Expository Notes on John

Ironside SG

I would like to share to you the work of a Bible scholar Dr. Gadiel Isidro. They are expository Notes on the book of John. It's main purpose according to the writer, Dr. Gadiel Isidro, is in accord with John's purpose in writing the book. It is written that a) you may belive that Jesus is the Son of God and b) through believing on Him you might have eternal life.

Joh 20:31 but these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing you may have life in His name.

It is not a verse by verse commentary. Only pertinent verses were commented upon. Verses which the writer felt relevant to the purpose. Here I would also like to solicit the respect of non-Christians here in this thread. Please refrain from posting in this thread anything that violates the integrity and purpose of this thread.

This commentary is given for free here in the place where i come from. I hope and pray that God will mightily use it for the edification and salvation of souls.
I will be regularly adding on and updating on this every now and then.

Notes on John by Dr. Gadiel Isidro

CHAPTER 1

Joh 1:1 "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God."

John 1:1 . The verb was from the Greek "en", being in the imperfect tense in Greek grammar, speaks of the eternality of the Logos. This means that before things began, the Logos was already in existence.

The title Logos is a very important philosophical and theological term. Greek philosophers believed that the Logos was the impersonal power which holds the universe together. Alexandrian philosophers also taught that the Logos was a powerful being, but inferior to the supreme being.

But John wrote that the Logos is a distinct person who is equal in being with God. This is emphasized by the last clause of the verse which states: and God was the Word.

The word God in Greek is "Theos". This has no article and it is the first word in the last clause. There is a very important rule in Greek grammar which states that the presence of the article identifies, but its absence qualifies.

This means that Theos in the last clause describes the Logos as God in His being, not a small god, as some groups teach. He is a distinct person, eternal and equal in being with the Father.

M©+square SG

I suppose he commented on context and the remaining verses are yet to be posted.

Ironside SG

12 But as many as received him, to them he gave authority to become the children of God, those who believe in his name:

John 1:12 The condition for becoming a child of God is to receive the Logos as God and Savior. No one will be born again unless that person believes in the deity of the Logos, who is Jesus Christ.

This act of receiving the Logos occurs only once because the tense of the verb receive refers to a single action. This is called the aorist tense in Greek. Thus after a person has genuinely received the Logos, he is born again permanently [based on the tense].

After he becomes a child of God, he becomes a continuing believer. This is the tense of the phrase ..those who believe. In this passage those who believe describes those who received and who have become children of God, not a condition for becoming a child of God, the phrase being a participle.

Ironside SG

13 Who were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.

John 1:13 This verse teaches that becoming a child of God is an act only by God and never by the efforts of any human being.

14 And the Word became flesh, and tabernacled among us, and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth.

John 1:14 Some translations render the first clause and the Word was made flesh. This passage of course refers to the incarnation of the Logos. But the more accurate translation should be And the Word became flesh, the verb became is in the active voice. So the Word actively decided to become flesh, thus teaching again that before His incarnation, He already was in existence as a person.

The more accurate translation should be he tabernacled rather than dwelt. The tabernacle signified the presence of God. His presence here on earth radiated the presence of God, He was full of grace and truth.

The word begotten here does not refer to the beginning of the existence of the Logos, but to his investiture of Messianic and redemptive authority. See Psalms 2:7.

Icemoon SG

if everyone starts an expository topic on every book of the bible .. we will have 66 new topics. Laughing

M©+square SG

I felt that he's off by only commentating on Jn 1:1 and not the rest of the passage.

This is where denominational differences comes in, Emphasis onto different words / semantics / verse.

To me, is a flaw simply because it is INcomplete.

Icemoon SG

maybe he wanted us to digest 1:1 first. Mr. Green

M©+square SG

Which is why i gave the benefit of doubt and waited. Wink

Icemoon SG

He could have typed them out by hand. Mr. Green

Ironside SG

18 No one has seen God at any time; the only begotten Son, who is in the bosom of the Father, He has revealed Him.

John 1:18 The more accurate designation should be Only Begotten Son rather than only begotten God as found in some contemporary translations. Because as pointed out in v. 14 that the title begotten refers to investiture of Messianic and Redemptive authority, then it contradicts the designation of the Son as Messiah and Saviour if we have only begotten God. And John 3:16 also states that the Logos is the Only Begotten Son.

While other translations have the word declared, the Greek verb is eksegeomai which more accurately should be translated revealed. The Logos, the Only Begotten Son, revealed the true being of the Father, not just explained or declared.

P.S. These are expository NOTES not expository sermons. Please pardon for some technicalities [like Greek and it's accompanying technicalities]. They are like that because they are EXPOSITORY.
This type of literature is in the category of EXEGETICAL EXPOSITORY NOTES.

All of the verses are not treated exactly the same because they are NOTES not expository sermons or commentaries. They are commetaries, yes, in a way because they comment on the verses but they do not comment on every part of the verse because they are NOTES
.

