The Pulpit Commentary — John — Volume 1 — Section 105

. (b) 'l'he eyno~tio an<l _Johannine portrait~res of John the Baptist unquestionably d11Ier, but the pomte of divergence are consp1cuously due to the circumstance that the eynoptiste virtually close their account of John with the baptism of Jesus. The fourth evangelist commences his account of the "man sent from God" after that prophet ha<l come into contact with the Baptizer with the Holy Gbost. Ji. question has often been asked whether one who could have delivered such a testimony concerning Chrii,t as that whith ie preserved in eh. iii. 't.7, etc., could, as the synoptiots assert, have sent from the prison the inquiry, " Art thou the coming One, or may we look for another? " 'l'he question has been melted down into a very moderate amount of anxiety by some apologists, and exaggerated into irreconcilable contradiction by the opponents of the Fourth Gospel. The middle course is the more rational. The full coming of the Christ is so variously estimated by the Jewish schools, that some believed in a twofold coming-that of a tender plant out of a dry ground, and that of a Sun and Kinu of Righteousness. Some anticipated a son of woman and also a Son of God, the co~ing of a suffering and also of a triumphant Messiah. The prophecies were then and are now difficult to disentangle. le the holder of the sceptre the same as the " Prophet" who should come into the world? Is the " David " and the " Melchizedek. " the same predicted manifestation? Is there more than one coming? is there more than one kind of revelation? The query," .Art thou he that should come?" (o lpxoµ.evos), may have reasonably meant, "Granting that thou art the suffering 'Lamb of God,' the Son of the Father, the Bridegroom of the Church, art thou the final manifestation, seein~ that thou art continually withdrawing from the asseveration of thy Messiahship? Like myself, art thou only a forerunner of the conquering Prince who is mightier than either of us?" (" Do we look for another?") This inquiry may have been built 011 the purely Old Testament sta11dpoint on which the great forerunner took his stand. It wa11 difficult, if not impossible, for him to discard the transitional role which he had been commissioned to fulfil. He would, like Judaism or Hebraism itself, have never accomplished the work assigned to him, if he had nut held to it with a tenacity which was really superfluous after his preparatory work had reached its climaL Great as the testimonies of John were, as seen and recorded in the Fourth Gospel. yet Christ says (eh. v. 36), "I have greater witness than that of John." This subject is discussed in the author's' John the Baptist,' pp. 419-449. (c) The character of Simon Peter is marvellously consistent as recorded in the synoptists. The " Peter " of Mark and Luke is a study of courage and weakness, of generous impulses and eager self-assertion, and of a rock like energy, which nevertheless shivers and is pulverized by the onset of doubt. From first to last he is ready to take matters into his own hands and criticize and even remonstrate with the Lord, to suggest almost child.like proposals which the Lord was compelled to reject. He is humble under rebuke, and impulsively makes some fresh suggestion equally wide of the mark. The very earliest account of Simon strikes the key-note of the delineation. ..When amazed at the miraculous draught of fishes (Luke v. 8), he cries impetuously, '' Depart from me, for I am a sinful man." The spirit was right, but the expression of it was directly adverse to the whole mystery of Divine love. On the mount of Trans.figura- tion (Luke ix. 33 and parallels) he made the vague suggestion, "Let us make three tabernacles, one for thee, one for Moses, one for Elijah," hurrying to a conclusion utterly beyond and aside the display he had just received of the Lord's inherent majesty. The "decease to be accomplished" suggested to him as yet no clear idea. When multitudes of the disciples walked no more with their Master, and vague and conflicting rumours were passing between lip and lip, Simon, son of Jona(or John) gave utterance to a confession of transcendent importance upon which the Church has bee11 built, and against which the gates of hell will not prevail; but when, upon the faith of this Divine conviction, Jesus proceeded to explain the tragic issues of his present mission, Peter could not count upon the wisdom or truth of "the Son of the living Goa ' and began to rebuke the very Christ, and to say (Matt. xvi. 22), "'l'hat be far from thee.'' Then Peter soon finds that his wisdom was not the measure of the ways of God. Simon Peter must have been by analogy the spokesman of the e1even who were anxious to second the wish of the multitudes to make Jesus by force mto their king, and w_hom Jes_us "constminld_" to get_int? the bo~t and depart f~o~ the s?ene of the gr,at nmaclc (cl. Mark v1. 45 with eh. v1. fo). While the other d1sc1ples cried out  lNTRODUCTION TO