1. According to the Encyclopedia Britannica, Tiberius Caesar reigned from 14 to 37 AD. This would make "the fifteenth year of his reign" sometime between 28 and 29 AD. And from Sir Robert Anderson's book, "The Coming Prince," we know that "[t]he date of Tiberius Caesar's reign is known with absolute accuracy; and his fifteenth year, reckoned from his accession, began on the 19th August, AD 28 (p. 95)." Therefore, the fifteenth year of Tiberius' reign we now know to be from exactly August 28 to August 29 AD.
There is also an interesting chronology that comes into view when the Gospels are synthesized. The context of the Gospels, when they are considered chronologically, reveal that in the fifteenth year of Caesar's reign, John went out baptizing. (Luke 3:1) And it was during this time that Jesus came to be baptized by him (Mark 1:9, Luke 3:21). After which, He then went into the desert to be tempted by the Enemy for forty days.
After those forty days, the apostle John tells us that John the Baptist saw Jesus again and said, "Look, the Lamb of God." to some of his disciples.
The text then continues by saying how "the next day" John told this to some men standing with him, and that they "stayed with Jesus the remainder of that day." And the text continues, "the next day . . ." and so on, now making it, at this point, four days after John had first pointed Jesus out as the Lamb of God, after He returned from the forty days in the wilderness.
At this time, it tells us how Jesus wanted to leave there and go into Galilee, and how He told Philip, His first disciple, "follow Me."
From the area northeast of Jerusalem, they traveled to Cana, where, as it says, He and a few of His disciples were invited to a wedding in Cana (John 2:2), the place where Jesus was about to turn the water into wine. Then it says: "After this, He went down to Capernaum, He, His mother, His brothers, and His disciples, and they stayed there only a few days. Immediately after this, they went to Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover.
Therefore, sometime during this 15th year of Caesar's reign (August 28 to August 29 AD), around 45 to 50 days from the point John baptized Jesus, Jesus went to Jerusalem for the 1st recorded Passover of the Gospels.
In view of this, we know that Passover was on April 17th that year (The Coming Prince p. 104), in 29 AD. And if you count back the "not many days" in Capernaum, the three days in Nazareth and Cana, the four days with John the Baptist, and the forty days of being tempted in the desert, it brings us to about two months, which would be sometime in mid February 29 AD.
Also, from knowing that Tiberius Caesar's 15th year began on August 19th in 28 AD, we can now be certain that John the Baptist's ministry, when "the word of the Lord came to [him]," also began sometime between mid August of 28 AD to sometime in February 29 AD.
Therefore, from both before and after the event in question, we can count and come to the same period of time, August 28 AD to February 29 AD. February 29 AD being the more exact time, based on the calculations provided to us by the date of the Passover celebration, and the number of days given to us by the text of the Gospels themselves.
Coming at it from even another angle: King Artaxerxes' reign is the most archaeological substantiated date in all of history. It is, according to the encyclopedia Britannica, from 465 BC to 425 BC. And knowing that date, we then need to consider Nehemiah 2:1 that says how it was in the 20th year of Artaxerxes' reign, which would have been 445 BC, in the Hebrew month of Nisan (equivalent to our March/April) that king Artaxerxes gave the order for Nehemiah to rebuild Jerusalem.
Bringing us to the time of Jesus' ministry, another important point is found in Dan. 9:24-26 where it says that from the going forth of this decree until the Messiah is cut off, there will be 69 sets of 7 years. Jewish years being 360 days each brings us to 173,880 days. This would also bring us, when counted from the date established above, to exactly the 10th day of the month of Nisan, in 32 AD – a month that coincides with our April sixth of that year (The Coming Prince by Sir Robert Anderson p. 127-128).
In that case, when we follow the narrative of the Gospels, we can see the chronology we are discussing confirmed. And the chronology is as follows: The first Passover of Jesus' ministry, the time when He stayed in Capernaum the "not many days (John 2:12-23)" was in 29 AD. Then the second Passover (John 5:1) was when He went up to "a feast of the Jews" and taught about the dead being raised to life in 30 AD (John 5:24-30). The third Passover was when He fed the five thousand, of which He did not go to Jerusalem to celebrate the Passover (John 6:4-10 and 7:1) in 31 AD. And then the fourth Passover, the Passover He was crucified on was in 32 AD.