There are devotional commentaries like Matthew Henry, there are expository commentaries like Bible Expositors Commentary, there are Exegetical Expository commentaries like Lenski. But there also exists NOTES on the Bible like Scofields NOTEs on the Bible like Ryries Study Bible and etc.
This commentary is of the latter kind.

Every Bible scholar would not be surpised why this literature is written the way it is written. They would simply understand it from the title: NOTES on JOHN.

Thanks to some for respecting the thread. Smile

Ironside SG

29 The next day John sees Jesus coming unto him, and says, Behold the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world.

36 And looking upon Jesus as he walked, he says, Behold the Lamb of God!

John 1:29,36 The title Lamb of God is also messianic, but the more distinctive emphasis is His redemptive work as also stated in Isaiah 53:6. It is only through the death of Logos as the Lamb of God, that we can be forgiven of our sins.

34 And I have seen , and have witnessed that this is the Son of God.

49 Nathanael answered and says to him, Rabbi, You are the Son of God; You are the King of Israel.

John 1:34, 49 Son of God is another title of the Logos. This speaks of his being as the same with God the Father. See John 5:18.

41 This one first finds his own brother Simon and he says to him, We have found the Messiah which is interpreted, the Christ.

49 Nathanael answered and says to him, Rabbi, You are the Son of God; You are the King of Israel

John 1:41, 49. As the Messiah, the Logos is the Christ or the Anointed who is also the King of Israel.

51 And he says to him, Truly, truly, I say to you, From now on, you will see heaven already opened, and the angels of God ascending and descending upon the Son of Man.

John 1:51 The Logos is also the Son of Man. This title does not refer primarily to his humanity. Instead this is another Messianic title as stated in Daniel 7:13,14.
So the Logos, who became flesh is designated as the Only Begotten Son, the Lamb of God, the Son of God, the Messiah and the Son of Man. These titles strongly argue for the eternal deity of the Logos who is Jesus Christ.

Ironside SG

CHAPTER 2

3 And being short of wine, the mother of Jesus says to him, They have no wine.

John 2:3 Was this fermented wine? Debate continues about the real nature of the wine used here. But the Bible clearly prohibits being drunk with wine. See Ephesians 5:18.

4 Jesus says to her, Woman, what is that to me and to you? My hour has not yet come.

John 2:4. When the Lord addressed his mother, woman, he was not showing any disrespect. The Greek word used here was a word of affection.

The meaning of the clause what is that to me and to you has challenged many translators and interpreters. Simply this should mean, What can I do for you now?

5 His mother says to the servants, Whatever he may say to you, do it.

John 2:5 This verse refutes the present teaching that when people pray to the mother of Jesus, then Jesus will have to answer. Instead she told the servants to do whatever Jesus will tell them to do.

Further, the Mary of the Bible is not the Mary to whom millions pray everyday.

11 This beginning of the signs Jesus did in Cana of Galilee, and manifested his glory; and his disciples believed in him.

John 2:11 What Jesus did at this wedding was called sign. The Greek word is 'semeion.' Signs done by prophets and apostles confirmed their office and their message as from God. But false prophets could also perform signs See II Thessalonians 2:9. There is no more need today for signs to confirm the true message of God because we already have the Scriptures

Ironside SG

15 And after he had made a whip of ropes, he threw out of the temple all the sheep, and the oxen; and poured out the money of the money-changers, and overturned the tables;

John 2:15. The whip was made out of ropes and he did not hit the people with the whip, but used the whip to drive out the animals.

18 Therefore the Jews answered and said unto him, What sign do you show to us, that you do these things?
19 Jesus said to them, Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up.

John 2:18,19. The sign that Jesus had the authority to do what he did was his resurrection.

23 And as he was in Jerusalem at the passover, at the feast, many believed in his name, beholding the signs which he did.

24 But Jesus Himself did not believe in them, because he knew all,

25 And did not need that any should witness concerning man: for he knew what was in man.

John 2: 23-25 Faith based on physical and visible signs is not genuine and saving faith. Jesus did not accept the faith of the people for they believe only because of the signs. But faith on the sign of His resurrection is genuine and saving faith. See Romans 10:9;10

Ironside SG

CHAPTER 3

1 There was a man of the Pharisees, named Nicodemus, a ruler of the Jews:

John 3:1 A Pharisee was a Jew who tried to keep all the laws given by Moses including the traditions given by the early Jewish fathers and teachers.

2 This came to Jesus by night, and said to him, Rabbi, we know that you are a teacher who has come from God: for no one can do these signs which you are doing, except God is with him.

John 3:2 Nicodemus came to see Jesus at night, not because of fear, but instead he wanted to spend more time with Jesus.

The use of the plural pronoun we means that Nicodemus came representing the Sanhedrin, the highest judicial body of the nation of Israel. This body of rulers was convinced that Jesus was a prophet from God because of the miracles which he performed.

3 Jesus answered and said unto him, Truly, truly, I say to you, Unless one is born from above, he cannot see the kingdom of God.

