Study bible with commentary by john macarthur online. MacArthur - New Testament - Commentaries - BibleQuote7. Where to Buy the Most Accessible Bible - With Commentary by John MacArthur

Study Bible MacArthur is the most understandable source of the word of God.
How is this edition different from other similar books?

1. The plot lines of the work are divided by headings and subheadings to facilitate understanding and tracing the logical chain
2. Words added by translators for coherence of the text are indicated in italics.
3. Quotations from the Old Testament are also marked in type.
4. Poems and prose are designed in a modern way.
5. Punctuation marks are placed according to the modern rules of the Russian language.
6. The outdated vocabulary of the Synodal Text of the Bible has been completely revised and has become understandable even to a child.

The MacArthur Study Bible contains a large number of Additional Resources to Help Your Child Grow in the Faith! Here's what you'll find in it:

1. Introductions - each of the 66 books of the Bible contains an introduction that will help the child understand what this book is about, how and when it was written. It also provides links to the main stories and characters in this book that the child will meet as they read.
2. - 500 notes titled "Strengthening Faith". They discuss important spiritual issues: how to be obedient to God and parents, how to be patient, how to endure difficulties, how to use your abilities to help other people.
3. Trial of Faith - Notes titled "Test of Faith" will test your child's progress in faith. There is also a special place where the child can write down what he learned when he read the verse from the Bible and answered the question.
4. Important Words - There are many important words in the Bible that your child needs to know and understand in order to grow in the faith. Key words are highlighted in the Bible with rectangles. There is also a Bible verse that helps clarify what God is saying about this topic.
5. Biblical heroes - if you scroll through this Bible, then you can find colored inserts in it, separated from the main text. Sixteen such pages are articles. In total, 16 people are identified that your child needs to know about and from whose life he can learn lessons for himself. These articles help the child, after reading a story about a particular hero, put himself in his place and think about how he would behave if he got into a similar situation.
6. Prayer - you will find 8 articles in a colored insert. After reading them, your child will need to answer some questions: "What is prayer?" "Does God always know our thoughts?" "Is there a special way to pray?" "How should I pray?" As your child reads this Bible by himself or with you, it is also important to learn how to pray. God wants children to talk to Him too.

At the end of this Bible you will find the article "How to Read the Bible" which offers one way to read
Bibles - 30 days - read the Gospels, 50 days - New Testament and 50 days - the Old Testament.
To this method, you will also find at the end the reading order of the Bible verses, a place to write what your child has learned by reading this or that passage.

Where to buy the most accessible Bible - with commentary by John MacArthur?

You can buy a Bible with the commentaries of John MacArthur by placing an order in the MSM online store.

Doctor of Theology, pastor of Grace Church in Sun Valley (California, USA), rector of Masters College and Seminary.
Renowned Bible interpreter and orator, author of numerous books, including The Gospel According to Jesus and the Interpretation of the New Testament Books series.
John's sermons are heard daily on over 1,300 radio stations, reaching many countries. These sermons have changed millions of lives by revealing the richness of God's powerful Word.
Dozens of books written by John MacArthur are published in many countries. The most famous of those that were published in Russian: "The Gospel of Christ", "Our Sufficiency in Christ", "The Dying Conscience", "How to Meet the Enemy", "" and others won several publishing awards and titles, exceeding distribution over a million copies.

Created: 12/28/2017 , 3519 6

"Don't say we have found wisdom: God will refute it, not man" (Job 32:13)

The history of Christianity knows many excellent theologians who carried the Word of God to people, pointing to the way of salvation for millions of people. Modern Christianity has a number of well-known names of theologians who in one way or another have influenced the preaching of the Gospel throughout the world. One such contemporary theologian who has some influence on Christians around the world is John Fullerton MacArthur, Jr. In short, he can be said to be an American pastor of the non-denominational Grace Community Church in Sun Valley, California. MacArthur is the author of over 150 Christian books, with the Study Bible being the most published work, with more than a million copies sold. Interestingly, some sources of information call John MacArthur a Baptist pastor and preacher, although in reality he is the pastor of a church that does not identify itself with any of the denominations. Apparently, the similarity with the Baptists, in the form and process of serving in the Grace Community Church, led to such conclusions. However, in the process of reviewing the theology of John MacArthur, not only Baptist doctrines, but also Calvinist and even Seventh-day Adventist doctrines immediately catch the eye. Also, the books of John MacArthur can be seen in the libraries of various denominations, and not only among the Baptists. Although it should be mentioned that MacArthur is opposed to the charismatic movement, especially their teachings about modern prophets.

It is noteworthy that the works of John MacArthur have an impact in churches not only in the United States, but also in the countries of the former USSR, where his Study Bible stands apart, containing short comments and explanations of Bible texts. The Study Bible contains an excerpt from MacArthur's multi-volume edition of the Commentaries of the Bible Books. To be fair, there is a lot of good information in the MacArthur Study Bible, especially in describing the historical background of the Biblical events. But at the same time, dogma is permeated with statements that contradict not only the Biblical context, but even themselves. Here we will look at some of John MacArthur's controversial dogmatic statements that ended up in the pages of the Study Bible, and begin our analysis with simpler statements.

Some Biblical texts are missing from the main manuscripts. The MacArthur Study Bible is a modern English translation of the Bible with condensed commentary by John MacArthur. As you know, modern translations of the Bible, in part of the New Testament, are a translation of the Greek text from the critical edition of Nestle-Aland. This edition lacks a number of Bible texts found in all Reformation Bibles. Here we will not consider in detail the features of critical texts, but you can read about them in our articles: "The correct translation of the Bible", "Gnosticism in the critical texts of the New Testament", "False landmark in Bruce Metzger's book -" New Testament Textology ", and" Bible. The struggle of the Catholic Church against the Reformation at the hands of the Protestants and Reformers themselves. Interestingly, the Russian version of MacArthur's Study Bible uses Synodal translation, where there are missing texts, and the reader in the comments to these verses sees the following inscription: "this verse is missing in the most common manuscripts." For example, this can be found in the comments on Matthew 17:21, Matthew 23:14, Acts 8:37, and so on. In addition, in modern translations there are a number of modified verses that have a completely different meaning than in the Reformation Bibles, for example, Matthew 23:14 in the New Version looks like this: "He said to him: why do you call me good? No one is good, but God alone. If you want to enter into eternal life, keep the commandments". However, in the modern translations underlying the MacArthur Study Bible, the text appears differently: "And He said to him, "Why are you asking Me about what is good? There is only One who is good; but if you wish to enter into life, keep the commandments" (New American Standard Bible). Here, the underlined text translated into Russian sounds like “why are you asking Me about good?”, and the focus is shifted from the person of Jesus Christ to “good” or “common good”, which is the basic issue of Greek philosophy. Interestingly, commenting on such a text, MacArthur writes: “Why do you call me good? No one is good but God alone." Jesus did not deny His nature as God at all, He only told the young man that all but God are sinners” (MacArthur Study Bible). And here we see embarrassment when MacArthur refuses to see words about goodness in the text of the modern translation, and comments on the text contained in the King James translation about the person of Jesus Christ. This leads the reader to wonder why MacArthur is quoting words that are not recorded in the modern translation that the reader is currently seeing? The same is true of Matthew 17:21, Matthew 23:14, and Acts 8:37. This is a gross inconsistency and careless attitude of MacArthur to the Biblical texts, which raises many questions from the reader. As for the Russian version of MacArthur's Study Bible, the whole problem here is that the Synodal Translation was made the basic translation for MacArthur's comments, which contradicts the modern translation that MacArthur read and commented on.

Septaugint. Continuing the theme of Biblical texts, it must be said that John MacArthur believes that the Apostles read and quoted the Septuagint, the Greek text of the Old Testament. He believes that the texts of the Septuagint were still in the pre-Christian period, and were used by Greek-speaking Jews. This was reflected in the comments of MacArthur, for example, we read in the Bible: "Behold, a virgin shall conceive and bear a Son, and they shall call his name Immanuel, which means, God is with us" (Matthew 1:23). Commenting on this text, MacArthur says: "Virgin" - Theologians sometimes debate whether the Hebrew term in Is. 7:14 "virgin" or "girl". Matthew is quoting here from the Septuagint, which uses an unambiguous interpretation of the Greek term "virgin" (MacArthur Study Bible). Let's think about why it was necessary for Matthew, who was a Jew living in Israel, where they spoke mainly in Hebrew and Aramaic, and also read the Scriptures in Hebrew, so that he suddenly began to quote a text from the Greek Septuagint? Unfortunately, MacArthur does not provide an answer to this question. Moreover, he goes even further in his fantasies, in his commentary on Matthew 24:3, which says: "And while He was sitting on the Mount of Olives, the disciples approached Him in private and asked: Tell us, when will this be? And what is the sign of Your coming and the end of the age?" (Matthew 24:3). Here MacArthur says: “When they asked about His coming (Greek parousia, lit. “presence”), they did not imagine that the Second Coming would be in the distant future. They spoke of His triumphant coming as the Messiah as an event that (they had no doubt) would happen very soon. Even if they were aware of His approaching death, which He clearly and repeatedly prophesied about (see note on 20:19), they did not anticipate that there would be His Ascension and the long life of the church. Nevertheless, He used the word parousia in His sermon, but used it in a special sense, as a reference to His Second Coming” (MacArthur Study Bible). In this comment, MacArthur comes to the conclusion that Jesus Christ, speaking to the disciples in Hebrew, suddenly uses the Greek word "parousia", ignoring that the Gospel of Matthew was written after the ascension of Christ and was a translation of His words into Greek, and Jesus himself did not speak Greek with the students. That is, not only the Apostles quoted the Greek text of the Old Testament, but even Christ himself began to use Greek words. Unfortunately, such nonsense has spread in millions of copies. In fact, the text that today is called the Septuagint did not exist at the time of the Apostles, and came into being already in the Christian period, which can be read in our article "The Septuagint - what is it?" .

