▼tn Grk “answered and said to them.”

▼tn Grk “Truly, truly, I say to you.”

▼tn Grk “because you ate of the loaves of bread and were filled.”

▼tn Or “perishes” (this might refer to spoiling, but is more focused on the temporary nature of this kind of food).

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

▼tn The referent (the food) has been specified for clarity by repeating the word “food” from the previous clause.

▼tn Grk “on this one.”

▼tn Grk “the works.”

▼tn Grk “What must we do to work the works of God?”

▼tn Grk “answered and said to them.”

▼tn Grk “the work.”

▼tn Grk “This is the work of God.”

▼tn Grk “that one” (i.e., God).

▼tn Or “forefathers”; Grk “fathers.”

▼sn A quotation from Ps 78:24 (referring to the events of Exod 16:4-36).

▼tn Grk “Truly, truly, I say to you.”

▼tn Or “he who.”

▼tn Or “Lord.” The Greek κύριος (kurios) means both “Sir” and “Lord.” In this passage it is not at all clear at this point that the crowd is acknowledging Jesus as Lord. More likely this is simply a form of polite address (“sir”).

▼tn Grk “the one who believes in me will not possibly thirst, ever.”

▼sn The one who believes in me will never be thirsty. Note the parallelism between “coming to Jesus” in the first part of v. 35 and “believing in Jesus” in the second part of v. 35. For the author of the Gospel of John these terms are virtually equivalent, both referring to a positive response to Jesus (see John 3:17-21).

▼tn Grk “But I said to you.”

▼tc A few witnesses lack με (me, “me”; א A a b e q sys,c), while the rest of the tradition has the word (P66,75vid rell). It is possible that the mss that lack the pronoun preserve the original wording here, with the rest of the witnesses adding the pronoun for clarity’s sake. This likelihood increases since the object is not required in Greek. Without it, however, ambiguity increases: The referent could be “me” or it could be “signs,” reaching back to vv. 26 and 30. However, the oblique form of ἐγώ (egō, the first person personal pronoun) occurs some two dozen times in this chapter alone, yet it vacillates between the emphatic form and the unemphatic form. Although generally the unemphatic form is used with verbs, there are several exceptions to this in John (cf. 8:12; 12:26, 45, 48; 13:20; 14:9). If the pronoun is a later addition here, one wonders why it is so consistently the unemphatic form in the mss. Further, that two unrelated Greek witnesses lack this small word could easily be due to accidental deletion. Finally, the date and diversity of the witnesses for the pronoun are so weighty that it is likely to be authentic and should thus be retained in the text.

▼tn Or “drive away”; Grk “cast out.”

▼tn Or “resurrect them all,” or “make them all live again”; Grk “raise it up.” The word “all” is supplied to bring out the collective nature of the neuter singular pronoun αὐτό (auto) in Greek. The plural pronoun “them” is used rather than neuter singular “it” because this is clearer in English, which does not use neuter collective singulars in the same way Greek does.

▼tn Or “resurrect him,” or “make him live again.”

▼sn Notice that here the result (having eternal life and being raised up at the last day) is produced by looking on the Son and believing in him. Compare John 6:54 where the same result is produced by eating Jesus’ flesh and drinking his blood. This suggests that the phrase in 6:54 (eats my flesh and drinks my blood) is to be understood in terms of the phrase here (looks on the Son and believes in him).

▼tn Grk “Then the Jews.” In NT usage the term ᾿Ιουδαῖοι (Ioudaioi) may refer to the entire Jewish people, the residents of Jerusalem and surrounding territory, the authorities in Jerusalem, or merely those who were hostile to Jesus. (For further information see R. G. Bratcher, “‘The Jews’ in the Gospel of John,” BT 26 [1975]: 401-9.) Here the translation restricts the phrase to those Jews who were hostile to Jesus (cf. BDAG 479 s.v. ᾿Ιουδαῖος 2.e.β), since the “crowd” mentioned in 6:22-24 was almost all Jewish (as suggested by their addressing Jesus as “Rabbi” (6:25). Likewise, the designation “Judeans” does not fit here because the location is Galilee rather than Judea.

▼tn Grk “answered and said to them.”

