοις ημων tois ophthalmois hēmōn). Instrumental case and showing it was not imagination on John‘s part, not an optical illusion as the Docetists claimed, for Jesus had an actual human body. He could be heard and seen.That which we beheld Repetition with the aorist middle indicative of τεαομαι theaomai (the very form in John 1:14), “a spectacle which broke on our astonished vision” (D. Smith).Handled (επσηλαπησαν epsēlaphēsan). First aorist active indicative of πσηλαπαω psēlaphaō old and graphic verb (from πσαω psaō to touch), the very verb used by Jesus to prove that he was not a mere spirit (Luke 24:39). Three senses are here appealed to (hearing, sight, touch) as combining to show the reality of Christ‘s humanity against the Docetic Gnostics and the qualification of John by experience to speak. But he is also “the Word of life” and so God Incarnate. [source]
A second commendation of Demetrius. It is possible, in view of 1 John 5:6 (the Spirit is the truth), that John means the Holy Spirit and not a mere personification of the truth.Yea we also (και ημεις δε kai hēmeis de). A third witness to Demetrius, that is John himself (literary plural).Thou knowest “The words in John 21:24 sound like an echo of this sentence” (Westcott). John knew Demetrius well in Ephesus. [source]
“The words in John 21:24 sound like an echo of this sentence” (Westcott). John knew Demetrius well in Ephesus. [source]