προφητῶν. 15. Λέγει αὐτοῖς, ““Ypets δὲ τίνα µε λέγετε εἶναι ;”” f Ch. καὶ.
16. ᾽Αποκριθεὶς δὲ Σίμων Πέτρος εἶπε, “Eb ef ὅ Χριστός, ὁ vids τοῦ iil 12; ix.
>? e - aa 14, X. 32
Θεοῦ τοῦ *Lavtos.” 17. Καὶ doxpideis? 6 ᾿Ιησοῦς εἶπεν αὐτῷ, (an ati ute ο
“‘Maxdptos et, Σίμων Bap “lava, ὅτι Soaps καὶ fatwa οὐκ Ἀἀπεκάλυψέ God).
50. Gal.i.16. Eph. vi.1z. Heb. ii. 14 (the same phrase in all),
1 αποκριθεις δε in ΜΒ ΓΡ, cursives.
cally (ἄλλοι) but generically: a lower type who did not connect Jesus with Messiah in any way, even as forerunner, but simply thought of Him as one in whom the old prophetic charism had been revived.
Vv. 15, 16. New question and answer. —Ver. 15. ὑμεῖς δὲ, and you? might have stood alone, perhaps did originally. Jesus invites the Twelve to give Him their own view. The first question was really only introductory to this. Jesus desires to make sure that He, otherwise without reliable following, has in His disciples at least the nucleus of a com- munity with a definite religious con- viction as to the meaning of His ministry and mission.—Ver. 16. Σίμων Πέτρος: now as always spokesman for the Twelve. There may be deeper natures among them (John 2), but he is the most ener- getic and outspoken, though withal emotional rather than intellectual; strong, as passionate character is, rather than with the strength of thought, or of a will steadily controlled by a firm grasp of great principles: not a rock in the sense in which St. Paul was οπς.- σὺ el... τοῦ ζῶντος: ‘ Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God,” in Mk. simply “Thou art the Christ,” in Lk. ‘the Christ of God”. One’s first thought is that Mk. gives the original form of the reply; and yet in view of Peter’s vehement temperament one cannot be perfectly sure of that. The form in Mt. certainly answers best to the reply of Jesus, vide on ver. 17. In any case the emphasis lies on that which is common to the three reports: the affirmation of the Christhood of Jesus. That was what differentiated the disciples from the favourably disposed multitude. The latter said in effect : at most a forerunner of Messiah, probably not even that, only a prophet worthy to be named alongside of the well-known prophets of Israel. The Twelve through Peter said: not merely a prophet or a forerunner of the Messiah, but the Messiah Himself. The temainder of the reply in Mt., whether spoken by Peter, or added by the evan-
61 Cor. xv. h Ch, xi. 25. Gal. i. 16.
gelist (to correspond, as it were, to Son of Man in ver. 13), is simply expansion or epexegesis. If spoken by Peter it serves to show that he spoke with emotion, and with a sense of the gravity of the declaration. The precise theo- logical value of the added clause cannot be determined.
Vv. 17-19. Solemn address of $esus to Peter, peculiar to Mt., and of doubtful authenticity in the view of many modern critics, including Wendt (Die Lehre Fesu, i., p. 181), either an addendum by the evangelist or introduced at a later date by areviser. This question eannot be fully discussed here. It must suffice to say that psychological reasons are in favour of something of the kind having been said by Jesus. It was a great critical moment in His career, at which His spirit was doubtless in a state of high tension. The firm tone of con- viction in Peter’s reply would give Him a thrill of satisfaction demanding ex- pression. One feels that there is a hiatus in the narratives of Mk. and Lk.: no comment on the part of Jesus, as if Peter had delivered himself of a mere trite commonplace. We may be sure the fact was notso. The terms in which Jesus speaks of Peter are characteristic —warm, generous, unstinted. The style is not that of an ecclesiastical editor lay- ing the foundation for Church power and prelatic pretensions, but of a noble-minded Master eulogising in im- passioned terms a loyal disciple. Even the reference to the “Church” is not unseasonable. What more natural than that Jesus, conscious that His labours, outside the disciple circle, have been fruitless, so far as permanent result is concerned, should fix His hopes on that circle, and look on it as the nucleus of a new regenerate Israel, having for its raison d’étre that it accepts Him as the Christ? And the name for the new Israel, ἐκκλησία, in His mouth is not an anachronism. It is an old familiar name for the congregation of Israel, found in Deut. (xviii. 16; xxiii. 2) and Psalms (xxii. 26), both books well known ta