▼tn Or “Do not grumble among yourselves.” The words “about me” are supplied to clarify the translation “complain to one another” (otherwise the Jewish opponents could be understood to be complaining about one another, rather than complaining to one another about Jesus).

▼tn Or “attracts him,” or “pulls him.” The word is used of pulling or dragging, often by force. It is even used once of magnetic attraction (A. Oepke, TDNT 2:503).

▼sn The Father who sent me draws him. The author never specifically explains what this “drawing” consists of. It is evidently some kind of attraction; whether it is binding and irresistible or not is not mentioned. But there does seem to be a parallel with 6:65, where Jesus says that no one is able to come to him unless the Father has allowed it. This apparently parallels the use of Isaiah by John to reflect the spiritual blindness of the Jewish leaders (see the quotations from Isaiah in John 9:41 and 12:39-40).

▼sn A quotation from Isa 54:13.

▼tn Or “listens to the Father and learns.”

▼tn Grk “this one.”

▼sn This is best taken as a parenthetical note by the author. Although some would attribute these words to Jesus himself, the switch from first person in Jesus’ preceding and following remarks to third person in v. 46 suggests that the author has added a clarifying comment here.

▼tn Grk “Truly, truly, I say to you.”

▼tc Most witnesses (A C2 D Ψ ƒ1,13 33 Maj lat and other versions) have “in me” (εἰς ἐμέ, eis eme) here, while the Sinaitic and Curetonian Syriac versions read “in God.” These clarifying readings are predictable variants, being motivated by the scribal tendency toward greater explicitness. That the earliest and best witnesses (P66,75vid א B C* L T W Θ 892) lack any object is solid testimony to the shorter text’s authenticity.

▼tn Cf. John 6:40.

▼tn That is, “the bread that produces (eternal) life.”

▼tn Or “forefathers”; Grk “fathers.”

▼tn Or “Here.”

▼tn Grk “someone” (τις, tis).

▼tn Grk “And the bread.”

▼tn Grk “Then the Jews began to argue.” Here the translation restricts the phrase to those Jews who were hostile to Jesus (cf. BDAG 479 s.v. ᾿Ιουδαῖος 2.e.β), since the “crowd” mentioned in 6:22-24 was almost all Jewish (as suggested by their addressing Jesus as “Rabbi” (6:25). See also the note on the phrase “the Jews who were hostile to Jesus” in v. 41.

▼tn Grk “with one another, saying.”

▼tn Grk “this one,” “this person.”

▼tn Grk “Truly, truly, I say to you.”

▼sn Unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood. These words are at the heart of the discourse on the Bread of Life, and have created great misunderstanding among interpreters. Anyone who is inclined toward a sacramental viewpoint will almost certainly want to take these words as a reference to the sacrament of the Lord’s Supper, or the Eucharist, because of the reference to eating and drinking. But this does not automatically follow: By anyone’s definition there must be a symbolic element to the eating which Jesus speaks of in the discourse, and once this is admitted, it is better to understand it here, as in the previous references in the passage, to a personal receiving of (or appropriation of) Christ and his work.

▼tn That is, “no eternal life” (as opposed to physical life).

▼tn Or “who chews”; Grk ὁ τρώγων (ho trōgōn). The alternation between ἐσθίω (esthiō, “eat,” v. 53) and τρώγω (trōgō, “eats,” vv. 54, 56, 58; “consumes,” v. 57) may simply reflect a preference for one form over the other on the author’s part, rather than an attempt to express a slightly more graphic meaning. If there is a difference, however, the word used here (τρώγω) is the more graphic and vivid of the two (“gnaw” or “chew”).

▼sn Notice that here the result (has eternal life and I will raise him up at the last day) is produced by eating (Jesus’) flesh and drinking his blood. Compare John 6:40 where the same result is produced by “looking on the Son and believing in him.” This suggests that the phrase here (eats my flesh and drinks my blood) is to be understood by the phrase in 6:40 (looks on the Son and believes in him).

▼tn Or “real.”

▼tn Or “real.”

▼tn Or “who chews.” On the alternation between ἐσθίω (esthiō, “eat,” v. 53) and τρώγω (trōgō, “eats,” vv. 54, 56, 58; “consumes,” v. 57) see the note on “eats” in v. 54.