There is an opinion that it is quite possible that the Jews in the 1st century spoke state languages the Roman Empire, and since the time of the Babylonian captivity, the Jews stopped speaking their native language. As a result, their native language was Aramaic. The answer to this opinion can be found in the text of the New Testament itself, which describes cases when the Hebrew language was in use among the Jews. So let's look at the text that talks about the crucifixion of Jesus Christ: "This inscription was read by many of the Jews, because the place where Jesus was crucified was not far from the city, and it was written in Hebrew, in Greek, in Roman" (John 19:20). Here we see that on the plate of "guilt" of Jesus Christ there was an inscription in three languages, where one of the languages ​​was Jewish. If the Jews lost the Hebrew language and did not speak it, then why was the inscription written in this language? Another important fact of the use of the Hebrew language was the communication in it by the Jews themselves, which can be seen below:

- “When he allowed it, Paul, standing on the stairs, signaled with his hand to the people; and when there was a deep silence, he began to speak in Hebrew so" (Acts 21:40);

- "Hearing that he spoke to them in Hebrew they have become even more quiet. He said" (Acts 22:2);

- "We all fell to the ground and I heard a voice saying to me in Hebrew: Saul, Saul! why are you chasing me? It is hard for you to go against the pricks" (Acts of the Apostles 26:14).

In these texts we see that the Apostle Paul addressed the Jewish people in the Hebrew language, and they listened to him and understood him. Likewise, Jesus Christ, when he first appeared to Paul, also spoke to him in Hebrew. These cases testify that during the period of the life of the Apostles, the Hebrew language was widely spoken among the Jews, and they fully spoke it. This does not change the fact that the Aramaic language was also in use among the Jews, just as well as the fact that they could know the Greek language. However, we do not find cases in the Bible when the Apostles spoke to the Jews in Greek. This situation baffles MacArthur's words that Jesus Christ addressed the Apostles in Greek, and specifically used certain Greek words.

In addition, the Holy Scriptures among the Jews were preserved in Hebrew, as evidenced by the archaeological excavations of the Dead Sea Scrolls, where a large number of manuscripts from the period of the 1st-2nd centuries were found. Here, the largest number of texts of Scripture was found in Hebrew, which eliminates the idea that the Jews of the 1st century did not use the Scripture in Hebrew.

All of the above shows that MacArthur, in trying to show that Christ spoke Greek to the Apostles, made a failed attempt to make believe that the Jews of the 1st century used the Greek Septuagint as Scripture.

Basis of Judaism. Sometimes in the Bible commentaries of John MacArthur you can find rather strange words. One such moment is a comment on the following text: “So also we, while we were children, were enslaved to the things of the world” (Galatians 4:3). Explaining the words of the Apostle Paul about the Law, MacArthur says the following: The word "beginning" comes from the Greek. term meaning "row" or "step". They denoted fundamental things, for example, the letters of the alphabet. In the light of its application in Art. 9, the word here is best seen as a reference to the basic elements and rituals of human religion (see explanation of Col. 2:8). Paul describes the Jewish and Gentile religions as simply human, never reaching God's level. Both Jewish and pagan religions rely on a man-made system of affairs. They are full of rites and ceremonies to be performed in order to achieve God's favor. All these outward elements are immature, as is the case with children who are subject to their caregivers.” (MacArthur Study Bible). From this we see that MacArthur claims that the Jewish religion, that is, Judaism, contains human rituals at its core. After all, we know that Judaism is based on the Law given by God through Moses, and the rituals that are in Judaism are given by God. But MacArthur sees that the rituals in Judaism are human, which is inconsistent with the context of the Bible and contradicts it. Perhaps MacArthur means by Judaism the Pharisaism, which has survived to this day and occupies a dominant position in Jewish society. If you look at Pharisaism from this point of view, then indeed there is a huge number of human rituals in it that are not written in the Law, but it is not the only representative of Judaism. For example, there are other currents in modern Judaism, such as Hasidism, Litvaks, Karaites, and so on. Particularly interesting are the Karaites, who do not recognize any teachings and books, except for the Tanakh - the books of the Old Testament. Be that as it may, one cannot say that Judaism is based on human commandments, because in reality it is based on the Torah - the Pentateuch of Moses, which is the words of God, and not of man, including in terms of rituals.

Demons in the dungeon. On the question of Judaism, John MacArthur's strange remarks did not end, and one can see a rather exotic commentary on the following Biblical text: “For even Christ, in order to bring us to God, once suffered for our sins, the righteous for the unrighteous, having been put to death according to the flesh, but made alive by the Spirit, by which He descended and preached to the spirits in prison, who had once been disobedient to the long-suffering of God that awaited them, in the days of Noah, at the time of the building of the ark, in which a few, that is, eight souls, were saved by the water" (1 Peter 3:18-20). Regarding this text, MacArthur says the following: "in the prison of the spirits" Refers to fallen angels (demons) who are forever bound in chains because of their great malice. Demons who are not yet in hell resist such a sentence (cf. Luke 8:31). In the end, they will all be cast into the lake of fire forever (Matt. 25:41; Rev. 20:10). preached Between Christ's death and resurrection, His Spirit descended to the demons in hell and preached there that despite His death, He had triumphed over them (see notes on Col. 2:14,15). rebellious...in the days of Noah, Peter further explains that hell is inhabited by demons who have been there since the time of Noah and who got there because their rebelliousness overwhelmed God's patience. In the days of Noah, demons revolted on earth, filled the world with their wickedness, meanness, deeds contrary to God, including sexual sins, so that even 120 years of Noah’s preaching while the ark was being built could not convince anyone to believe God, except for 8 people from Noah's Family (MacArthur Study Bible). That is, he claims that Christ descended to demons in prison in order to preach to them His victory over them, and not to the spirits of people who died during the flood. This view is also held by Seventh-day Adventists and Jehovah's Witnesses, where the latter put it this way: “According to the apostle Peter, these spirits were “once disobedient, when in the days of Noah God waited patiently” (1 Pet. 3:20). Undoubtedly, Peter was referring to spirit creatures who decided to join Satan's rebellion. Jude mentions the angels “who did not retain their original position, but left their proper dwelling”, and says that God “saves [them] in eternal fetters under the cover of hopeless darkness for the judgment of the great day” (Jude 6) ... Probably after what It was some time after his resurrection that Jesus announced to the evil spirits that they were in for an absolutely deserved punishment. Such preaching gave them no hope. It was a condemnation sermon (Jonah 1:1, 2). Since Jesus showed faith and devotion to death and then was resurrected (this proved that the Devil had no power over him), Jesus had reason to announce such a conviction” (Watchtower, 06/15/2013, pp. 22-23). But such an interpretation of the text leads to a number of questions, namely: if on earth demons forced people to sin in the time of Noah, then why are some of them in prison, and some are free today, what is the difference between them? In this text it says "the longsuffering of God that waited", which means that God waited and endured a long time. What was God waiting for? Repentance? Since MacArthur believes in the immortality of the soul, another question arises: where are the people who were at the time of Noah, and why did he decide that they were demons, and not people from the time of the flood? In general, this interpretation of this text leads to even more questions than the answers received.

About the oath. Quite interestingly, MacArthur imagines the pronunciation of oaths, in the light of the New Testament, for example, look at the words of Jesus Christ: "But I say to you, do not swear at all: neither by heaven, for it is the throne of God; nor by the earth, for it is His footstool; nor by Jerusalem, for it is the city of the great King; nor by your head do you swear, for you cannot make one hair white or black. But let your word be yes, yes; no, no; but anything more than this is from the evil one" (Matthew 5:34-37). Reading this text, we can see the attitude of Jesus Christ to the oath, but MacArthur sees these words of Christ in his own way, where he says the following: "do not swear at all." Compare James 5:12. This passage should not be taken as a condemnation of an oath in all circumstances. God Himself sealed His promise with an oath (Heb. 6:13-18; cf. Acts 2:30 ) Christ Himself spoke under oath (26:63, 64) Under certain circumstances the law permits oaths (e.g., Num. 5:19, 21; 30:2, 3)" (MacArthur Study Bible). In this short text, John MacArthur made some serious claims that need to be considered in more detail.

First, he claims that Christ spoke under oath, referring to Matthew 26:63-64, in which we read the following words: “Jesus was silent. And the high priest said to him: I conjure you by the living God, tell us, are you the Christ, the Son of God? Matthew 26:63-64). MacArthur understands this text as follows: "I conjure." See note on 5:34. Caiaphas tried to break Jesus' silence (v. 62). The oath was supposed to legally compel Him to answer. Jesus' answer (v. 64) suggests that He took the oath" (Study Bible MacArthur). That is, he claims that the words "I conjure you" means bringing someone to an oath, and the fact that Christ did not remain silent meant that He took the oath. The word “conjure”, according to the Dictionaries of Ushakov and Ozhegov, does not mean an oath, but a request or prayer in the name of something holy. That is, when the high priest said these words, he expressed a prayer in the name of God, so that Christ would say whether He is the Son of God. Such an understanding of the spell is present in other texts of the New Testament, for example, Mark 5:27 speaks of an evil spirit that said to Jesus Christ: “I conjure you by God, do not torment me!” Did the evil spirit lead to the oath of Christ? It is impossible to bring someone to an oath or an oath without the consent of the other party and the pronunciation of the text of the oath. But Christ did not swear an oath, and the fact that He answered the high priest did not mean at all that he took the oath, this is simply not in the text of the Bible.

Second, MacArthur contends that Matthew 5:34 does not refer to relinquishing an oath, and suggests comparing it with James 5:12, which says: "First of all, my brethren, swear not by heaven or earth, and no other oath but let it be with you yes, yes, and no, no, lest you fall under condemnation" (James 5:12). However, this text says "by no other oath," which includes any oath. In fact, this text does not leave a single possible variant of the oath, but completely prohibits any form of oath.

Based on the words of MacArthur, it is clear that he proposes not to notice in the New Testament the complete exclusion of the oath from the life of a Christian, and does not want to understand the words of Christ and the Apostles directly, as they are written.