With that given, if you count backwards from 32 AD, you have the third Passover on 31 AD, the second on 30 AD, and then the first in 29 AD. And if you add those two months, as recorded in the beginning of the Gospels, and then add some time for John the Baptists ministry, this all also brings us to around February of 29 AD.
So from no matter what direction you approach it – from before it happened or after it happened – we come to the same date. This is also in keeping with the truth that "Every fact is to be confirmed by the testimony of two or three witnesses (2 Corinthians 13:1, NASB)."
To further explain the second feast, which is now indisputably a Passover (as recorded in John chapter five), when John said, "after these things there was a feast of the Jews, and Jesus went up to Jerusalem (John 5:1)," it is believed that this feast was a Passover because of what He taught while He was there – specifically the two verses below:
For the Father loves the Son, and shows Him all things that He Himself is doing; and greater works than these will He show Him, that you may marvel. "For just as the Father raises the dead and gives them life, even so the Son also gives life to whom He wishes (verses 20-21, author's emphasis).
2. The Greek here actually uses the word metanoeite, which comes from the two Greek words, meta meaning "after," "follow," or "hereafter;" and noieo meaning "to consider," "think," or "understand (the word from which we get our word, knowledge)."
However, when these words are put together, they literally mean, "to change one's mind." And for clarification, this expanded definition is given, rather than the blunt and rather limiting word "repent," which generally has the meaning of "to turn." The English word "repent" limiting our understanding of the Greek text.
Additionally, it is important to know that repentance is a concept understood in the Bible, even before the New Covenant was written. See Isaiah 55:7-8.
3. The phrase used here is foreign to the common Greek language. It is actually a Hebrew idiom never used in any other Greek literature, even though this phrase is written in Greek here in the Gospels. The phrase is, "before your face." (As in, sending someone "before your face".)
To put it into our vernacular, it is translated into the Modern English idiom equivalent, "ahead of you".
This is done based on studies done in the Greek, among some scholars, on how Greek is a static language (static, meaning that it is more like snap shots or outlines), and how this is not so with the Hebrew. In the Hebrew language – which is referred to as a dynamic language – the words chosen usually describe something in motion, such as, "He lifted His eyes," or "he sent them before His face."
4. The Greek word here that is usually translated as confess is the word homologio, and it comes from the two words homo, meaning "the same" or "similar," and logos meaning "to speak."
Therefore the literal meaning is, "to speak the same," and it has the idea of verbally acknowledging something that someone else has already said. Thus, "to confess" means to verbally acknowledge what God has already said about our sin. Repentance is the turning from that sin (see endnote 2:2).
5. For the expression "changing your frame of mind" see endnote 2:2.
6. Others usually translate the Greek word, which is translated here into the word "encouragement," as "exhort." It is the Greek word parakalown. It is a word that comes from two words, para, meaning "along side of," and kaleo, meaning "to call." When put together it means "to call along side of," which is usually for the purpose of encouragement or help.
However, it does not have the same meaning when WE think of encouragement. We think of encouragement as someone making us feeling nice and cozy inside. But the kind of encouragement that is used here is in the sense of enabling someone to achieve a better walk of life.
7. In this age, we have the Jordan River, which begins somewhere around Turkey and flows south, down into the Sea of Galilee. It then flows out from the southern end of the Sea of Galilee and down through the Jordan valley and into the Dead Sea, the lowest part of the earth.
The Dead Sea is called the Dead Sea because it is so rich with salt and minerals that no life can even begin to grow there. This is what would have been in people's mind when they came to John at the Jordan, just north of the Dead Sea, in the area of Judea, to be baptized for the forgiveness of sins. It was a picture of your sins being washed down into the Dead Sea.
However, there is more to this hope that we, as believers, have in the Messiah. We are waiting for the day when we will be delivered from this body of death once and for all (Romans 7:24 or rather 14-25 and 1 John 3:2).
But there is even more! It is described in the book of Ezekiel (specifically chapter 47 verses 1-9) that there will be a new river flowing out from beneath the throne of Jesus during the Millennial kingdom. This river will flow from His thrown in the Temple in Jerusalem – a city just west of the Dead Sea – and eastward into this Sea. And because of this river of life, "the waters will become fresh" and have all kinds of living creatures once again living in it. This is the complete fulfillment of Jeremiah 31:33-34.