▼sn Resides in me, and I in him. Note how in John 6:54 eating Jesus’ flesh and drinking his blood produces eternal life and the promise of resurrection at the last day. Here the same process of eating Jesus’ flesh and drinking his blood leads to a relationship of mutual indwelling (resides in me, and I in him). This suggests strongly that for the author (and for Jesus) the concepts of ‘possessing eternal life’ and of ‘residing in Jesus’ are virtually interchangeable.

▼tn Or “who chews”; Grk “who eats.” Here the translation “consumes” is more appropriate than simply “eats,” because it is the internalization of Jesus by the individual that is in view. On the alternation between ἐσθίω (esthiō, “eat,” v. 53) and τρώγω (trōgō, “eats,” vv. 54, 56, 58; “consumes,” v. 57) see the note on “eats” in v. 54.

▼tn Or “This one.”

▼tn Or “forefathers”; Grk “fathers.”

▼tn Grk “This is the bread that came down from heaven, not just like your ancestors ate and died.” The cryptic Greek expression has been filled out in the translation for clarity.

▼tn Or “who chews.” On the alternation between ἐσθίω (esthiō, “eat,” v. 53) and τρώγω (trōgō, “eats,” vv. 54, 56, 58; “consumes,” v. 57) see the note on “eats” in v. 54.

▼tn Grk “He”; the referent (Jesus) is specified in the translation for clarity.

▼sn A synagogue was a place for Jewish prayer and worship, with recognized leadership (cf. Luke 8:41). Though the origin of the synagogue is not entirely clear, it seems to have arisen in the postexilic community during the intertestamental period. A town could establish a synagogue if there were at least ten men. In normative Judaism of the NT period, the OT scripture was read and discussed in the synagogue by the men who were present (see the Mishnah, m. Megillah 3-4; m. Berakhot 2).

▼sn See the note on Capernaum at John 6:17.

▼Or hard

▼tn The words “these things” are not present in the Greek text but are implied. Direct objects in Greek were often omitted when clear from the context, and must be supplied for the English reader.

▼tn Or “hard,” “demanding.”

▼tn Or “teaching”; Grk “word.”

▼tn Or “obey it”; Grk “hear it.” The Greek word ἀκούω (akouō) could imply hearing with obedience here, in the sense of “obey.” It could also point to the acceptance of what Jesus had just said, (i.e., “who can accept what he said?” However, since the context contains several replies by those in the crowd of hearers that suggest uncertainty or confusion over the meaning of what Jesus had said (6:42; 6:52), the meaning “understand” is preferred here.

▼tn Grk “When Jesus knew within himself.”

▼tn Or “were grumbling.”

▼tn Or “Does this cause you to no longer believe?” (Grk “cause you to stumble?”)

▼sn Does this cause you to be offended? It became apparent to some of Jesus’ followers at this point that there would be a cost involved in following him. They had taken offense at some of Jesus’ teaching (perhaps the graphic imagery of “eating his flesh” and “drinking his blood”), and Jesus now warned them that if they thought this was a problem, there was an even worse cause for stumbling in store: his upcoming crucifixion (John 6:61b-62). Jesus asked, in effect, “Has what I just taught caused you to stumble? What will you do, then, if you see the Son of Man ascending where he was before?” This ascent is to be accomplished through the cross; for John, Jesus’ departure from this world and his return to the Father form one continual movement from cross to resurrection to ascension.

▼tn Or “he was formerly?”

▼tn Grk “the flesh counts for nothing.”

▼tn Or “are spirit-giving and life-producing.”

▼Or hand Him over

▼sn This is a parenthetical comment by the author.

▼tn Grk “And he said”; the referent (Jesus) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

▼tn Grk “unless it has been permitted to him by the Father.”

▼tn Grk “many of his disciples went back to what lay behind.”

▼tn Grk “were not walking with him.”

▼tn Questions prefaced with μή (mē) in Greek anticipate a negative answer. This can sometimes be indicated by using a “tag” at the end in English (here it is “do you?”).

▼tn Grk “And we.”

▼sn See 1 John 4:16.