Law. A characteristic feature of MacArthur, as a pastor of a non-denominational church, is the acceptance of certain dogmas from various denominations. One such teaching is the view of the Law given to Moses and its place in the Christian life, of which John MacArthur says the following: “Between the Jew and the Gentile, the greatest barrier was raised in the form of a ceremonial law - the Law of commandments. Christ abolished festivals, sacrifices, fees, laws, purifications and sanctifications and all the commandments that distinguished Israel, which constituted its unique characteristics. But God has not abolished His moral law, as the word doctrine indicates. His moral law reflects His holy nature and is therefore never subject to change (cf. Matt. 5:17-19). This law was expressed in the ten commandments given to the Jews, and is written in all human hearts" (John MacArthur, Commentary on the Books of the New Testament, Epistle to the Ephesians, Chapter 7 - "The Unity of the Body - the Church") . These words clearly show the teaching of Seventh-day Adventists about the division of the Law into ceremonial and moral, and that Christ abolished precisely the ceremonial law, but left the moral one. This idea is exactly repeated by MacArthur, which is reflected in the interpretation of many other texts of the Bible, for example, in the following text of the Bible:"but to the false brethren who crept in, who came secretly to spy on our freedom, which we have in Christ Jesus, to bring us into bondage" (Galatians 2:4) . Commenting on this text, MacArthur sees the following in it: « freedom" - Christians are free from the law as a means of salvation, from its external rites and ordinances as a way of life, and from the curse for disobedience to the law - the curse that Christ bore for all believers (3:13) "(MacArthur Study Bible) . Here we see the statement that Christians are not saved by the law, where MacArthur means external rites and ordinances of a way of life. But here the question arises, what is meant by the regulations of the way of life? If this is meant by the moral standards of the Law, then MacArthur contradicts himself, because in the interpretation discussed earlier, he claims that the moral Law has remained. But what is important here is not even this, but the fact that in the Bible there is no division of the Law into ceremonial and moral, and this division was invented by people. There are commandments in the law that are difficult to attribute to a ceremonial or moral law, such as the ordinance refusing to eat blood. What part of the law does this apply to? If to the moral, then by what sign can one determine that this is a moral law, because this commandment is not in the ten commandments? If to the ceremonial, then it turns out that Christ freed from all ceremonial commandments, but the Apostles, according to the book of Acts 15:29, forbade the use of blood for food, so they renewed the commandment that Christ abolished? There are many such commandments, and the adherents of the division of the Law create difficulties for themselves. As already mentioned, this idea was taken from the Adventists, and supported by MacArthur. Another theologian, William MacDonald, spoke well about this view, the division of the Law, where he says:“Sabbath prophets usually begin by preaching salvation by faith in Jesus Christ. They use their favorite gospel hymns to lure the uninformed, and they seem to attach great importance to the Scriptures. But they soon subject their followers to the law of Moses, emphasizing in particular the commandment of the Sabbath (Saturday is the seventh day). How dare they do this in light of Paul's clear teaching that the Christian is dead to the law? How can they get around what is clearly stated in Galatians? The answer is that they distinguish between the moral law and the ceremonial. The moral law is the Ten Commandments. The ceremonial law is other regulations given by God, such as rules regarding unclean food, leprosy, offerings to God, etc. The moral law, they say, has never been repealed. It is an expression of the eternal truth of God. To engage in idolatry, to commit murder or adultery is always against the law of God. However, Christ put an end to the ceremonial law. Therefore, they conclude, when Paul teaches that the Christian is dead to the law, he is talking about the ceremonial law, not the Ten Commandments... Paul does not distinguish between moral and ceremonial laws. Rather, he insists that the law is a single whole, and that cursed are those who strive to achieve righteousness by it, and at the same time cannot keep it completely ”(William MacDonald, Commentary on Galatians, 6 chapter) .

The division of the Law into moral and ceremonial leads John MacArthur to misinterpret some other important places in the Bible, for example, we read the text of the Apostle Paul about the New Testament: "By saying 'new', he showed the oldness of the first; but that which grows old and grows old is near to destruction" (Hebrews 8:13). Following the views of the Adventists, MacArthur comes to the following interpretation: "close to destruction." Shortly after the writing of Hebrews, the temple in Jerusalem was destroyed and the worship of the Levites ended.” (MacArthur Study Bible). With these words, MacArthur shows that the end of the Levite ministry marked the destruction of the first covenant, but the Levite ministry was not the whole essence of the covenant and the Law, but only a part. By this MacArthur is trying to imagine that under the old covenant, the Apostle Paul means the ceremonial law. In fact, Paul is talking about the covenant as a whole, and there is no division in Paul's words. Such a division is a juggling of facts, which is not displayed in any way in the text.

Commandments of Jesus Christ. John MacArthur accepted Adventist dogma not only regarding the division of the Law into ceremonial and moral, but also a view of the commandments of Jesus Christ. In order to understand what this position is, let's look at the words of Jesus Christ: “You have heard what the ancients said: do not kill, but whoever kills is subject to judgment. But I tell you that everyone who is angry with his brother in vain is subject to judgment; whoever says to his brother: “cancer” is subject to the Sanhedrin; and who He will say, "He is foolish," he is subject to hellfire" (Matthew 5:21-22). MacArthur's commentary on this text reveals the essence of his views on the matter, where he says the following: "Christ did not change the words of the law in any of these scriptures. Rather, he corrected what they "heard", i.e. the rabbis' interpretation of the law" (MacArthur Study Bible). Here MacArthur argues that Christ corrected the interpretation of the rabbis, and did not change anything. But in this case, the question arises: where does it say in the Old Testament "whoever says:" foolish "is subject to hellfire"? This shows that MacArthur, like the Adventists, rejects the existence of the commandments of Jesus Christ, and the fact that Christ brought a new teaching that came to replace the commandments of the Law. In the light of this attitude, MacArthur's view of the following words of Christ is very interesting: "You have heard what was said of the ancients: do not commit adultery. But I say to you that everyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart" (Matthew 5:27-28). This text contains words that were never in the Law, namely the words that he who looks at a woman with lust has already committed adultery with her. Therefore, it cannot be said that this is an interpretation of the Law, especially when these words are preceded by the phrase “but I say,” where Jesus Christ clearly shows that these are His words, and not from the Law. Therefore, MacArthur had problems with such words of Christ, and for this reason he does not have any comments on such texts, including no comments on the following text: "For you know what commandments we have given you from the Lord Jesus" (1 Thessalonians 4:2). This is an extremely uncomfortable text that directly points to the existence of the commandments of Jesus Christ, but to which MacArthur, like the Adventists, turned a blind eye.

This attitude towards the commandments of Christ, or rather the unwillingness to acknowledge their existence, leads MacArthur to contradict himself. To see this contradiction, we read the text: “His disciples say to him, If such is the duty of a man to his wife, it is better not to marry” (Matthew 19:10). Looking at the interpretation of this text by John MacArthur, one gets the impression that he has forgotten a little about his attitude to the commandments of Christ, and says the following: "The disciples correctly understood the nature of the obligations that marriage entails, and that Jesus set a very high standard by permitting divorce only as a last resort" (MacArthur Study Bible). Here MacArthur unexpectedly says that Jesus set the standard, that is, He gave some kind of decrees from Himself. Moreover, MacArthur says that Jesus even allowed divorce in a special case, that is, again Christ of Himself gave permission. Such a statement does not fit in any way with the words that Christ did not change anything, but only interpreted. And here is a question for MacArthur and his supporters: did Jesus Christ change something in this way, or did he just explain the Law? This is a clear contradiction, where, on the one hand, Christ did not change anything in the matter of observance of the Law, and on the other hand, He made His decrees.

Election and Predestination. The central dogma of John MacArthur is the teaching of the Calvinists about God's predestination of people for salvation. For such claims, the main text of the Bible is usually the following: “For those whom He foreknew He also predestined to be conformed to the image of His Son, that He might be the firstborn among many brethren” (Romans 8:29). On understanding predestination, MacArthur says the following: "foreknew" - Not just an indication of God's omniscience - that in distant eternity He knew who would come to Christ. Here, rather, it refers to the choice of those whom His love will touch and with whom He will establish family relations, i.e., His election (cf. Acts 2:23, where the inviolable rule of Greek grammar indicates the relationship between "predestination" and “foreknowledge,” see notes on 1 Peter 1:2 and cf. 1:20—this word should be translated the same in both verses). See explanation on election at 9:10-24. "predetermined" - Literally "allocated, appointed or determined in advance." Whom God chooses, He determines to the final likeness of His Son (see notes on Ephesians 1:4, 5, 11)” (MacArthur Study Bible). In this explanation, we see that MacArthur understands foreknowledge and predestination as the "appointment in advance" of those who will be saved. This means that God has appointed in advance who will be saved and who will not, and nothing can change this situation. This understanding leads him to a contradictory understanding of other texts of the Bible, where he contradicts not only the context of the Bible, but also himself. An example of this can be seen in the interpretation of the following Biblical text: "All things have been delivered to Me by My Father, and no one knows the Son except the Father; and no one knows the Father but the Son, and to whom the Son wants to reveal. Come to Me, all you who are weary and burdened, and I will give you rest" (Matthew 11:27 -28). MacArthur explains the text as follows: “This scripture reflects the first beatitude (5:3). Note that this open invitation, addressed to all who hear, is worded in such a way that only those who are aware of their spiritual poverty and who are frustrated in trying to be saved by the law will respond to this invitation. The stubbornness of people is such that without God-sent spiritual awakening, all sinners refuse to realize the full depth of their spiritual poverty. Therefore, as Jesus says in v. 27, our salvation is the result of God's work. The truth of God's election in v. 27 is not incompatible with the free offer of salvation to all in Art. 28-30" (MacArthur Study Bible). In this interpretation, one can see a clear contradiction to oneself, where on the one hand it is said that God openly invites all people to him, but at the same time, for some of these people he does not give spiritual awakening, and therefore they refuse to realize their spiritual poverty. In other words, the responsibility for rejecting God's grace lies not with man, but with God. The Chosen One is one who was originally appointed prior to his creation, but MacArthur says that this does not conflict with the free offer of salvation. But the problem is that "appointment" and "freedom" are concepts that are not compatible initially. That is, he says that on the one hand, God appoints the saved in advance, and on the other hand, there is freedom of choice to accept salvation or not, which is completely incompatible. This is an attempt to combine two opposing concepts, which also leads to a contradiction in the context of the Bible.