8. Matthew says, "This is My beloved son in whom I am well-pleased,' while Mark and Luke say, "You are My beloved son, in You I am well-pleased." However, considering the verse where Jesus says, "This voice has not come for My sake, but for your sakes (John 12:30)," it would then make sense that Matthew, at this point, could have been wording it the way he did to stress a particular point – that Jesus was the Father's beloved Son.
Given this, then, it would make it not a contradiction, but rather an author's emphasis, or aid for the readers to help in their understanding.
But the fact remains, this voice did come, and the Father was pleased with Him. This is the point, and neither wording takes away from it.
9. The Greek simply says, ". . . returned from the Jordan." But it is much easier to picture this happening when it is written as ". . . stepped out of the Jordan River."
10. The Greek word used here is the word we get the name "Satan." It is actually a
Greek transliteration of the Hebrew word satan, which, in both languages, literally means "enemy" or "adversary."
11. The Greek word translated here as "if" can also be translated as "since." But since we are told throughout His ministry how the demons knew who He was (Mark 1:24; Luke 4:34), it only makes sense that the ruler of the demons also knew who He was and would thus say, "since" rather than "if."
12. The Greek can be translated simply as, ". . . comes from the mouth of God." But when God says something, it happens. Therefore, it is translated more literally to the Greek here as, ". . . comes out from the mouth of God." Semantically, it gives a picture more of a word that comes out to take an action. In this case, the action that it takes is in giving one a nourishment that regular food cannot provide.
13. In Genesis chapter one, we are told that God gave Adam ruler-ship over everything He had created (Genesis 1:26 and 28). Adam, however, handed it over to Satan when he disobeyed God and ate from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil.
15. This is believed to be on the northeast corner, the highest corner of the Temple mount.
17. Matthew and Luke use the Greek work, diablos here, which means "slanderer," or "accuser," and Mark uses the word satanas, which means "enemy." Therefore, in this sentence both descriptions are used. (Also see endnote 2:10.)
18. See endnote 2:17 directly above.
19. Isn't this interesting: After Jesus quotes the scripture that informs us that no one should tempt Yahweh God, Satan stops tempting Jesus? What does this infer? Yes, Jesus is God, and He is also God over Satan.
20. According to the Roman historian Josephus, King Herod died around the night of a lunar eclipse. One such eclipse, without a doubt, happened on March 12th in 4 BC (Sir Robert Anderson P. 258).
If this truly is the eclipse being referred to (though there is also reportedly another one that happened in the year one) then Jesus would have been born at some time before this point. And was no less than, and even possibly up to two years previous to this (see endnote 1:48).
Along those same lines, there is an astronomical event that happened on April 17th in 6 BC, exactly two years before Herod died, that fully indicates a King of the Jews being born. (For further and very fascinating research into this, see, "The Star of Bethlehem; the Legacy of the Magi" by Michael R. Molnar, ISBN: 0813527015. But keep in mind, some of his interpretations of Scripture are questionable – though his historical data is impeccable.)
Based on the facts in endnote number 1 of this chapter, we know that Jesus started His ministry in the beginning of 29 AD. And since we also know that it ended in 32 AD, (With one BC and one AD being the same year), this makes Him about 34 or 35 years old when He began His ministry – when He was "around thirty years old (Luke 3:23)." (The "around thirty" being because they did not keep accurate records of birthdays back then, in that culture.)
The statement, "You are not yet fifty years old, and have You seen Abraham? (John 8:57)" seems to make more sense. Especially since, by the time of this event – just before His crucifixion – Jesus was close to forty and had probably aged a bit in appearance from His rough lifestyle.
22. Because of the meticulous details in the genealogies of the Torah (namely that the exact year is given when a particular son is born, followed by the exact year for the death of the father (Genesis 5:18, for example)), this is most likely an error generated by the translators or scribes of the Septuagint, since there is no record of this name being inserted here by any other translation. It is probably a scribal error made by someone who transcribed the Septuagint, coming from the exact same name, just a few names earlier in the genealogy (see Genesis 5:9)
23. From Adam to Noah, when the names are translated rather than transliterated, they say, "Man [is] appointed [an] incurable sorrow. [But] the blessed God shall come down, teaching. [And] His death shall bring [the] despairing rest."
