Bible Commentaries
Matthew 16

Verses 1-99

(M) 16:1. And the Pharisees and Sadducees came, tempting Him, and asked Him to show them a sign out of heaven.] Mk. has: “And the Pharisees went out, and began to dispute with Him, seeking from Him a sign from heaven, tempting Him.” For the request for a sign, see 12:38. ἐπερωτᾶν = to beseech, cf. on 15:23. The editor substitutes his favourite καὶ προσελθόντες for Mk.’s ἐξῆλθον, of which the precise reference is obscure. Whence did they go out?

2. And He answered and said to them.] Mk. has: “And having groaned in His spirit, He saith.” For the omission of�

(E ?) When it is evening, you say, (It will be) fair weather: for the heaven is red.]

(E) 3. And in the morning (you say), To-day (will be) stormy: for the heaven is red and angry. The face of the heaven you know how to discern; but the sign of the times ye are unable.] For similar ideas differently worded, cf. Luke 12:54-56.

(M) 4. An evil and adulterous generation seeks for a sign; and a sign shall not be given to it, save the sign of Jonah.] Mk. has: “Why does this generation seek (ζητεῖ) a sign? Verily I say to you, A sign shall not be given to this generation.” Mt. assimilates to 12:39.

4. And leaving them, He went away.] Mk. has: “And leaving �

1-4. Mt. and Luke 11:16, Luke 11:29 agree against Mk. in the following:—

σημεῖον ἐκ τοῦ οὐρανοῦ, Mat_1 = σημεῖον ἐξ οὐρανοῦ, Luk_16.

πονηρά, Mat_4, Lk 29.

καὶ σημεῖον οὐ δοθήσεται αὐτῇ εἰ μὴ τὸ σημεῖον Ἰωνᾶ, Mat_4, Lk 29.

2. Ὀψίας γενομένης—οὐ δύνασθε] C D al. Om. א B V X S1 S2. The clause can hardly be genuine here. It seems to be a gloss modelled on Luke 12:54-56.—στυγνάζων] στυγνότης is used of the dulness of the sky in Polyb. iv. 21. 1. στυγνάζειν occurs in the LXX = שָׁמַם Ezekiel 27:35, Ezekiel 28:19 A, 32:10. πυρράζειν seems to occur only in Byzantine writers. πυρρίζειν occurs in the LXX, Leviticus 13:19, Leviticus 13:42, Leviticus 13:43, Leviticus 13:49, Leviticus 13:14:37, B2 R.

(M) 5. And the disciples came to the other side, and forgot to take bread.] Mk. has: “And they forgot to take bread, and had not with them in the boat save one loaf.” In Mk. the dialogue which follows presumably took place in the boat during the crossing of the lake. Mt. by inserting καὶ ἐλθόντες οἱ μαθηταί before εἰς τὸ πέραν in Mk v. 13 seems to wish to make it clear that the subject of ἐπελάθοντο did not include Christ. The disciples forgot, not the Lord. His insertion has the further effect that the whole of what follows took place, not during the crossing, but when they had reached the other side. It is necessary, therefore, to omit Mk 14b.

(M) 6. And Jesus said to them, Take heed, and beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees.] Mk. has: “And He was charging them, saying, Take heed, beware (βλέπετε) of the leaven of the Pharisees, and of the leaven of Herod.”—προσέχετε�Luke 12:1 also has προσέχετε in this connection.—καὶ Σαδδουκαίων] Mk. has καὶ τῆς ζύμης Ἠρῴδου. It is doubtful what Mk. intended his readers to understand by the leaven of the Pharisees and of Herod. Possibly the plots of the Pharisees and the Herodians to kill Christ, cf. Mark 3:6. Mt. has understood ζύμη to mean false teaching, and therefore substitutes Σαδδουκαίων for Ἡρῴδου.

