λέγετε εἶναι ;” Θεοῦ.” τοῦτο, 22. εἰπών, ““Ore δεῖ τὸν υἱὸν τοῦ ἀνθρώπου πολλὰ παθεῖν, καὶ ἀποδοκιμασθῆναι ἀπὸ τῶν πρεσβυτέρων καὶ ἀρχιερέων καὶ ypap- / x a a ~ ή ς / 3 a 74
µατέων, καὶ ἀποκτανθῆναι, καὶ τῇ τρίτη ἡμέρα ἐγερθῆναι.
23. Ἔλεγε δὲ πρὸς πάντας, “Et τις θέλει ὀπίσω µου ἐλθεῖν,Σ ἀπαρνησάσθω ἑαυτόν, καὶ ἀράτω τὸν σταυρὸν αὐτοῦ καθ ἡμέραν,
1 οἱ οχλοι λεγ. in SBLE 1, 131 sah. cop, 2 Πετρος δε αποκ. in $$BCLE 1 sah. cop.
ὄλεγειν in NABCDLE ai. pl. * So in most uncials. }ερχεσθαι in SYBCDLE al.
ACD minusc. have αναστηναι (W.H. πιατρ.). The important authorities are divided between
απαρνησασθω and the simple αρνησ. (W.H. former in margin, latter in text).
narrative at ix, 18: Jesus alone praying, as in Mt. xiv. 23, Mk. vi. 45-46, yet the disciples are with Him though alone (κατὰ µόνας συνῆσαν a. ot padynrat), and He proceeds to interrogate them. This raises the question as to the motives for intentional omission, which may have been such as these: avoidance of duplicates with no new lesson (second feeding), anti-Pharisaic matter much restricted throughout (ceremonial wash- ing), Jewish particularism not suitable in a Gentile Gospel, not even the appearance of it (Syrophenician woman).—«ara µόνας, the scene remains unchanged in Lk.—that of the feeding of the 5000. No trace in this Gospel of Caesarea Philippi, or indeed of the great northerly journey (or journeys) so prominently recognised in Mk., the aim of which was to get away from crowds, and obtain leisure for intercourse with the Twelve in view of the approaching fatal crisis. This omission can hardly be without intention. Whether Lk. knew Mk.’s Gospel or not, so careful and interested an inquirer can hardly have been ignorant of that northern excursion. He may have omitted it because it was not rich in incident, in favour of the Samaritan journey about which he had much to tell. But the very raison d’éire of the journey was the hope that it might be a quiet one, giving leisure for inter- course with the Twelve. But this private fellowship of Jesus with His disciples with a view to their instruction is just one of the things to which justice
is not done in this Gospel. Their need of instruction is not emphasised. From Lk.’s narrative one would never guess the critical importance of the conversa- tion at Caesarea Philippi, as regards either Peter’s confession or the announce- ment by Jesus of the coming passion.— Ver. 20. τὸν Χριστὸν τοῦ Θεοῦ: even the form of the confession, as here given, hides its significance. Peter speaks the language of the apostolic age, the Christ of God, a commonplace of the Christian faith. Mk.’s Thou art the Christ, laconic, emphatic, is original by comparison, and Mt.’s form still more sounds like the utterance of a fresh, strong conviction, a new revelation flashed into the soul of Peter.
Vv. 21-27. The cross and cross-bear- ing.—Ver. 22. εἰπὼν introduces re- ference to the coming sufferings of Jesus in a quite incidental way as a reason why the disciples should keep silence as to the Messiahship of their Master, just confessed. The truth is that the con- versation as to the Christ was a mere prelude to a very formal, solemn, and plain-spoken’announcement on a pain- ful theme, to which hitherto Jesus had alluded only in veiled mystic language. Cf. the accounts in Mt. and Mk. (xvi. 21, viii. 31).---ὅτι δεῖ, etc., the announce- ment is given in much the same words as in Mk.— Ver. 23. ἔλεγε δὲ πρὸς πάντας: with this formula Lk. smoothly passes from Christ’s statement concern- ing His own Passion to the kindred topic of cross-bearing as the law of
bet on, EYATTEAION
καὶ ἀκολουθείτω por. 24. ὃς γὰρ ἂν θέλῃη τὴν Wuxhy αὐτοῦ σῶσαι, ἀπολέσει αὐτήν: ὃς δ ἂν ἀπολέσῃ τὴν ψυχὴν αὐτοῦ ἕνεκεν ἐμοῦ, 25. τί γὰρ ὠφελεῖται ἄνθρωπος, κερδήσας τὸν 26. ὃς γὰρ ἂν