In other words:
Adam = man
Seth = appointed
Enosh = incurable
Cainan = sorrow
Mahalaleel = the blessed God
Jared = shall come down
Enoch = teaching
Methuselah = his death shall bring
Lamech = despairing
Noah = rest
24. The Greek plainly says, "where John was baptizing." But to bring out the understanding that the people involved would have had, it is amplified into, "was baptizing the people into the river."
25. The Greek says, "fruits worthy of repentance (the word "worthy" coming from the Greek word "holy")." But this seems to be more understandable when translated as, ". . . fruit with the value according to that knowledge." This is because the word "worthy" implies something having a value, and "according to that knowledge" is the sense of the Greek word repentance (see endnote directly below).
26. ". . . According to that knowledge" is from the one Greek word metanoian, which literally means "after (meta)" and "knowledge (noian)," and it is commonly translated as "repentance."
Also, the word "after" can, at the same time, be understood as "according to," and this is why it is translated as "according to the knowledge," rather than what it's common translation into the limiting word "repentance." See endnote 2:2.
27. The Greek word translated here as, "people" is the word ockloi, and it is commonly translated into the English as "multitude." This is misleading, however because it actually has more of the idea of just the people of that specific area. In other words, the town-folk.
Whenever the text does mean multitude, as it turns into shortly after this point in His ministry, the text will read, a "great ockloy." (Matthew 14:14 is one of many examples.)
28. The Greek says "tunics," which was a type of shirt. It is different than a cloak, which was used more like a coat, as well as a blanket. (See endnote number 4:44)
29. The Greek literally reads "And he confessed and did not deny: he confessed, 'I am not the Messiah.'" The second "he confessed" is removed to keep it from sounding redundant.
30. If you ever have the opportunity to talk to a Kingdom Hall person, erroneously called "Jehovah's Witness," you have one of two choices: either you go all over scripture chasing way too many different conflicting doctrines, and really end up getting nowhere, or you can go straight to the main point.
To see this, first, go to John 1:1-3 and ask them what it means when it says, "the word was with God and was God. . . ." And how the text also says that "He created all things (there publication adding the word "other" – which is not in the Greek – to the phrase "all things"), and how nothing that has been made was made without Him (author's paraphrase)."
Then let them go through their whole shpiel until they eventually bring you to Colossians 1:15-17 where it says, "And He [Jesus] is the image of the invisible God, the first-born of all creation. For by Him all things were created, both in the heavens and on earth. . . . All things have been created by Him and for Him."
Then let them give you their whole explanation on how they think Jesus was the first thing created (though that is their twisting of the words ". . . first-born over all creation (1 Corinthian 1:15)"), and then let them continue with how everything "else – according to them" – was then created by Him. Let them do this without giving them even a single objection, no matter how bad you may want to.
Once they are done, then take them to Genesis 2:7 and point out how Jesus spoke everything into existence (chapter one) – except Adam. With Adam, He did not speak but was actually there with His hand's "forming man out of the dust of the ground." And then point out how it also says, in that verse, that it was "Jehovah God who formed Adam out of the dust of the ground (author's emphasis)." With this they are forced to admit that Jesus is Jehovah, something they cannot accept while they remain a Kingdom Hall person.
Keep in mind, your bible may say, "LORD God." But "LORD" is the translator's way of translating Jehovah into English from the Hebrew. Regardless, the Kingdom Hall people's Bible does say "Jehovah God . . ."
You can try to argue with them that Jesus is God if you want to, but they will only agree with you and think, or possibly say, yes "Jesus is a God." And you can then go back and forth arguing about this with them.
But it is much more effective to show them that Jesus is Jehovah. But don't just say that to them because, to them, that would just be blasphemy. Show it to them the way it is explained here.
The reason I am telling you all this, here, is because after you have gone through all this, you can then show them this verse in John 1:23, which is quoting Isaiah 40:3 in reference to Jesus being Jehovah.
(I learned this way of reasoning with the Scriptures to the Kingdom Hall people by observing a friend of mine who had a big and long ministry speaking with Kingdom Hall people in Chicago, IL.)