(M) 7. And they were reasoning in (or amongst) themselves, saying, (He says it) because we took no bread.] Mk. has: “And they were reasoning with one another because they have no bread.”1 The disciples suppose that the Lord’s warning against the leaven of the Pharisees had some reference to the fact that they were without sufficient provision, as though He were advising them to be on their guard against purchasing poisoned loaves.—οἱ δέ] for Mk.’s καί, as often.—διελογίζοντο ἐν ἑαυτοῖς] occurs again in 21:25.

(M) 8. And Jesus, perceiving it, said, Why do you reason in (or amongst) yourselves, O ye of little faith, because you have no bread?] Mk. has: “And perceiving it, He saith to them, Why do you reason because you have no bread?”—γνοὺς δέ] for Mk.’s καὶ γνούς, as often.—εἶπεν] for Mk.’s λέγει, as often. Mk. omits ὁ Ἰησοῦς and ἐν ἑαυτοῖς ὀλιγόπιστοι. ὀλιγόπιστοι is also inserted by Mt. in 8:26, where, as in the next verse, He is softening a rebuke administered to the disciples. It occurs also in 6:30, 14:31. Here πίστις seems to be trust, confidence, assurance in the power of Christ to provide food as He had done before.

(M) 9, 10. Do you not understand nor remember the five loaves of the five thousand, and how many baskets ye took up? Nor the seven loaves of the four thousand, and how many baskets ye took up?] The editor rewrites Mk vv. 17-20 in such a way as to avoid the questions in Christ’s mouth (see notes on 8:28, 14:17, 15:29, 16:9-10, 17:11, 14, 17, 18:1, 19:7, 26:7, 8), and to soften the rebuke of the disciples; cf. 8:26, note. Mk. has: “Do you not yet understand nor perceive? Have ye your heart hardened? Having eyes, see ye not? And having ears, hear ye not? And do ye not remember? When I brake the five loaves to the five thousand, how many baskets full of fragments took ye up? They say to Him, Twelve. When the seven to the four thousand, of how many baskets took ye up (their) fulness of fragments? And they say to Him, Seven.” Mt. three times omits references to the hardness of the hearts of the disciples; Mark 3:5, Mark 6:52, Mark 8:17.

(M) 11. How do ye not understand?] Mk. has: “And He was saying to them, Do ye not yet understand?”

(E) The editor here adds the explanatory that not about bread I spake to you, but beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees.

(M) 12. Then understand they that He bade them not beware of the leaven of bread, but of the teaching of the Pharisees and Sadducees]. This explanation, which is connected with the substitution of Σαδδουκαίων in v. 6 for Ἡρῴδου, has little to commend it. Whatever may originally have been meant by “the leaven of the Pharisees and the leaven of Herod,” it can hardly have been teaching. The connection of the Pharisees with Herod suggests rather that the leaven symbolised the hostility and enmity of the Pharisees and of Herod; cf. Mark 3:6. For a similar note in favour of the disciples, see 17:13.

12. τῆς ζύμης τῶν ἄρτων] Om. τῶν ἄρτων, D S1 S2 a b ff2. This is probably right. S2 assimilates to the preceding verse by adding “of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees.” אc B L add τῶν ἄρτων; C E al τοῦ ἄρτου.

13. The editor here omits Mark 8:22-26. For this omission, see on 15:29. See also Briggs, The Messiah of the Gospels, p. 93.

(M) And Jesus having come into the districts of Cæsarea Philippi, asked His disciples, saying, Whom say men that (I) Son of Man am?] Mk. has: “And Jesus and His disciples went out into the villages of Cæsarea Philippi, and on the road He asked (ἐπηπώτα) His disciples, saying to them, Whom do men say that I am?”—ἐλθὼν δέ] for Mk.’s καὶ ἐξῆλθεν, as often. Mt. substitutes τὸν υἱὸν τοῦ�

