had held mth Jesus, had convinced him that He was indeed the Christ.
[Ihe Messias... .interpreted.... Christ.] It is almost needless to remark, that these names mean the " anointed one." The first is Hebrew, and the second is Greek. Kings, prophets, and priests, in the Old Testament, were anointed, and our Lord as the Prophet, Priest, and King of the Church was called tne Anointed One, not because He was really anointed with oil, but because he was " anointed with the Holy Ghost." (Acts x. 38.)
The extent of Andrew's religious knowledge ought not to be overlooked. Poor and humble in station as he was, he seems, like all the Jews, to have known what the Old Testament prophets had foretold about Messiah, and to have been prepared to hear of a person appearing in the character of Messiah. It is one of many expressions in the Gospels which show that the lower orders among the Jews were far better acquainted with the letter of the Old Testament Scriptures, than the poor in our own day generally are with the letter of the New Testament, or indeed of any part of the Bible.
Calvin remarks on Andrew's conduct, " Woe to our indolence, if we do not, after having been fully enlightened, endeavour to make others partakers of the same griice."
42. — [When Jesus heheld....said....thou art Simon.'] Our Lord here displayed His perfect knowledge of all persons, names, and things. He needed not that any should tell Him who and what a person was. This knowledge was supposed by the Jews to be a peculiar attribute of Messiah, whenever He came. He was to be one of " quick understanding." (Isaiah xi. 3.) Enough fur us to know that it is a peculiar attribute of God. He alone knows the hearts of men. Our Lord's perfect knowledge of all hearts was one among many proofs of His divinity. The same knowledge appears again in His address to Nathanael, in this chapter, ver. 47, and in His conversation with the Samaritan woman. (John iv. 18, etc.) — The eflect produced in both cases, is very worthy of notice.
[Cephas.] This is a Syriac word, and is equivalent to the Greek word Petros, which we render Peter. Both mean a stone, a portion of a rock. "Petra" means a rock, "Petros" a piece of a rock. Peter was the latter, but not the former.
[A stone.] The marginal reading here, as Lightfoot remarks, would have been much better than that which the translators have put in our version. If the words were "Ceplias, wldch is by interpretation Peter," it would have conveyed our Lord's meaning far more clearly.
The custom of having two names appears to have been