The attempt to reconcile incompatible concepts leads MacArthur to a very unusual understanding of other texts of the Bible, such as those dealing with the punishment of sinners. To see an example of this understanding, we read the following Bible text: "Even so, it is not the will of your Father in heaven that one of these little ones should perish" (Matthew 18:14). Now let's see what MacArthur has to say about this text: "perished - this word can (and in this context it does) mean spiritual death rather than eternal death. But this does not imply that God's children will die at all (cf. John 10:28)" (MacArthur Study Bible). Here MacArthur says that the word "perished" means a spiritually dead person, although the context of this verse is one of salvation. A few verses above read: "For the Son of Man came to seek and save that which was lost" (Matthew 18:11). This text says that Christ came to save people who are lost, that is, in a position where they cannot enter the Kingdom of Heaven. Therefore, death in verse 14 does not mean spiritual death, but eternal death, because one who is already spiritually dead cannot die spiritually.

Some of MacArthur's statements raise a lot of questions, especially against the background of his understanding of predestination, for example, we read two texts:

1). “And then many will be offended, and they will betray one another, and they will hate one another” (Matthew 24:10). In MacArthur's study Bible, one can find the following interpretation: "many will be tempted Literally," they will be made to stumble, "" they will be led astray. testify that they were never true believers at all" (MacArthur Study Bible). Here we see the statement that if a person was a member of the church, but fell away, then he was never a believer, that is, he excludes that a true believer can fall away from the church. In other words, we can say that a person who fell away from the church was never saved.

2). "If he will not listen to them, tell the church; but if he will not listen to the church, then let him be to you, like a heathen and a publican" (Matthew 18:17). MacArthur sees the meaning of this text as follows: "The point is not simply to punish the sinner or completely avoid him, but to remove him from the community of the church as a pernicious influence, and from now on treat him not as a brother, but as a object of evangelization" (MacArthur Study Bible). Here we see that he believes that a person removed from church society is an object of evangelization, that is, as if a person who does not believe, who is again called to repentance. This moment just raises a number of questions: why should anyone be evangelized if God has already determined in advance who will be saved? If the one who has fallen away from the church has never been a believer and saved, then he was not destined for salvation, then why evangelize him?

In interpreting these two texts, MacArthur contradicts himself, where, on the one hand, the principle, if it fell away from the church, means that it was never saved by the predestined God, and on the other hand, it needs to be evangelized, but it is not clear why, since the doctrine of predestination shows that that such a person will not help anything.

It is interesting that the teaching of the predestination of some people for salvation, and others for destruction, does not come from Calvinists, but was formed long ago in Islam. In fact, the doctrine of predestination corresponds to the words of the Koran, where the following words are said:

- “We created for Gehenna many jinn and people. They have hearts that do not understand, and eyes that do not see, and ears that do not hear. They are like cattle, but they are even more deluded. It is they who are the heedless ignoramuses.” (Quran 7:179);

- “... Thus Allah leads astray whom He wills, and guides whom He wills to the straight path.” (Quran 74:31).

The doctrine of predestination is very consistent with the Quran, because it turns out that God determined some people for salvation, which means that other people were originally determined for eternal death, which leads to the idea that they were originally created for this. Therefore, we can say that this is not only a Calvinist teaching, but also a Muslim one, which appeared earlier than Calvinism.

In fact, Romans 8 is not talking about the predestination from the beginning of the world of some people for salvation, which is not in the text, but it is about the dignity and hope of Christians, and that God predestined Christians to be like the image of His Son, oh than we read in the text again: "For those whom He foreknew, He also predestined to be conformed to the image of His Son, that He might be the firstborn among many brethren. And whom He predestined, these He also called; and whom He called, Romans 8:29-30). From the text we see that God made a predestination, to be similar to the image of Christ, to those people whom He foreknew. The word "foreknowledge", according to the explanatory dictionaries of Ushakov and Efremova, has the meaning of "know in advance." That is, God predestined those of whom He knew in advance that they would respond to His call. In other words, God's knowledge of the future in advance comes first, and only then the predestination of already saved people, so that they would be similar to the image of Christ. MacArthur, on the other hand, says: "It is rather about the choice of those who will be touched by His love." Once again, we emphasize that we are talking about predestination "to be like the image of Christ" for already saved Christians, and not predestination for the salvation of a certain number of people. This text of the Bible does not speak at all about saved and unsaved people, and predestination for the death of someone, all this is not in the text. The text itself clearly emphasizes God's attitude towards the people who responded to His call, and describes the honor for the saved person. John MacArthur, like the Calvinists, did not see the purpose of predestination, and what constitutes a group of predestined people.

Forgiveness. A large number of contradictory statements by John MacArthur led him to a natural result - a contradictory understanding of the forgiveness of sins and salvation. To see what MacArthur thinks about forgiveness, look at the following Bible text, where Christ says the following about forgiveness: "But unless you forgive men their trespasses, neither will your Father forgive you your trespasses" (Matthew 6:15). Let's see what MacArthur's understanding of this text is: “It is not supposed here that God will leave without justification those who have already received the forgiveness which He gives to all believers. Forgiveness as a permanent and complete deliverance from the guilt and negative consequences of sin belongs to all who are in Christ (cf. John 5:24; Rom. 8:1; Eph. 1:7). Moreover, Scripture tells us that God punishes those who disobey Him (Heb. 12:5-7). Believers must confess their sins in order to be cleansed from sin daily (1 John 1:9). This kind of forgiveness is a simple cleansing from the worldly corruption of sin; he does not repeat that cleansing from sin which is given to us with justification. It is comparable to washing the feet instead of taking a bath (cf. John 13:10). Such forgiveness is denied by God to those Christians who do not forgive others.” (MacArthur Study Bible). With an unbiblical position on predestination, MacArthur naturally falls into a trap when it comes to forgiveness and unforgiveness. After all, it is difficult to combine predestination with the unforgiveness of already believing people, and therefore MacArthur made, in fact, the statement that a person not forgiven by God has salvation. Such a statement directly contradicts the context of the Bible, because in the Bible forgiveness and redemption are inseparable from each other, for example, we read: "in whom we have redemption through his blood and the forgiveness of sins" (Colossians 1:14). If God does not forgive a person's sin, then MacArthur says that a sinner can enter the Kingdom of God, but the Apostle Peter asks John MacArthur a question: "And if the righteous is scarcely saved, where will the ungodly and sinful appear?" (1 Peter 4:18). Of course, MacArthur has already given his answer to this question, but only it does not correspond to the Biblical teaching, because according to the Bible, nothing unclean will enter the Kingdom of God, as it is written: "And nothing unclean shall enter into it, nor anyone given over to abomination and falsehood, but only those who are written in the Lamb's book of life" (Revelation 21:27). A person who is not forgiven for sin is unclean and sinful, and such people cannot be in the Kingdom of God, no matter how much MacArthur would like it.

Conclusion. Although the MacArthur Study Bible contains a lot of useful information, the dogmatic part of it is periodically contradictory and does not correspond to the Biblical text. John MacArthur, being a non-denominational pastor of the church, made a synthesis of various teachings from different Christian denominations, which was reflected in his comments on the Bible. Therefore, the MacArthur Study Bible is a specific and controversial collection of biblical exegesis.

Name

The title of the fourth gospel follows the pattern of the rest of the gospels. It was first called "According to John", and the word "Gospel", as in other books, was added later.

Although the gospel does not name the author, the early church strongly and unanimously names the Apostle John as the author. The early church father Irenaeus (c. 130-200 A.D.) was a disciple of Polycarp (c. 70-160 A.D.), who was a disciple of the Apostle John. Irenaeus argued, based on the authority of Polycarp, that John wrote the Gospel in his advanced years, when he lived in Ephesus, in Asia Minor ("Against Heresies", 2.22.5; 3.1.1). All the Church Fathers after Irenaeus considered John the author of this gospel. Clement of Alexandria (c. 150-215 A.D.) wrote that John, who knew the facts of the other gospels and was moved by the Holy Spirit, composed "the holy gospel" (see Eusebius, Church History, 6.14.7 ).

The essential features of the gospel confirm the tradition of the early church. While the Synoptic Gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke) refer to the Apostle John by name about 20 times (including analogies), he is not directly mentioned in the Gospel of John. On the contrary, the author prefers to refer to himself as the disciple “whom Jesus loved” (13:23; 19:26; 20:2; 21:7, 20). The absence of any direct mention of John's name is remarkable when one considers the important role played in the gospel by the other named disciples. However, John's repeated self-identification as the disciple "whom Jesus loved," i.e., John's deliberate reluctance to give his name, reflects his modesty and shows his relationship to his Lord Jesus. There was no need to mention his name, since his original readers knew for certain that he was the author of the gospel. Also, analyzing mainly the material in chapters 20, 21, through the method of elimination, we come to the conclusion that this disciple “whom Jesus loved” is the Apostle John (e.g., 21:24; cf. 21:2) . Since the author of the Gospel is accurate in mentioning the names of other characters in the book, if the author were someone other than the apostle John, he would not have omitted the name of John.

The anonymity of the gospel strongly reinforces the case for John's authorship, because only a man of well-known and eminent apostolic authority could have written a gospel so vastly different in form and content from the other gospels and unanimously approved by the early church. Conversely, the apocryphal gospels, which were written from the middle of the second century and falsely attributed to the apostles or other famous personalities who were close to Jesus, were, however, with universal approval, rejected by the church.