John 3:3 But Jesus told him that unless one is born from above, he cannot see the kingdom of God. While some versions translate born again, the more accurate translation of the Greek word anothen is above rather than again. This is the same word translated above in v. 31 He who comes from above. The emphasis of the Lord is that one must have a heavenly birth inorder to see the kingdom of God. This happens when one receives everlasting life when he believes in the Only Begotten Son. See v. 16.

The verb be born comes from the Greek verbal form gennethe which is in the passive voice. This means that being born from above is not the work of man, but of God. See again John 1:13. Further, the tense of the verb speaks of a one-time event, not a process. So genuine spiritual birth is only a single event.

Ironside SG

5 Jesus answered, Truly, truly I say unto you, Unless one is born of water, even of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.

John 3:5 The translation by most versions born of water and Spirit has been used as the basis of the teaching of baptismal regeneration. To them, this means, that one has to be baptized inorder to be saved. But the more accurate translation should be born of water, even of the Spirit, because many times in the New Testament the Greek conjunction kai could be translated even. But a much stronger basis is that in Gospel of John water is the symbol of the Holy Spirit. See John 7:37-39.

ben1xy SG

Originally posted by Ironside:

5 Jesus answered, Truly, truly I say unto you, Unless one is born of water, even of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.

John 3:5 The translation by most versions born of water and Spirit has been used as the basis of the teaching of baptismal regeneration. To them, this means, that one has to be baptized inorder to be saved. But the more accurate translation should be born of water, even of the Spirit, because many times in the New Testament the Greek conjunction [b]kai could be translated even. But a much stronger basis is that in Gospel of John water is the symbol of the Holy Spirit. See John 7:37-39.[/b]

Hi Ironside,

how does this change the verse. no matter how i read it, it still seems that Bptism still seems necessary for salvation

davidche SG

it is, but it is not a dead law.

You see that jesus always inply this. When healing the sick on sabbath.

Ironside SG

yes, my friend baptism is necessary. Dry baptism that is. The Word of God is clear that wet baptism is only for those who have experienced dry baptism.

When the Lord Jesus said: "one must be born of water even of the Spirit" He was not talking of being baptized with water. The word "EVEN" is explicative. It explains the preceeding word.

"One must be born of water....."

we ask: what water are you talking about? Is this literal water or not? The proceeding words then explains:

" EVEN OF THE SPIRIT."

So water there is really a symbolism of the Holy Spirit not of literal water. It is the Holy Spirit that causes one to be born again. The Lord Jesus Himself interprets water for us in the same book. We don't have to go to doctors and theologians to find the interpretation for ourself. The best commentary of the Bible is the Bible itself.

Here read this my friend:

Joh 7:37 On the last day, that great day of the feast, Jesus stood and cried out, saying, "If anyone thirsts, let him come to Me and drink.

The Lord Jesus is inviting sinners here to come to Him.

38 "He who believes in Me, as the Scripture has said, out of his heart will flow rivers of living water."

What a great text on salvation my friend. If you but come to Christ and trust in Him for salvation OUT OF YOUR HEART WILL FLOW FORTH RIVERS OF LIVING WATER."

What water is He talking about? Is this literal water or was the Lord Jesus talking symbolically? Read the next verse to find out what water is this?

39 But this He spoke concerning the Spirit, whom those believing in Him would receive; for the Holy Spirit was not yet given, because Jesus was not yet glorified.

Ah so this water He is talking about refers to the Holy Spirit. Not literal water. In the same book, we find the interpretation with the Lord Jesus Himself as our teacher.

So that's why after He said that one must be born of water even of the Spirit in verse 5. He only says Spirit in verse 6 as the agent of the new birth:

Joh 3:5 Jesus answered, "Most assuredly, I say to you, unless one is born of water even of the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God.

6 "That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.

I am also aware that some understood the verse my friend as a Hendiadys. Hendiadys means using words to mean the same thing. Hence, they also say 'water and the Spirit' here is one.

Others also say that 'water' means the Word of God--the Gospel of salvation--for in other instances in the NT, the Word of salvation is symbolized as water.

The Holy Spirit illuminating the repentant sinner to the Word of Salvation and thus the sinner becomes born again. 1 Cor. 2:14-16 and 1 peter 1:23, Eph. 5:26 combined.

ben1xy SG

fair enough

similar to Catholic's practise of Baptism by intent

Very Happy

Ironside SG

14 And even as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, so must the Son of Man be lifted up:

John 3:14 The account of the lifting up of the serpent in the wilderness is found in Numbers 21:5-9. When people were bitten by the serpents, Moses was told by God to make a brazen serpent and lift up the image in a pole and all those who were bitten were healed when they just lifted up their eyes to the image of that brazen serpent.

The lifting up of the serpent was a type of the crucifixion of the Lord Jesus Christ and all those who look in faith to Christ who died on the cross will have everlasting life.