The Pulpit Commentary — Matthew — Volume 2 — Section 64

lJy Oapcr,in (e.g. Exod. xiv. 18; :u:, 20). Simon ; for he doubted, e.nd begcm to aink in One or two second-re.te manuscripts omit the sea." 6a.pcre7n in Mark, but tbis may be only due Ver. 81.-And immediately, Without t.o o r~miniecenoe of J obn. It is also omitted any waste of time, just e.s in 'Ver. 27. .Jesus in Tatian's' Die.tesse.ron' (edit. Hempbill). stretched forth his ha.nd. So that St. Peter hnd come up to, him (ver. 29). And ce.nght Vere. 28-31.-St. Peter's 1'Mlture. 'Mat- him; and too1, hold of him (Revised Ver- thew only. sion, l.,,.,>,,d/3<-ro cl,.rou: cf. Heb. ii. 16; viii. 9). And said; saith (Revised Version). Ver. 28.-And; St, slightly ndversative, The writer passes to more vivid narration. because St. Peter's words were so contrnry Unto_him, 0 thou of little faith (clMyomu.. ,); to what might have been expected. Peter eh. vi. 30, note. But in ell. xvii. 20 (West- answered him and said, Lord, if it be thou cott and Hort) the aubst11ntive is used of (,, ui:, ,i). No doubt is implied (cb. iv. 3, fe.i th in a more active sense. Wherefore ( <lr not.e). Bid me (1<b.,11uo11 µ.<); jube me (Vul- T(); ",1t:1S, literally rendered" (Dr. Guille- gate). He will only come e.t Christ's com- mard). Didst thou doubt 1 (l5tu..aua.s). In mand. In this lies the difference-e.nd it the New Test11ment, oh. xxvili. 17 only. is e. decisive difference-from the second Christ saves first, and rebukes e.fterwards. temptation (eh. iv. 6). Come unto thee on Perhaps the need for help we.a more imme- the water. Not " bid me we.lk on the diate than in eh. viii. 26, or possibly the water; " for be does not want to perform e. fervency of St. Peter's love deserved gentler mimcle but to oome to Jesus. Bis request treatment. is not due to the hope of me.king e. show, Ver. 32.-And when they were come-gone but to impulsive love. Observe, too, the.t up (Revised Version)-into the ship, the wind he seems to have ree.lized the.t the Lord oeased. Apparently not before, so that would enable his followers to do e.s he him- Peter may still have walked e. little further self did (cf. Chrysostom). On the toater; on the water in the midst of the storrii', but the waters (Revised Version); rougil though upheld by the Lord's hand. • • they were. Ra.d we e.ny other account of . Ver. 39.--:--Me.tthewonly. Then--and(Re- this incident, it would be interesting to see TI.Bed Version, ~,')-they that were in the if it contained the.ea words. They read ship j boat (Revised Version). If there w~.te very like e.n explanatory addition by the others than the disciples in the .boe.t, e.s is narrator. probable, these also would be included; but Ver. 29.-A.nd he so.id, Come. Our Lord tlie disciples would naturally ta.ke the.lead '8kes him at his word, and gives the (cf. tile notes on oh. viii.,23, 27). Ca.me.and. oomme.nd. It is not merely a permission. The Revised Version .omits these two w.ords, Observe that our Lord never blames him with the manuscripts. They are due to the for having ma.de the request. His venture e.ne.logy of cb. viii. ·2; 'ix. 18. Worshipped of faith would he.ve been e.ltogether success- lUm (eh. iv. 9, note). In eh. viii. 27 we ful he.cl his faith continued. And when read of wonder; here, of homage. Se.ying, l'eter was come down out of the ship. The Of e. truth (<t"-716Js); cf. eh. v. 18, s.v. "verily." Revised Version has moresimply,.AndPeter The word seems to imply that the suggestion went tiown from the boat, and. Re walked on did not enter their minds now for the first the water. For !he narrator was chiefly in- time. Two had, perhaps, he1trd the words terested in his walking there (contrast ver. spoken at the baptism (eh. iii. 17),and most 28). To go to J"eBUB; rather, and came f,o of them, if not all, the utterance by the Je,;,us (Westcott e.nd Hort; cf. me.rgin of demons in eh. viii. 29. Yet these utterances Revised Version). 'I'he true text ste.tes iu reality far surpassed what they even now whe.t did, in fact, happen, notwithijfo1Jdi11g imagined ( vide infra). Thou a.rt the Son of Peter'o lack of faith (cf. ver. 31). God (0,oti ulbs ,1). Although the phrase Yer. 30.-But when he saw the wind is not of the definite form found in eh. xxvi. boysterous (iuxupov is clearly e. gloss, and 63 a.nd xvi 16, where it is used with express therefore omitted by the Revised Version). reference to tbe Messie.hship of Jesus (cf. Ee was afraid ; and beginning to Bink. The for the intermediate form, oh. xxvii. 40 natural tendency to aink, which he he.d ha.d with 49), yet it is impossible to te.ke it all the time, was counteracted before by hia here as merely referring to a moral relation faith, which enabled him to receive Christ's between Jesus and God. In eh. :uvii. '54 Power. But now the.t his doubt me.de him this might be sufficient (Luk,e has "right- mcapable of receiving this, he sank ( cf. eous"); but here there is no question of Meyer). He cried (t1<p~E11), 111.ying, Lord. coming up to a ate.ndard of more.I uprigilt- sa.ve me (eh. viii. 25). Aphraates (' Homi- ness, but rather of manifestation of power, lies,' "ide Resch, • Agrapha,' p. 380) quotes and this is connected with' Messiah: His an apocryphal saying of our Lord's, "Doubt authority over the elements leads to the not, lest ve e.re engulfed in the world, as homage of thoae who witness its exercise. oH, xxv 1-80.) THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO ST. MATTHEW. 67