John and James, his older brother (Acts 12:2), were known as "the sons of Zebedee" (Matt. 10:2-4), and Jesus called them "sons of thunder" (Mark 3:17). John was an apostle (Luke 6:12-16) and one of the three closest friends of Jesus (together with Peter and James - cf. Matt. 17:1; 26:37), as well as a witness and participant in the early ministry of Jesus (1 Jn .1:1-4). After the Ascension of Christ, John became the "pillar" of the church in Jerusalem (Gal. 2:9). He ministered with Peter (Acts 3:1; 4:13; 8:14) until he went to Ephesus (tradition says that this was before the destruction of Jerusalem), where he wrote his Gospel and from where the Romans exiled him to Patmos (Rev. 1:9). In addition to the gospel that bears his name, John also wrote three epistles and the book of Revelation (Rev. 1:1).

Since the writings of some church fathers indicate that John was actively writing in his advanced years and that he was already familiar with the synoptic gospels, many date this gospel shortly after they were written, but before the time of John's epistles and Revelation. John wrote his Gospel c. A.D. 80-90, about 50 years after he witnessed Jesus' earthly ministry.

Historical background and writing background

A fact of strategic importance for understanding the context in which the Gospel of John was written is that, according to tradition, John knew the Synoptic Gospels. Obviously, he wrote his Gospel in order to make a special contribution to the written record of the life of the Lord (the "spiritual gospel") and, in part, to supplement the narratives of Matthew, Mark and Luke.

The characteristics of the gospel confirm this purpose:

1. John provided a large amount of unique material not recorded in the other gospels.

2. Often he gives information that helps to better understand the events described in the synoptic gospels. For example, although they begin the narrative with Jesus' ministry in Galilee, they suggest that Jesus had a ministry before that (eg, Matt. 4:12; Mark 1:14). John answers this by describing Jesus' previous ministry in Judea (ch. 3) and Samaria (ch. 4). In Mk. 6:45, after feeding the 5,000, Jesus urged his disciples to cross the Sea of ​​Galilee to Bethsaida. John wrote down the reason. The people were ready to make Jesus king because He miraculously multiplied food, and He shied away from their crafty efforts (6:26).

3. The gospel of John is the most theological of the gospels, containing, for example, a deep theological prologue (1:1-18), more instructive material and conversations than narrative material (for example, 3:13-17), and the largest amount of teaching about the Holy Spirit (e.g. 14:16, 17, 26; 16:7-14). Although John was familiar with the synoptic gospels and gave his gospel their form, in spirit he was independent of their information. Rather, in compiling this gospel, he, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, used his own recollections as an eyewitness (1:14; 19:35; 21:24).

The Gospel of John is the only Gospel of the four that contains a definite statement about the author's purpose in writing (20:30, 31). He states that "these things are written so that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name" (20:31). Thus, the main purpose is twofold: evangelistic and apologetic. The fact that the word "believe" occurs about 100 times in this gospel (the synoptic gospels use the word less than half) confirms the evangelistic purpose. John wrote his gospel to provide his readers with a basis for saving faith and, as a result, to assure them that they would receive God's gift of eternal life (1:12).

The apologetic goal is closely related to the evangelistic goal. John wrote to convince his readers of the authenticity of Jesus as the God-man incarnate, whose divine and human natures were perfectly united in one Person and who was the foretold Christ ("Messiah") and Savior of the whole world (e.g., 1:41; 3 :16; 4:25, 26; 8:58). He builds the entire gospel around 8 "miracles" or proofs that testify to the true Person of Jesus, leading to faith. The first half of his work centers around seven supernatural signs chosen to reveal the Person of Christ and awaken faith: 1) turning water into wine (2:1-11); 2) the healing of the son of a courtier (4:46-54); 3) healing of the paralyzed (5:1-18); 4) feeding the multitudes (6:1-15); 5) walking on water (6:16-21); 6) healing of the blind (9:1-41); 7) the resurrection of Lazarus from the dead (11:1-57); 8) miraculous catch of fish (21:6-11) after the Resurrection of Christ.

According to the evangelistic and apologetic purposes of the Gospel of John, the all-inclusive essence of the Gospel is found in 20:31 - "Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God." Therefore, the book focuses on the person and work of Christ. The three dominant words (“miracles,” “believe,” and “life”) in 20:30, 31 are constantly given new emphasis throughout the gospel to reinforce the theme of salvation in Him that was first introduced in the prologue (1:1–18; cf. 1 John 1:1-4) and is then reflected again in various ways throughout the gospel (e.g., 6:35, 48; 8:12; 10:7, 9, 11-14; 11:25; 14:6; 17 :3). In addition, John gives a description of how people responded to Jesus Christ and the salvation He offered. In summary, we can say that the gospel focuses on: 1) Jesus as the Word, Messiah and Son of God; 2) on the One who gives humanity the gift of salvation; 3) on people who accept or reject the offer.

John also has comparative sub-themes that reinforce his main point. He uses contrast (life and death, light and darkness, love and hate, above and below) to convey vital information about the Person and work of Christ and the need to believe in Him (eg, 1:4, 5, 12, 13; 3:16-21; 12:44-46; 15:17-20).

There are also 7 expressive "I AM" statements here that identify Jesus as God and Messiah (6:35; 8:12; 10:7, 9, 11, 14; 11:25; 14:6; 15:1, 5 ).

Problems of interpretation

Since John presented his story in a simple and understandable manner, there is a danger of underestimating the depth of this gospel. Because the gospel of John is a "holy" gospel (see author and time of writing), it conveys profound truths. In order to discover the vast wealth of spiritual treasures that the apostle, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit (14:26; 16:13), lovingly left in his gospel, the reader must prayerfully and carefully examine the book.

Chronological calculation in the Gospel of John and in the synoptic gospels is difficult, especially with regard to the time of the Last Supper (13:2). While the Synoptic Gospels depict the disciples and the Lord at the Last Supper eating the Passover on Thursday evening (Nisan 14) and Jesus being crucified on Friday, the Gospel of John states that the Jews did not enter the praetorium “lest they be defiled.” but that the passover might be eaten” (18:28). Therefore, the disciples ate the Passover on Thursday evening, but the Jews did not. Indeed, John (19:14) states that the suffering and crucifixion of Jesus took place on the day of preparation for the Passover, and not after the Passover was eaten, so that by suffering and being crucified on Friday, Christ actually gave His life in the very time when the Passover lamb was sacrificed (19:14). The question arises: why did the disciples eat the Passover on Thursday?

The answer is that the Jews counted the beginning and end of the day differently. It is known from Josephus, the Mishnah, and other Hebrew sources that the Jews in northern Palestine counted the days from sunrise to sunrise. This area included Galilee, where Jesus and all the disciples grew up, with the exception of Judas. Obviously, most, if not all, Pharisees used this number system. But the Jews in the southern part, centered on Jerusalem, counted the days from sunset to sunset. Since all the priests necessarily lived in or near Jerusalem, like most of the Sadducees, they followed the southern system.

No doubt this deviation sometimes caused misunderstandings, but it also had practical advantages. For example, during Passover, it made it possible to legally celebrate the holiday for two days in a row, thereby allowing sacrifices to be made in the temple for a total of not two, but four hours. This division of days may also have been intended to ease both regional and religious divisions between the two groups.

Based on this, the apparent inconsistencies in the gospel narratives are easily explained. As Galileans, Jesus and the disciples believed that Passover began after sunrise on Thursday and ended at sunrise on Friday. The Jewish leaders who arrested and tried Christ, being mostly priests and Sadducees, believed that the Passover day would begin on Thursday at sunset and end on Friday at sunset. By means of this difference, ordained by God's sovereign ordinance, Jesus could legally celebrate the last Passover supper with the disciples and yet give His life and be sacrificed on the day of the Passover.

Again, God can be seen sovereignly and marvelously taking care of the exact execution of His redemptive plan. Jesus was Anything but a Victim of the insidious plans of people, and even less - a blind chance. Every word He spoke and every action He performed was directed and protected by God. Even the words and actions of others against Him were controlled by God. See, for example, 11:49-52; 19:11.

Plan

I. The Incarnation of God's Son (1:1-18)

A. His eternal existence (1:1, 2)
B. His activities before the incarnation (1:3-5)
C. His Forerunner (1:6-8)
D. His rejection (1:9–11)
E. His acceptance (1:12, 13)
F. His Godly nature (1:14–18)

II. Testimonies of Jesus as the Son of God (1:19–4:54)

A. Testimony of John the Baptist (1:19–34)

1. Religious leaders (1:19-28)
2. At the baptism of Christ (1:29-34)

B. Testimony to the Disciples of John (1:35–51)

1. Andrew and Peter (1:35-42)
2. Philip and Nathanael (1:43-51)

C. Testimonies in Galilee (2:1–12)

1. First miracle: turning water into wine (2:1-10)
2. The faith of the disciples (2:11, 12)

D. Testimonies in Judea (2:13–3:36)

1. The cleansing of the temple (2:13-25)
2. Teaching to Nicodemus (3:1-21)
3. Sermon of John the Baptist (3:22-36)

E. Testimonies in Samaria (4:1-42)

1. Testimony to the Samaritan Woman (4:1-26)
2. Testimony to the disciples (4:27-38)
3. Testimony to the people of Samaria (4:39-42)

E. Testimonies in Galilee (4:43–54)

1. Acceptance by the people of Galilee (4:43-45)
2. Second miracle: healing of the son of a courtier (4:46-54)

III. Opposition to Jesus as the Son of God (5:1–12:50)

A. Opposition at the feast in Jerusalem (5:1-47)

1. Third miracle: Healing a paralyzed man (5:1-9)
2. Rejection by the Jews (5:10-47)

B. Passover Resistance (6:1-71)

1. Fourth miracle: Feeding the 5,000 (6:1-14)
2. Fifth miracle: walking on water (6:15-21)
3. Doctrine of the Bread of Life (6:22-71)

C. Opposition at the Feast of Tabernacles (7:1–10:21)

1. Hostility (7:1–8:59)
2. Sixth miracle (9:1–10:21)

D. Opposition at the Feast of Renewal (10:22-42)
E. Opposition in Bethany (11:1–12:11)

1. Seventh miracle: the resurrection of Lazarus (11:1-44)
2. The Pharisees plot to kill Christ (11:45-57)
3. Mary anoints Christ (12:1–11)