(M) 14. And they said, Some (say) John the Baptist, but others Elijah, and others Jeremiah, or one of the prophets.] Mk. has: “And they spake to Him, saying that John the Baptist, and others Elijah, but others that one of the prophets.” Mt., as usual, omits Mk.’s ὅτι, and corrects εἷς into ἕνα to harmonise with the other accusatives. The insertion of Jeremiah shows acquaintance with Jewish belief in the possibility of the appearance of the illustrious dead; cf. 2 Mac 15:13ff. where Onias and Jeremiah appear to Judas Maccabee; 2 Esther 2:18: “For thy help I will send My servants, Isaiah and Jeremiah.” For the expectation of Elijah, see on 11:14. Mt.’s οἱ μέν is intended to ease the Greek. For ἔτεροι in the third clause, see Blass, p. 179; Win.-Schm. p. 244.

(M) 15. He saith to them, But you, whom say ye that I am?] Mk. has: “And He asked them, But you, whom say ye that I am?”

(M) 16. And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.] Mk. has: “Peter answered and saith to Him, Thou art the Christ.” Mt.’s ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ θεοῦ τοῦ ζώντος is explanatory. It has caused the substitution of τὸν υἱὸν τοῦ�

13-16. Mt. and Lk. agree against Mk. in the following:

ἅλλοι δέ, Mat_14, Luk_19. Mk. has καὶ ἄλλοι.

δέ—εἶπεν, Mat_16, Luk_20. Mk. has λέγει.

ὁ υἱὸς τοῦ θεοῦ ζῶντος, Mat_16 = τοῦ θεοῦ, Luk_20.

17-19. The editor here inserts three verses which are not in Mk. For the prominence given to S. Peter, cf. 10:2, 14:28-31, 15:15.

(L) 17. And Jesus answered and said to him, Blessed art thou, Simon Bar Jona, because flesh and blood did not reveal (it) to thee, but My Father who is in the heavens.]—Σίμων] for the form, see on 4:18. βάρ is the Aramaic “son,” and Ἰωνᾶ (cf. John 1:43) = יונה = Jouah יונא as a shortened form of יוחנן = John, is not found elsewhere. See Dalm. Gram. p. 179, Anm. 5.—σὰρξ καὶ αἷμα] בשר ודם is very common in the Talmud and Midrashim as an expression for humanity as contrasted with God; cf. B. Berakhoth 28b “a king of flesh and blood,” contrasted with “the King of kings, “the fear of flesh and blood” contrasted with the “fear of heaven.”—ὁ πατήρ μου ὁ ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς] see on 5:16.

(L) 18. And I also say to thee that thou art Peter, and on this rock will I build my church, and the gates of Hades shall not prevail against it.] The πέτρα is equivalent to the object of�it,” i.e. the Messiahship and divine Sonship of Christ. “Upon this rock of revealed truth I will build my Church.” The play upon Πέτρος and πέτρα means, “You have given expression to a revealed truth, and your name Πέτρος suggests a metaphorical name for it. It shall be the πέτρα or rock upon which the Church shall stand. In other words, it shall be the central doctrine of the Church’s teaching.” The idea that the divine Christ is the keystone of the new edifice of the Christian Church, finds expression elsewhere in the parallel metaphor of the corner-stone in 1 P 2:4-8, Ephesians 2:20.—ἐκκλησία] As the Evangelist wrote the word, he, no doubt, had in mind the Christian society for which ἐκκλησία had long been a current title (Acts, S. Paul, Hebrews, S. James, S. John’s Epp., and Rev.). There is no difficulty at all in supposing that Christ used some Aramaic phrase or word which would signify the community or society of His disciples, knit together by their belief in His divine Sonship, and pledged to the work of propagating His teaching.

