Real Bible Translation

He is saying to themselves, "Come and you will perceive!" Therefore they came and perceived the Day, that one where he is abiding, and they stayed close beside self. She was an hour just as a tenth.⁵⁹

Julia Smith Literal 1876 Translation:
He says to them, Come and see. They came and saw where he remains, and they remained with him that day: and it was about the tenth hour.

LITV Translation:
He said to them, Come and see. They went and saw where He stayed, and they remained with Him that day. And the hour was about the tenth.

ESV Translation:
He said to them, “Come and you will see.” So they came and saw where he was staying, and they stayed with him that day, for it was about the tenth hour.

Footnotes

What Time Is It?

ὥρα ἦν ὡς δεκάτη the hour was just as a tenth. Scholars were always trying to figure out the exact time of day (and elsewhere like John 4:6 and 19:14) to workout the "extreme difficulties" with putting together a timeline:

The extreme difficulty of reconciling John's statement as to the time of the Crucifixion with that of Mark (see note on John 19:14) has led very able critics, like Townson, McLellan, Westcott, to argue that all John's notices of time are compatible with his having adopted the Roman method of measuring, i.e. from midnight to noon, and from noon to midnight.

(Pulpit Commentary, John 1:39)

On John 19:14—“ἦν δὲ παρασκευὴ τοῦ πάσχα, ὥρα ἦν ὡς ἕκτη” (“And it was the Preparation Day of the Passover; it was about the sixth hour”)—there exists a long-standing scholarly difficulty in reconciling this Johannine time statement with the Synoptic accounts that situate the crucifixion at the third hour (Mark 15:25) and darkness at the sixth hour (Mark 15:33; Matthew 27:45; Luke 23:44). This "extreme difficulty" is frequently acknowledged (see Pulpit Commentary on John 1:39), and has led critics to argue that all John’s notices of time might reflect the Roman method of counting hours from midnight to noon and from noon to midnight, thereby aligning John with the Synoptic narratives. Yet such efforts to harmonize these “extreme difficulties” proceed from an anachronistic imposition of modern linear time concepts—imagining time as a sequence of discrete hours measured uniformly and mechanically.

In ancient Hebraic thought, however, “hour” (ὥρα) functioned not merely as a quantitative unit but as a theological locus of divine disclosure—a sign of Aonic Time (cf. John 4:6: “ὥρα ἦν ὡς ἕκτη” and John 19:14: “ὥρα ἦν ὡς ἕκτη”), which collapses linear chronology into a Möbius-like prophetic simultaneity: past, present, and future coalesce within a single revelatory moment. This concept parallels OT expressions such as “the day of that one” (ביום ההוא), denoting an eschatological time—“in the day of Himself”—attested in Genesis 15:18 and Isaiah 7:20.

Thus, John’s usage of “ὥρα” is not an empirical timestamp but a sacramental temporal marker, merging the Passover preparation with the divine hour of judgment and redemption (cf. John 2:4; 12:23; 17:1). The sixth hour, in this context, deliberately overlaps with the darkness hour in the Synoptics, demonstrating that the Passion is not confined to a historical timeline but unfolds within eternal time, wherein the crucifixion hour recapitulates creation, exodus, and the final judgment.

This insight reveals why modern scholars, seeking to harmonize or literalize these time references, have often failed: they neglect the Johannine recursivity that resists linear sequence, thereby missing the writer’s deeper intent to present the crucifixion as a cosmic, timeless event.