E. Resistance in Jerusalem (12:12-50)

1. Solemn entrance (12:12-22)
2. Discussing Faith and Rejection (12:23-50)

IV. Making disciples of the Son of God (13:1–17:26)

A. In the Upper Room (13:1–14:31)

1. Washing the feet (13:1-20)
2. Message of betrayal (13:21-30)
3. Discussing the departure of Christ (13:31–14:31)

B. On the way to the garden (15:1–17:26)

1. Instruction of disciples (15:1–16:33)
2. Intercession with the Father (17:1-26)

V. The execution of the Son of God (18:1–19:37)

A. Rejection of Christ (18:1–19:16)

1. His arrest (18:1-11)
2. Judgments on Christ (18:12–19:16)

B. Crucifixion of Christ (19:17–37)

VI. Resurrection of the Son of God (19:38–21:23)

A. Burial of Christ (19:38–42)
B. Resurrection of Christ (20:1–10)
C. Appearances of Christ (20:11–21:23)

1. Mary Magdalene (20:11-18)
2. Disciples without the presence of Thomas (20:19-25)
3. To the disciples in the presence of Thomas (20:26-29)
4. Statement of the Purpose of the Gospel (20:31, 32)
5. Disciples (21:1-14)
6. Peter (21:15-23)

VII. Conclusion (21:24, 25)

Doctor of Divinity John MacArthur is known for his amazing devotion to the Holy Scriptures. Shepherding and preaching are his main vocation. For 40 years, John MacArthur has been pastor-teacher at Grace Church in Los Angeles, California, which has about 9,000 people every Sunday.
During his ministry, he preached thousands of sermons. Grace to You, of which he is president, has distributed over 12 million audio cassettes and CDs of his sermons. John's sermons are heard daily on over 1,300 radio stations, reaching many countries. These sermons have changed millions of lives by revealing the richness of God's powerful Word.
Dozens of books written by John MacArthur are published in many countries. The most famous of those that were published in Russian are “The Gospel of Christ”, “Our Sufficiency in Christ”, “A Dying Conscience”, “How to Meet the Enemy”, etc. The study Bible with commentaries by John MacArthur won several publishing awards and titles, exceeding one million copies in distribution.
John MacArthur is also president of the seminary and college (The Master's College and The Master's Seminary). He and his wife Patricia have four children and 14 grandchildren.

1:1‑18 These verses form the prologue. He introduces many of the major themes that John will address, especially the main one, that "Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God" (vv. 12-14, 18; cf. 20:31). Many keywords can be found here that are repeated throughout the gospel (eg life, light, testimony, glory). The subsequent content of the Gospel develops the theme of the prologue about how the Eternal Word of God, Jesus, the Messiah and the Son of God, became flesh and ministered among people so that all who would believe in Him would be saved. Although written by John in the simplest language in the New Testament, the prologue conveys the deepest truths. The prologue presents six basic truths about Christ as the Son of God: 1) the eternal Christ (vv. 1-3); 2) Christ incarnate (vv. 4, 5); 3) forerunner of Christ (vv. 6-8); 4) unrecognized Christ (vv. 9-11); 5) the almighty Christ (vv. 12, 13); and 6) the glorious Christ (vv. 14-18).

1:1 at the beginning Unlike 1 Jn. 1:1, where John used a similar phrase ("from the beginning") to report the starting point of Jesus' ministry and preaching of the gospel, here the phrase parallels Gen. 1:1, where the same expression is used. John used this phrase in its absolute sense to refer to the beginning of the existence of the material universe in time and space. It was The verb brings to the fore the eternal existence of the Word, i.e. Jesus Christ. Before the beginning of the existence of the universe, there always existed the Second Person of the Trinity, i.e. He has always been (cf. 8:58). This word is used in opposition to the verb "beginning to be" in v. 3, which means start in time. John did not include the genealogy that Matthew and Luke have because it reflects the theme that Jesus Christ is the eternal God, the Second Person of the Trinity. Whereas in terms of His human nature He had a human genealogy, in terms of His God nature He had no genealogy. Word John borrowed the term "Word" not only from the terminology of the Old Testament, but also from Greek philosophy, in which the expression was essentially impersonal, meaning the reason endowed with the first cause of "divine reason", "intelligence" or even "wisdom". However, John filled the term with an exclusively Old Testament and Christian meaning (for example, Gen. 1:3, where the Word of God created the world; Ps. 32:6; 107:20; Prov. 8:27, where the Word of God is His mighty self-expression in creation, wisdom, revelation and salvation) and made it a reference to a Person, i.e. Jesus Christ. Therefore, Greek philosophy is not the exclusive basis of John's thought. From a strategic point of view, the term "Word" serves as a bridge word to reach not only the Jews, but also the unsaved Greeks. John chose this term because it was familiar to both Jews and Greeks. . and the Word was with God The Word, being the Second Person of the Trinity, has been in close communion with God the Father throughout eternity. However, although the Word shared with the Father the splendor of heaven and eternity (Isaiah 6:1-13; cf. 12:41; 17:5), He willingly left the glory of heaven, taking on the form of a death on the cross (see notes on Phil. 2:6-8). was God In Greek, the construction emphasizes that the Word possessed all the essence or attributes of God, i.e. Jesus the Messiah was fully God (cf. Col. 2:9). Even at His incarnation, when He emptied Himself, He did not cease to be God, but, having accepted the real human nature- the body - He voluntarily renounced the independent manifestation of God's properties.

1:3 All things came into being through him Jesus Christ was the Representative of God the Father who participated in the creation of everything in the universe (Col. 1:16, 17; Heb. 1:2).

1:4, 5 life... light... darkness John introduces readers to the opposing themes found throughout the gospel. "Life" and "light" are qualities of the Word, not only for God (5:26), but also for those people who respond to the preaching of the gospel of Jesus Christ (8:12; 9:5; 10:28; 11: 25; 14:6). In the Gospel of John, the word "life" is used about 36 times - far more than in any other book of the New Testament. In a broad sense, it speaks not only of physical (temporal) life, which the Son gave to the created world during His participation in this creation (v. 3), but mainly of spiritual (eternal) life, transmitted as a gift through faith in Him ( 3:15; 17:3; Eph. 2:5). "Light" and "darkness" are familiar symbols in Scripture. Intellectually, "light" refers to biblical truth, while "darkness" refers to error or deceit (cf. Ps. 119:105; Prov. 6:23). Morally, "light" refers to holiness or purity (1 John 1:5), while "darkness" refers to sin or transgression (3:19; 12:35, 46; Rom. 13:11-14; 1 Thess. 5:4-7; 1 John 1:6; 2:8-11). In relation to Satan, who currently rules the spiritually dark world, as "the prince of the power of the air", contributing to spiritual darkness and rebellion against God (Eph. 2:2), and his demonic host (1 John 5:19) " darkness" has a special meaning. Of the 17 occurrences of the expression "darkness" in the New Testament, John uses it 14 times (8 in the Gospel and 6 in the 1st Epistle), making it almost exclusively a John word. In relation to Jesus Christ, the Word, the expressions "life" and "light" also have their own special meaning (vv. 9; 9:5; 1 John 1:5-7; 5:12, 20).

1:5 did not embrace The meaning of this word is better conveyed as "did not overcome." Darkness is not able to conquer or subdue light. Just as one candle can overcome the darkness that fills a room, the Person and works of the Son (His death on the cross; cf. 19:11a) overcome the powers of darkness.

1:6 sent from God As the forerunner of Jesus, John was to testify of Him as the Messiah and the Son of God. John's ministry ended the "400 years of silence" between the close of the Old Testament and the beginning of the New Testament period when God did not give His revelation. John In this gospel, the name "John" always refers to John the Baptist, not the Apostle John. Unlike other gospels, where an additional description is used to identify him (Mt. 3:1; Mk. 1:4; Lk. 7:20), the author of this gospel calls him simply "John" without the word "Baptist". Moreover, the apostle John (or the son of Zebedee) nowhere in the gospel refers to himself directly by name, although he was one of the three closest friends of Jesus (Matt. 17:1). Such silence decisively proves that the apostle John wrote this gospel and that his readers knew very well that he composed the gospel that bears his name. For more information about John the Baptist cf. Matt. 3:1-6; Mk. 1:2-6; OK. 1:5-25; 57-80.

1:7 testimonies... testify This gospel emphasizes the words "witness" or "testify", reflecting the language of the courtroom of the Old Testament, where the truth of the case was to be established on the basis of numerous testimonies (8:17, 18; cf. Deut. 17:6; 19: fifteen). Not only did John the Baptist testify of Jesus as the Messiah and Son of God (vv. 19-34; 3:27-30; 5:35), but there were also other witnesses: 1) a Samaritan woman (4:29); 2) the works of Jesus (10:25); 3) Father (5:32-37); 4) Old Testament (5:39, 40); 5) the people (12:17); and 6) the Holy Spirit (15:26, 27). that all may believe through him The word "him" does not refer to Christ, but to John as the mediator who testified of Christ. The purpose of his testimony was to generate faith in Jesus Christ as the Savior of the world.

1:8 He was not light While John the Baptist was the subject of faith, Jesus Christ is the object of faith. While John's personality and ministry were vital (Matt. 11:11), he was only a forerunner, heralding the coming of the Messiah. Many years after John's ministry and death, many people still failed to understand John's subordinate role to Jesus (Acts 19:1-3).