πύλαι ᾅδου] Against the Church the powers of evil shall not prevail. But just as the Church has been compared to a building, so, too, the powers of evil. These have their metropolis in the fortress of Hades. For Hades symbolised as a strong fort with barred gates, cf: Isaiah 38:10 “the gates of Sheol” (πύλαις ᾅδου), Job 17:16 “the bars of Sheol,” Job 38:17 “the gates of death,” Psalms 9:18, Psalms 107:18, Wis 16:13, 3 Mac 5:51, Ps.-Sol. 16:2. “The gates of Hades shall not prevail against the Church” is a pictorial way of saying, “The organised powers of evil shall not prevail against the organised society which represents My teaching.”

(L) 19. I will give to thee the keys of the kingdom of the heavens, and whatsoever thou shalt bind upon earth shall be bound in the heavens, and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in the heavens.]

κλεῖς] The figure of the gates of Hades suggests the metaphor of the keys. There were keys of Hades, Revelation 1:18; cf. 9:1, 20:1. The apocalyptic writer describes the risen Christ as having the keys of Hades, i.e. having power over it, power to enter it, and power to release from it, or to imprison in it. In the same way, “the kingdom of the heavens” can be likened to a citadel with barred gates. He who held the keys would have power within it, power to admit, power to exclude. In Revelation 3:7 this power is held by Christ Himself: “He that hath the key of David, that openeth and none shall shut, and that shutteth and none shall open.” The words are modelled on Isaiah 22:22, and express supreme authority. To hold the keys is to have absolute right, which can be contested by none. Just so in B. Sanh. 113a it is said that the keys of birth, of rain, and of the resurrection of the dead are in the hand of God, and are delegated to no one.

It would, therefore, be not unexpected if we found the Messiah or Son of Man described as having the keys of the kingdom of the heavens. This would imply that He was supreme within it. But it is surprising to find this power delegated to S. Peter. We must, however, be careful not to identify the ἐκκλησία with the kingdom. There is nothing here to suggest such identification. The Church was to be built on the rock of the revealed truth that Jesus was the Messiah, the Divine Son. To S. Peter were to be given the keys of the kingdom. The kingdom is here, as elsewhere in this Gospel, the kingdom to be inaugurated when the Son of Man came upon the clouds of heaven. If S. Peter was to hold supreme authority within it, the other apostles were also to have places of rank: “Ye shall sit upon twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel,” 18:28: The ἐκκλησία, on the other hand, was the society of Christ’s disciples, who were to announce the coming of the kingdom, who were to wait for it, and who would enter into it when it came. The Church was built upon the truth of the divine Sonship. It was to proclaim the coming kingdom. In that kingdom Peter should hold the keys which conferred authority. In the next clause this authority is described under a different metaphor. To “bind” and to “loose,” in Jewish legal terminology, are equivalent to “forbid” and to “allow,” to “declare forbidden” and to “declare allowed”; see Lightfoot, Her. Heb. in loc. The terms, therefore, describe an authority of a legal nature. If he who has the keys has authority of an administrative nature, he who binds and looses exercises authority of a legislative character. In the coming kingdom Peter was to exercise this two-sided authority.—ὃ ἐὰν δήσῃς ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς ἔσται δεδεμένον ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς] The idiom “on earth,” “in heaven,” is simply an emphatic way of stating that the action referred to would be permanent in its results: “Whatsoever thou bindest shall remain bound, shall never be loosed.” Cf. B. Joma 39a: “If a man sanctifies himself a little, he will be sanctified much; if (he sanctifies himself) below, he will be sanctified above; if (he sanctifies himself) in this world, he will be sanctified in the world to come.” The contrast, therefore, between earth and heaven is merely literary. The words throw no light upon the earthly or heavenly position of the future kingdom. But nothing in this Gospel suggests any other locality for it than the renewed (cf. 19:28) earth.

17-19. The whole passage, therefore, might be paraphrased thus: “Happy are you, Simon, son of Jonah, because the truth to which you have given utterance was revealed to you by God Himself. Your name is Petros, and this truth is a rock (πέτρα) upon which I will build My Church. It will be the foundation truth of the belief of My disciples, i.e. of those who await the kingdom of heaven. In that kingdom you shall hold an exalted position, having the keys of administrative power, and the right to legislate for the needs of its citizens.”