31. Being that John the Baptist and Jesus were related (Luke 1:36), it is very probable, given Miriam's special relationship with her relative, Elizabeth (Luke 1:39-56), that John the Baptist knew Jesus. In fact this is even indicated when Jesus came to be baptized by John the Baptist, when John told Jesus, "I have need to be baptized by You, and do You come to me (Matthew 3:14)?"
This does seem odd, though, when John says, "I did not know Him . . . (J 1:31, 33)." However, what he was saying is that he did not know Him as the Messiah. Not that he did not know him at all.
32. There is a popular saying that says, "Jesus was baptized for our example." But the one thing dangerously wrong with this is that it is saying something Scripture does NOT say. Not that the statement is dangerous in itself, but adding to Scripture is (Revelation 22:18).
What Scripture does say concerning this is, Jesus was baptized so that Israel would know he was the Messiah (John 1:31). That is also why – as Scripture tells us – the "Spirit came down like a dove and rested upon Him, and then a voice came out of heaven saying, 'This is My Son in whom I am well pleased, listen to Him (Matthew 17:5).'"
33. The sense of the text here is not that the Spirit came down looking like a dove, but that it descended gently, like a dove. It is not to describe the form of the Spirit, but it is describing the way in which He came down.
34. It is believed that when Jesus would say this, or "Son of Man," he was not making a flippant statement, like saying, "I am a son from men" or "I am God's son," necessarily. In making these statements, He was alluding to terms written in Scripture prior to the Gospels as titles for the Messiah, such as we find in Daniel 7:13 and 3:25. Jesus was, in a indirect way, saying – by saying these things – that He is the Messiah.
35. In the book of John, the Greek in this verse says, "the tenth hour."
Now there is indication that John's book was originally written in Greek (see the Preface). For example, when he quotes something Jesus said, he repeatedly uses a Hebrew word and then goes on to say "which is translated into Greek as such and such." If he had originally written it in Aramaic or Hebrew, he would not of had to do this.
Other indications are: instead of calling the Sea of Galilee by that name, he chose to use the Roman name for that sea, calling it "the sea of Tiberias." So when John says "the sixth hour," he is most likely using the Roman timeframe, which would correlate exactly to our time of either ten AM or PM.
36. This is a perfect example of the note, mentioned directly above, where John uses a Hebrew word when quoting Jesus or one of His disciples. For he has used the Hebrew word Messiah, rather than the Greek word Christ; and then said, "which translated means Christ."
37. This verse is amplified into the phrase, "which is an Aramaic word translated into Greek as Peter, meaning a Stone." However, in the original language, it is only stated as, "which is translated Peter."
Also, the closest Hebrew word for rock to this one is cela. Cephas, as far as I understand, is an Aramaic word. However, we need to keep in mind that that does not prove that they spoke Aramaic. What it can also mean is that they had adopted an Aramaic word into the Hebrew language, similar to the way we say "Gesundheit!" even though it is a German word.
You can see this even today because at this present time, Israel – being a country that speaks Hebrew – still uses some Aramaic words, especially the word "Abba," meaning "daddy."
38. The Greek here says "on the morrow." However, we can backtrack and count to what day it actually was in reference to the others.
The sequence is as follows: The first day described (though not mentioned specifically to be the first day in the text) is the one on which John explains to the Pharisees why he is baptizing, since he is not the Messiah (John 1:23-28). "The next day" is when John first points out Jesus as the Messiah in general (John 1:29). The second day (which is now really the third day according to the chronology of events) is when John Points out Jesus as the Messiah to two of his disciples, one of them being Andrew, Peter's brother (John 1:35 and 40). And the third day is the one after John's discourse with the Pharisees, when we are told that Jesus wanted to go to Galilee and, subsequently, calls Philip to follow Him (John 1:43). Then in John 2:1 we are told that it was on the third day that there was a wedding in Cana where Jesus turned the water into wine.
The third day, which is mentioned in John 2:1-3, is questionable. It could be the third day after John first points Jesus out to two of his disciples as the Messiah (John 1:35), which is the day mentioned directly above, or it could be three days after Jesus calls Philip to follow Him to Galilee (John 1:43). Considering that it was probably more than just a one day's walk from Bethabara to Cana, the second scenario is more likely.