1:9 True light...coming into the world The preferred translation is given in a footnote in the margin. The words "coming into the world" would be grammatically correct to refer to the word "Light", and not "every person" and, thus, translate "the true Light that comes into the world enlightens every person." This highlights the incarnation of Jesus Christ (v. 14; 3:16). enlightens every person Enough light is given to each person by the sovereign power of God to be accountable. Through general revelation in creation and conscience, God has infused His knowledge into man. However, general revelation does not produce salvation, but either leads to the perfect light of Jesus Christ or brings condemnation to those who reject such “light” (see notes on Romans 1:19, 20; 2:12–16). With the advent of Jesus Christ, the light that God placed inside the human heart was realized and incarnated. world The main meaning of this word in Greek, meaning decoration, is explained by the word "outer" (1 Pet. 3:3). While this expression is used a total of 185 times in the New Testament, John showed particular love for the word, using it 78 times in his Gospel, 24 times in the epistles, and 3 times in Revelation. John gives several shades of its meaning: 1) the created physical universe (v. 9; cf. v. 3; 21:24, 25); 2) mankind in general (3:16; 6:32, 51; 12:19) and 3) the invisible spiritual world of evil, which is in the power of Satan, and everything he offers, enmity against God, His Word and His people (3 :19; 4:42; 7:7; 14:17, 22, 27, 30; 15:18, 19; 16:8, 20, 33; 17:6, 9, 14; cf. 1 Corinthians 1:21 ; 2 Corinthians 4:4; 2 Pet. 1:4; 1 John 5:19). The latter concept is an essentially new designation which the term acquires in the New Testament and which prevails in John. Thus, in most cases, John uses this word with a certain negative connotation.

1:11 to their own... their own The first expression, “to their own,” most likely refers to humanity as a whole, and the second to the Jewish people. As the Creator, the world belongs to the Word as a property, but due to spiritual blindness the world did not even recognize Him (cf. also v. 10). John used the second word "His" in a narrower sense to refer to the physical origin of Jesus, the Jews. Although they had the Scripture that testified of His Person and coming, they still did not receive Him (Isaiah 65:2, 3; Jeremiah 7:25). The Gospel of John focuses on the theme of the Jews' rejection of their promised Messiah (12:37-41).

1:12, 13 These verses are contrasted with verses 10, 11. John softens the general rejection of the Messiah by emphasizing the existence of a believing remnant. This book is previewed here, since in its first 12 chapters the emphasis is on the rejection of Christ, and ch. 13-21 focus on the believing remnant that received Him.

1:12 who received him, those who believe in his name The second sentence explains the first. To accept Him - the Word of God - means to acknowledge His statements, to believe in Him, and thus to be devoted to Him. gave This word emphasizes that the grace of God is involved in the gift of salvation (cf. Eph. 2:8-10). power Those who receive Jesus - the Word - receive full authority to claim the high title of "children of God." His name The expression signifies the nature of the Person Itself. See notes on 14:13, 14.

1:13 from God God's side of salvation: Ultimately, salvation comes from God's will, not man's (cf. 3:6-8; Tit. 3:5; 1 John 2:29).

1:14 The Word became flesh Since Christ, being God, was not eternal and uncreated (see note on v. 1), the word "became" emphasizes Christ's taking on human flesh (cf. Heb. 1:1-3; 2:14-18). Undoubtedly, of all the facts, this is the most difficult to understand, since it testifies that Infinity became finite, Eternity was subject to time; The Invisible became the Visible; the supernatural Person has made Himself natural. However, when incarnated, the Word did not cease to be God, but became God in human flesh, i.e. the former God, but in human form (1 Tim. 3:16). lived The phrase means "set up a tabernacle" or "dwell in a tent." This expression is reminiscent of the Old Testament tabernacle where God spoke to Israel before the temple was built (Ex. 25:8). It was called "the tabernacle of the meeting" (Ex. 33:7), or "the tabernacle of testimony" (in the Septuagint), where "the Lord spoke to Moses face to face, as a man speaks to his friend" (Ex. 33:11). During the New Testament, God chose to dwell among His people in a purely personal way, by becoming a man. In the Old Testament we read that when the tabernacle was completed, the cloud of God's presence (or shekinah) filled the entire building (Ex. 40:34; cf. 1 Kings 8:10). When the Word became flesh, the glorious presence of God became incarnate in Him (cf. Col. 2:9). we have seen his glory Even though His divine essence was hidden in human flesh, the gospels bear witness to His divine majesty. The disciples saw the radiance of His glory on the Mount of Transfiguration (Matt. 17:1-8). However, the mention of the glory of Christ was not only visible, but also spiritual. They saw in Him manifestations of the attributes or characteristics of God (mercy, generosity, benevolence, wisdom, truth, etc.; cf. Ex. 33:18–23). glory as... from the Father Jesus, being God, showed the same perfect glory as the Father. They are one in nature (cf. 5:17-30; 8:19; 10:30). only begotten The expression "one-begotten" does not accurately translate the Greek word. It is not identical with the term meaning "beget into the world", but, on the contrary, has the meaning "the only beloved." Therefore, it reflects the idea of ​​someone's exclusivity, uniqueness and indicates that someone is loved like no one else. With this word, John emphasized the special nature of the relationship between the Father and the Son in God (cf. 3:16, 18; 1 John 4:9). It has the additional meaning not of descent, but of unique prominence; for example, the word was used of Isaac (Heb. 11:17), who was the second son of Abraham (the first was Ishmael; cf. Gen. 16:15 with Gen. 21:2, 3). full of grace and truth John is probably referring to Ex. 33, 34. There Moses asked God to show him His glory. The Lord answered Moses that He would pass all His “glory” before him, and then, as God passed by, He proclaimed: “The Lord ... is merciful and merciful, long-suffering and merciful and true” (Ex. 33:18, 19; 34:5 -7). These attributes of God's glory emphasize the grace of God's character, especially in relation to salvation. Jesus, being the God of the Old Testament (8:58; "I AM"), displayed the same attributes of God when He dwelt among men in the New Testament age (Col. 2:9).

1:15 The testimony of John the Baptist confirms the statement of the apostle John about the pre-eternity of the Incarnate Word (cf. v. 14).

1:16 grace upon grace This phrase emphasizes the abundance of grace God has shown to mankind, especially believers (Eph. 1:5-8; 2:7).

1:17, 18 These verses, confirming the truth in v. 14 are final in contrast to the prologue. The law given to Moses was not a manifestation of God's mercy, but was God's demand for holiness. He acted as a way of demonstrating the sinfulness of man and pointed out the need for a Savior, Jesus Christ (Rom. 3:19, 20; Gal. 3:10-14, 21-26). God gave the law. Moreover, the law revealed only a part of the truth and was of a preparatory nature. The real essence or complete truth that the law pointed to came through the Person of Jesus Christ.

1:18 who is in the bosom The expression signifies the intimacy, love, and understanding found in the Triune God (13:23; Luke 16:22, 23). revealed From this word, theologians formed the term "exegesis", or "interpretation". John meant that everything in Jesus and everything He does reveals and explains who God is and what He does (14:8–10).

1:19‑37 In these verses, John, reinforcing his main theme (20:30, 31), introduced the first of many witnesses to prove that Jesus is the Messiah and the Son of God. John the Baptist testified for three days different groups people (cf. vv. 29, 35, 36). Each time he spoke about Christ in a different way and emphasized His special aspects. The events described in these verses took place in AD 26/27, just a few months after John's baptism of Jesus (cf. Matt. 3:13-17; Luke 3:21, 22).

John 1:19 John, born into a family of priests, belonged to the tribe of Levi (Luke 1:5). When he was about 29 or 30 years old, he began his ministry in the Jordan Valley and boldly proclaimed the need for spiritual repentance and preparation for the coming of the Messiah. He was the cousin of Jesus Christ and fulfilled the appointment of His prophetic forerunner (Matt. 3:3; Luke 1:5-25, 36). Jews... from Jerusalem Here, perhaps, we are talking about the Sanhedrin, the main governing body of the Jewish people. The Sanhedrin was run by the family of the high priest, so the messengers would naturally be priests and Levites, who are interested in John's ministry, his preaching, and his baptism.

1:20 I am not Christ Some thought that John was the Messiah (Luke 3:15-17). Christ The word "Christ" is the Greek equivalent for the Hebrew term "Messiah".

1:21 are you Elijah? The prophet Malachi in 4:5 (see explanation ibid.) promises that the prophet Elijah will return before the Messiah establishes his earthly kingdom. They asked if John was the forerunner of the Messiah, was he Elijah? In announcing the birth of John, the angel said that John would come before Jesus "in the spirit and power of Elijah" (Luke 1:17), thus indicating that it was not Elijah who could literally fulfill the prophecy, but someone else. God sent John, who was like Elijah, i.e. a person who had the same type of ministry, the same authority, and similar personality traits (2 Kings 1:8; cf. Matt. 3:4). And if Jesus came as the Messiah, then John probably fulfilled this prophecy (see notes on Matt. 11:14; Mark 9:13; Luke 1:17; Rev. 11:5, 6). Prophet? Here is a reference to Deut. 18:15-18, which foretold that God would raise up a great Prophet like Moses who would act as His voice. While some people in John's time interpreted this prophecy as referring to another forerunner of the Messiah, the New Testament (Acts 3:22, 23; 7:37) refers to Jesus.

1:23 John quoted and referred to Is. 40:3 (cf. Matt. 3:3; Mark 1:3; Luke 3:4). In the context of the original Is. 40:3 the prophet heard a voice calling for a straight path through the eastern wilderness so that the God of Israel could bring his people home from the Babylonian captivity. This call was a prophetic description that foreshadowed Israel's final and greatest return to their God from spiritual darkness and alienation through the Messiah's spiritual deliverance (cf. Rom. 11:25-27). In humility, John compared himself to a voice rather than a person, thus focusing his attention exclusively on Christ (cf. Luke 17:10).

1:25 you baptize Since John identified himself as merely a voice (v. 24), the question arose of his authority to perform baptism. The Old Testament associated the coming of the Messiah with repentance and spiritual cleansing (Ezek. 36, 37; Zech. 13:1). John focused on his position as the forerunner of the Messiah. He used ordinary proselyte baptism for Jews as a sign of the need to recognize that they, too, are outside God's saving covenant, just like the Gentiles. Before the coming of the Messiah, they also needed spiritual cleansing and preparation (repentance - Matt. 3:11; Mark 1:4; Luke 3:7, 8). See explanations to Matt. 3:6, 11, 16, 17 to explain the meaning of John's baptism.

1:27 Here the words of John the Baptist continue the theme of the Messiah's superiority to him, touched upon in the prologue (vv. 6-8, 15), and show his amazing humility. Whenever John had the opportunity to focus on himself in such encounters, he turned his full attention to the Messiah instead. John humbled himself to the point of claiming that he—unlike a slave who was required to take off his master's shoes—was not even worthy to perform this act in regard to the Messiah.