▼tc The witnesses display a bewildering array of variants here. Instead of “the Holy One of God” (ὁ ἅγιος τοῦ θεοῦ, ho hagios tou theou), Tertullian has ὁ Χριστός (ho Christos, “the Christ”); C3 Θ* ƒ1 33 565 lat read ὁ Χριστὸς ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ θεοῦ (ho Christos ho huios tou theou, “the Christ, the Son of God”); two versional witnesses (b syc) have ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ θεοῦ (“the Son of God”); the Byzantine text as well as many others (Ψ 0250 ƒ13 33 Maj) read ὁ Χριστὸς ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ θεοῦ τοῦ ζῶντος (ho Christos ho huios tou theou tou zōntos, “the Christ, the Son of the living God”); and P66 as well as a few versions have ὁ Χριστὸς ὁ ἅγιος τοῦ θεοῦ (“the Christ, the Holy One of God”). The reading ὁ ἅγιος τοῦ θεοῦ is, however, well supported by P75 א B C* D L W as well as versional witnesses. It appears that Peter’s confession in the Synoptic Gospels (especially Matt 16:16) supplied the motivation for the variations. Although the witnesses in Matt 16:16; Mark 8:29; and Luke 9:20 vary considerably, the readings are all intra-synoptic, that is, they do not pull in “the Holy One of God” but reflect various permutations of “Christ”/“Christ of God”/“Christ, the Son of God”/“Christ, the Son of the living God.” The wording “the Holy One of God” (without “Christ”) in significant witnesses here is thus unique among Peter’s confessions, and best explains the rise of the other readings.

▼sn You have the words of eternal life…you are the Holy One of God! In contrast to the response of some of his disciples, here is the response of the Twelve, whom Jesus then questioned concerning their loyalty to him. This was the big test, and the Twelve, with Peter as spokesman, passed with flying colors. The confession here differs considerably from the synoptic accounts (Matt 16:16, Mark 8:29, and Luke 9:20) and concerns directly the disciples’ personal loyalty to Jesus, in contrast to those other disciples who had deserted him (John 6:66).

▼tn Grk “Jesus answered them.”

▼tn Although most translations render this last phrase as “one of you is a devil,” such a translation presupposes that there is more than one devil. This finds roots in the KJV in which the Greek word for demon was often translated “devil.” In fact, the KJV never uses the word “demon.” (Sixty-two of the 63 NT instances of δαιμόνιον [daimonion] are translated “devil” [in Acts 17:18 the plural has been translated “gods”]. This can get confusing in places where the singular “devil” is used: Is Satan or one of the demons in view [cf. Matt 9:33 (demon); 13:39 (devil); 17:18 (demon); Mark 7:26 (demon); Luke 4:2 (devil); etc.]?) Now regarding John 6:70, both the construction in Greek and the technical use of διάβολος (diabolos) indicate that the one devil is in view. To object to the translation “the devil” because it thus equates Judas with Satan does not take into consideration that Jesus often spoke figuratively (e.g., “destroy this temple” [John 2:19]; “he [John the Baptist] is Elijah” [Matt 11:14]), even equating Peter with the devil on one occasion (Mark 8:33). According to ExSyn 249, “A curious phenomenon has occurred in the English Bible with reference to one particular monadic noun, διάβολος. The KJV translates both διάβολος and δαιμόνιον as ‘devil.’ Thus in the AV translators’ minds, ‘devil’ was not a monadic noun. Modern translations have correctly rendered δαιμόνιον as ‘demon’ and have, for the most part, recognized that διάβολος is monadic (cf., e.g., 1 Pet 5:8; Rev 20:2). But in John 6:70 modern translations have fallen into the error of the King James translators. The KJV has ‘one of you is a devil.’ So does the RSV, NRSV, ASV, NIV, NKJV, and the JB [Jerusalem Bible]. Yet there is only one devil…The legacy of the KJV still lives on, then, even in places where it ought not.”

▼Or was intending to

▼sn At least six explanations for the name Iscariot have been proposed, but it is probably transliterated Hebrew with the meaning “man of Kerioth” (there are at least two villages that had that name). See D. A. Carson, John, 304.

▼tn Grk “this one”; the referent (Judas) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

▼sn This parenthetical statement by the author helps the reader understand Jesus’ statement one of you is the devil in the previous verse. This is the first mention of Judas in the Fourth Gospel, and he is immediately identified (as he is in the synoptic gospels, Matt 10:4, Mark 3:19, Luke 6:16) as the one who would betray Jesus.