39. It seems rather odd that John gives no indication that Nathanael becomes one of the twelve disciples, for he is only mentioned at this point and again at the end of John's Gospel (John 21:2). But John doesn't mention Matthew (Levi) either. In fact John does not give us a single list of the twelve at all. Based on this, and other clues, it is believed that Nathanael was actually the disciple Bartholomew.
John never uses the name Bartholomew, only Nathanael. And the Synoptic Gospels only use the name Nathaniel and never Bartholomew. And in the entire scope of the Gospels whenever Nathaniel and Bartholomew are mentioned, they are always associated with Philip.
40. It has been proposed that it was a common tradition in those days that when a Jew wanted to pray for the coming of the Messiah, he would go under a fig tree – which was supposed to represent Israel – to do it. That does sound plausible, but I am not so sure.
It is very probable that what had happened is – if you read the text in context – that Philip and Andrew were with John the Baptist at the moment Jesus had walked past them, when John the Baptist said, "Behold, the Lamb of God . . ." That is when Philip and Andrew began to follow Jesus. And if you look closely, you can see that Peter was probably somewhere in the area, and that was why Andrew then went to go get him.
After this, all three of them spent the rest of the day together with Jesus (John 1:39).
Nathanael, however, was not with them at this time. Nathanael is not even mentioned until sometime shortly after this event – probably because He was nowhere to be found at the time. But when Philip did get him, Nathanael knew – once he got over to where Jesus was standing – that He could not have known that he was under the fig tree, as if He had seen him there off in the distance. When Jesus informs Nathanael that He knew he was under the fig tree, Nathanael recognized that Jesus knew this supernaturally. That is probably what generated the comment, "You are the king of Israel."
41. Here the vernacular goes, "Amen, amen, I say to you," or "Truly, truly, I say to you." But in our vernacular, it would be better translate as, "I tell you, and you can count on this," or "I tell you that this is for sure."
42. His disciples (not necessarily limited only to those who became "one of the twelve") at this point, probably only consisted of Philip and a few others. The "few others" could possibly be Joseph, called Barsabbas, and Matthias, as mentioned in the verses below.
We also know that Peter, Andrew, James, and John did not "leave everything and follow Him" until sometime after this point. (See the last few paragraphs in the section of the Preface titled Details In the Gospels That Show Forth a Specific Chronology).
43. The Greek here says, "they stayed there not many days."
To understand who the "they" were, it is most likely that Peter, Andrew, James, and John were not among Jesus' committed followers at this point. We know this because when Jesus did call these four men to follow Him (Matthew 4:19), they went to the synagogue, then to Peter's house, and then ". . . throughout all Galilee, and into the congregations of the Jews . . .(Mark 1:39 & Luke 4:44)." And the fact that they went into the "congregations of the Jews (a.k.a. "synagogues") throughout all Galilee, this eliminates any possibility for them to have stayed in Capernaum only for a few days (John 2:12), as it is indicated in the context of Gospels at the point of this endnote.
Put another way, since the four disciples, Peter, Jacob, John, and Andrew had followed Jesus throughout all Galilee preaching in the synagogues directly after Jesus calls them to follow Him, this would not allow them to have been called at the point of this endnote. If they were, we would have a contradiction. We would have Jesus calling them to follow Him and then after only a few days go to Jerusalem. And at the same time also have them preach throughout Galilee one several Sabbaths in a row. That is impossible!
See endnote 3:8, 3:22, and also the preface under the heading, Details In the Gospels That Show Forth a Specific Chronology.
44. It would have been against the law for them to do this in the actual temple, so they were most likely doing this in the area of the court of the Gentile's. (Also, notice Jesus' response in Mark 11:17.)
45. This scripture may be – at least in part – where James gets the idea he presents in James 4:5.
46. Both the NKJV and the NASB translate the Greek at this point as ". . . He knew all men," the NKJV italicizing the word "men" because it does not exist in the Greek text at this specific point.
But there is more, the Greek text here is, also, actually in the "present, active, infinitive" tense(Aland, Kurt, Black, Matthew, Martini, Carlo M., Metzger, Bruce M., and Wikgren, Allen, The Greek New Testament, (Deutsche Bibelgesellschaft Stuttgart) 1983.). Therefore, it literally reads "He knows all." And in this, John is informing us that Jesus knows all things.