1:28 Vifavar The original word "Bethany" has been replaced by this word, as some believe that John mistakenly named Bethany as the site of these events. The explanation is that there were two Bethanies, i.e. one near Jerusalem, where Mary, Martha and Lazarus lived (11:1), and the other "at the Jordan" near the region of Galilee. Since John took great pains to name another Bethany near Jerusalem, here he most likely referred to another city with the same name.

1:29‑34 This section talks about John's testimony of Jesus to another group of Jews the next day (see vv. 19-28 for information about the first group and the day). This section forms something like a bridge. This continues the theme of the testimony of John the Baptist, but also provides an extensive list of Jesus-related names: Lamb of God (vv. 29, 36), Rabbi/Teacher (vv. 38, 49), Messiah/Christ (v. 41), Son of God (v. 34, 49), the King of Israel (v. 49), the Son of Man (v. 51), and "He of whom Moses wrote in the law and the prophets" (v. 45).

1:29 The next day This phrase probably refers to the day after John replied to the delegation from Jerusalem. It also begins the succession of days (vv. 43; 2:1) culminating in the miracle at Cana (2:1-11). Lamb of God The use of the lamb for sacrifice was exceptionally clear to the Jews. The lamb was sacrificed at Passover (Ex. 12:1-36); in the prophecies of Isaiah the lamb was led to the slaughter (Isaiah 53:7); Israel offered the lamb in daily sacrifices (Lev. 14:12-21; cf. Heb. 10:5-7). John the Baptist used this expression as a reference to Jesus' last sacrifice on the cross to atone for the sins of the whole world. This is a theme that the apostle John uses throughout his writings (19:36; cf. Rev. 5:1-6; 7:17; 17:14) and is found in other books of the New Testament (e.g., 1 Pet. 1:19). ). the sin of the world See explanation to Art. 9; cf. 3:16; 6:33, 51. In this context, "the world" refers to humanity in general, not to each person specifically. The use of the singular word "sin" in combination with the word "world" indicates that Jesus' sacrifice for sin potentially applies to all people without exception (cf. 1 John 2:2). However, John makes it clear that it has an effective effect only for those who have accepted Christ (vv. 11, 12). For a discussion of the description of Christ's death for the sake of this world, see the note to 2 Cor. 5:19.

1:31 I didn't know him Although John was a relative of Jesus, he did not know Jesus as the "Coming One" or the "Messiah" (v. 30).

1:32 Spirit descending Prior to this, God had told John that this sign would point to the promised Messiah (v. 33). Therefore, when John testified of what was happening, he was able to identify Jesus as the Messiah (cf. Matt. 3:16; Mark 1:10; Luke 3:22).

1:34 Son of God Although in a narrow sense, believers may be called “sons of God” (e.g., v. 12; Matt. 5:9; Rom. 8:14), John uses this expression with the full force of a title that indicates a unique unity and the intimacy that Jesus maintains with the Father as the "Son". The term conveys the idea of ​​the Godlike nature of Jesus as the Messiah (vv. 49; 5:16-30; cf. 2 Sam. 7:14; Ps. 2:7; see notes on Heb. 1:1-9).

1:35‑51 This section deals with John's testimony of Jesus to the third group, i.e. some of John's disciples on the third day (see vv. 19-28; 29-34 for the first and second groups). In keeping with his modesty (v. 27), John focuses his own disciples on Jesus (v. 37).

1:37 follow Jesus Although in apostolic style the verb "go" usually means "follow like a disciple" (vv. 43; 8:12; 12:26; 21:19, 20, 22), it can also have an indefinite meaning (11:31). Here "following" does not necessarily mean that they became regular disciples at this time. Perhaps they followed Jesus to get to know Him better because of John's testimony. Here the disciples of John the Baptist first came under the influence of Jesus (eg Andrew; 1:40). Ultimately, when Jesus called them into permanent service after these events, they dedicated their lives to Him as true disciples (Matt. 4:18-22; 9:9; Mark 1:16-20). From this point in the story, John the Baptist gradually disappears from the scene, and all attention is focused on the ministry of Christ.

1:39 past ten The Jews divided the daylight hours into 12 hours (starting at dawn, at about 6 o'clock). So it must have been about 4 pm. Most likely, John mentions exact time to emphasize that he was that other disciple of John the Baptist who came to Christ with Andrew (v. 40). He was an eyewitness to the events that took place over the next three days, and the first meeting with Jesus was so significant in his life that John even remembered the exact time of this meeting with the Lord.

1:41 Messiah The word "Messiah" is a transliteration of the Hebrew or Aramaic verbal adjective "Anointed". It comes from a verb meaning "to anoint" someone, and refers to an action that entails initiating that person into a particular role or activity. The expression first referred to the king of Israel (“anointed of the Lord” - 1 Sam. 16:6), the high priest (“anointed priest” - Lev. 4:3) and, in one place, to the patriarchs (“my anointed ones” - Ps. 104: fifteen). Ultimately, it reached its highest value in predicting the "Coming One" or "Messiah" in the role of prophet, priest and king. The term "Christ" - a Greek word (verbal adjective) that comes from the verb meaning "to anoint" - is used as a translation of the Hebrew term. The words "Messiah" or "Christ" are not personal names of Jesus, but His titles.

1:42 Jesus looked at him Jesus knows hearts perfectly (vv. 43-51) and not only looks into them (vv. 47, 48), but also transforms a person into the way He wants him to be. you will be called Keefa Until that time, Peter was known as "Simon son of Jonas" (the Aramaic name "Jonah" means "John"; cf. 21:15-17; Matt. 16:17). In Aramaic, the word "Kepha" means "stone", it is translated into Greek "Peter". Jesus gave Simon the name "Kepha" or "Peter" early in his ministry (cf. Matt. 16:18; Mark 3:16). This statement not only predicts who Peter will be called, but also tells how Jesus will change his character and use Peter in founding the church (cf. 21:18, 19; Matt. 16:16-18; Acts 2:14 –4:32).

1:43‑51 This section reflects the fourth day since the beginning of the testimony of John the Baptist (cf. vv. 19, 29, 35).

1:44 from Bethsaida, from the same city with Andrew and Peter Although Mark in 1:21, 29 names Capernaum as Peter's hometown, John tells us that he was from Bethsaida. The solution to the problem lies in the fact that Peter and Andrew most likely grew up in Bethsaida and later moved to Capernaum, just as Jesus was constantly identified with His hometown of Nazareth, although He later lived elsewhere (Matt. 2: 23; 4:13; Mark 1:9; Luke 1:26).

1:45 The one about whom Moses in the law and the prophets wrote This phrase summarizes the position of the entire Gospel of John: Jesus is the fulfillment of the Old Testament Scripture (cf. vv. 21; 5:39; Deut. 18:15-19; Luke 24:44, 47; Acts 10:43; 18:28 26:22, 23; Rom. 1:2; 1 Cor. 15:3; 1 Pet. 1:10, 11; Rev. 19:10). can anything good come from Nazareth? Nathanael was from Cana (21:2), another city of Galilee. While the Jews despised the Galileans, the Galileans themselves did not regard the inhabitants of Nazareth as anything. In light of what is said in 7:52, Nathanael's neglect was probably based on the fact that Nazareth was not an important village and had no significance in terms of prophecy (cf., however, Mt. 2:23). Later, some will scorn the faith of Christians as "Nazarite heresy" (Acts 24:5).

1:47 no guile Jesus meant that Nathanael's directness showed that he was an Israelite without duplicitous motives, inclined to personally verify the claims made about Jesus. The expression reveals an honest searching heart. The reference here is to Gen. 27:35 where James, unlike the sincere Nathanael, was known for his cunning. Perhaps the meaning here is that the use of deceit distinguished not only Jacob, but also his descendants. For Jesus, an honest and sincere Israelite was the exception rather than the rule (cf. 2:23–25).

1:48 I saw you A laconic allusion to the supernatural knowledge of Jesus. Not only were Jesus' brief conclusions about Nathanael correct (v. 47), but He also revealed information that only Nathanael himself could have known. It is possible that Nathanael had an important or exceptional fellowship with God in that place, and Jesus' allusion to this was clearly recognizable. In any case, Jesus had knowledge of this event inaccessible to man.

1:49 Son of God... King of Israel Jesus' manifestation of supernatural knowledge and Philip's testimony dispelled Nathanael's doubts, so John added Nathanael's testimony to this part. The use in the original of the definite article in the expression "Son of God" most likely indicates that the phrase must be understood in its full sense (cf. v. 34; 11:27). For Nathanael, this was the One about whom it was impossible to speak in simple, human words.

1:51 true, true Wed 5:19, 24, 25. Very often this phrase has been used to emphasize the importance and truth of the following statement. heaven open and the angels of God ascending and descending In the light of the context of Art. 47, this verse is probably referring to Gen. 28:12, where Jacob dreamed of a ladder descending from heaven. Jesus pointed out to Nathanael that just as Jacob experienced a supernatural or heavenly revelation, so Nathanael and the other disciples would experience fellowship that confirmed who Jesus was. Moreover, the expression "Son of Man" replaced the ladder in Jacob's dream, showing that Jesus is man's means of access to God. Son of Man See explanation to Matt. 8:20. Jesus loved this name most of all, since He mostly pronounced it Himself (more than 80 times). In the New Testament, this phrase refers only to Jesus and is found mainly in the Gospels (cf. Acts 7:56). In the Fourth Gospel, this expression appears 13 times and is most often associated with the theme of crucifixion and suffering (3:14; 8:28), revelation (6:27, 53), as well as with the theme of eschatological authority (5:27; 9:39 ). While the term can sometimes refer simply to a person or substitute for "I" (6:27; cf. 6:20), it takes on a special eschatological meaning when referring to Dan. 7:13, 14, where the "Son of Man" or Messiah comes in glory to receive the kingdom from the "Ancient of Days" (i.e., the Father).