Just after this, the word "to know" at the end of the next verse is in the "imperfect, active, indicative" tense when the text informs us that Jesus "knew all men," the Greek word for men really being in the text at this point.
47. To say this is in reference to water baptism is to grossly depart from the surrounding context. Considering Jesus' response that "that which is born from the flesh is flesh and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit" would answer the question as to what He is referring to immediately prior to this, when he says one needs to be "born of water . . . and of the Spirit." "Flesh" and "water" in this context are synonymous.
48. Here, the Greek literally says ". . . born from above." But to understand the confusion Nicodemus is experiencing over the term "born again (verse 73 of this publication)," the second "from above (verse 76 of this publication)" is translated as "a second time." This is in reference to the fact that the Greek does not say "born again," but does say "born from above."
As well, this shows that Nicodemus' confusion was not, necessarily, over what being born from above meant; he was confused about how a person could be born a second time. And that is why he asked the question, "how can a man be born when he is old, he cannot enter a second time into his mother's womb (John 3:4)".
Another point to keep in mind is that baptism is nowhere in the discussion Jesus and Nicodemus are having; therefore, to translate Jesus' remark about being born of water as baptism is just not logical. But since Jesus is talking about being born a second time, water makes much more sense, if it is understood as being the water of the mother's womb.
49. Or, "How can this happen."
50. The word commonly translated here as "only-born" is monogenes, and it comes from the Greek word ginomai, meaning "kind." What we do have to note is that it is a different word than the words gennos, meaning "originated" or "born" and menos, meaning "only" or "unique."
But Jesus, being born of the Holy Spirit (Matthew 1:18-25), does make Him uniquely born – the only one born as God's son. We, on the other hand, are not born into God's family as sons. We are adopted (Ephesians 1:5). (Also see endnote 1:7.)
51. Here it is not saying that Jesus is blackmailing people to believe in Him – threatening that, if you don't believe in Him, He will send you to hell. What it is saying is that we are already spiritually dead, and He is the only one qualified to offer us life.
53. The Greek here says, "having their deeds made visible."
54. Baptism is a Greek word meaning "to be immersed" or "dipped." The confusion comes when the word is transliterated, rather than translated. When it is only transliterated, it gives the impression that baptism had never been practiced before, and that it was solely an institution of the "New Testament."
This is just not so. In fact, not only was it a common practice of the Jews in Jesus' day, but it was even prescribed in the Scriptures prior to Jesus' birth. You can see this in the following verses, where it is designated as one of the priest's responsibility for the Day of Atonement, in Israel – something that had only happened once a year. The Day of Atonement being a celebration symbolizing Israel being cleansed from their sins:
And he shall bathe his body with water in a holy place and put on his clothes, and come forth and offer his burnt offering and the burnt offering of the people, and make atonement for himself and for the people (Leviticus 16:24).
And the following verse is a description given of the baptismal "sea," and the hand and utensil basins for washing.
Also, note the Greek use of the word baptism in the following verses:
Another aspect of this to consider is: The problem in this circumstance was that the elders had applied this to a wide array of other areas – as a law for a man to clean himself from unrighteousness, for instance. (Which is something we are not able to obtain through the flesh anyway, Romans 8:7).
Therefore, this rule would not have been bad if they had applied it as a general rule for sanitation, depending on the spirit they enforced it with.
Obedience to the law is not legalism. Legalism is trying to use the law to justify ourselves in the sight of God; as well as using it for ourselves, or on others, as a way to cure an incurable heart.
Faith, on the other hand, is trusting in the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus the Messiah, through which we then receive a new heart that leads us into obedience to the law (Romans 3:30). Also, consider Matthew 5:19.
55. In the Greek it says, ". . . wrath remains on them."
56. Sychar is the same city as Shechem.
With that in mind, the following verses give the history, as recorded in the Bible, for this city, Shechem:
57. There is one main reason why this is most likely six PM and not six AM. It is because He was tired from His journey, and because they had asked Him to stay with them that night.
And knowing Jesus, He probably planed to arrive in Shechem at that time. See endnote 2:35.
58. The Greek here literally says ". . . and He will announce everything."