As an alternative, we might interpret τὰς κλεῖς with special reference to the function of a key in opening shut doors. Cf. Matthew 23:13 “You shut the kingdom of the heavens before men: for you enter not, nor suffer those who are entering to go in”; Luke 11:52 “You took away the key of knowledge,” i.e. refused to open the doors of the kingdom of “knowledge” to others. δώσω σοὶ τὰς κλεῖς woe will then mean: “I will give to you the right of admitting others to the kingdom.” The Evangelist may very possibly have had in mind the part taken by S. Peter in the early days of the Church in admitting Gentiles to its privileges, just as in the “binding” and “loosing” he may have had in mind the prominent part taken by S. Peter in regulating the affairs of the infant Church.

It is possible that originally the “keys” described the effect of S. Peter’s insight into divine truth. His perception that Jesus was the Divine Son, was a key which admitted him into the kingdom. By bringing others to the same faith, he would open for them, too, the kingdom, in contrast to the scribes and Pharisees, who locked it in the face of those who wished to enter, 23:13. But, if so, the Evangelist by inserting v. 18 before v. 19, and by combining the saying about “the keys” with the saying about “binding” and “loosing,” has obscured the original meaning. In his connection the “keys” are not equivalent to S. Peter’s faith, but represent a privilege promised to the Apostle as a reward for it. Further, the position of v. 18, with its description of the Church as a fortress impregnable against the attacks of evil (the gates of Hades), suggests irresistibly that “the keys of the kingdom” mean more than power to open merely, and imply rather authority within the kingdom. And this is confirmed by the “binding” and “loosing” which immediately follow. The latter saying occurs again with the verbs in the plural in 18:18. This may be its more original form. If so, the Evangelist is here, as elsewhere, compiling detached sayings, fitting them into contexts which seemed to him to be suited to them. If we remove, therefore, 19b as alien to the context, we are justified in asking whether the remaining three verses originally formed part of this incident. V. 17 is in every respect suitable to the context. V. 18 might seem to betray the hand of the Evangelist in the phrase οἰκοδομήσω μου τὴν ἐκκλησίαν, which certainly seems to reflect ideas which presuppose the history and growth of Christianity in the early Apostolic age. But if Christ, wishing to commend S. Peter’s faith, drew from his name a metaphor, “the rock,” to symbolise the value and importance of the revealed truth to which S. Peter had given utterance, this metaphor of the rock would suggest the phrase “to build” rather than any such expression as “My disciples shall stand.” ἐκκλησία may well be the equivalent of some Aramaic expression for community, society, school, band of disciples. Further, the idea thus gained of the Christian body as a building firmly founded, would suggest the use of the common phrase “gates of Hades” to describe the forces of evil which would attack it. And it is possible that this latter phrase would suggest the keys of the kingdom of the heavens as a term expressing some privilege to be given to S. Peter. The real difficulty in supposing that vv. 17-19a were spoken on this occasion, lies in the vagueness of the idea thus expressed. What were the keys thus given? Even if we identify the kingdom with the Church, it is not entirely satisfactory to suppose that the Lord simply foretold that S. Peter was to take a prominent part in the work of opening the door of faith to the Gentiles. His share in that work, though a great, was not an exclusive one. S. Paul bore the burden of it. Of course we might, without identifying Church and Kingdom, give the words some such meaning as this. The truth of the divine Sonship shall be the keynote of the doctrine of My disciples in their work of preaching the coming kingdom. All to whom this truth is revealed will have in it a key to the kingdom, and will be able to admit others to it, i.e. make them members of the society which waits for the kingdom. In this case S. Peter would be mentioned on the ground that it was he who had given utterance to the divinely revealed truth, with the implication that all to whom it should be revealed would have the same privileges. But in view of the fact that v. 19b is almost certainly added to this context and modified by the Evangelist so as to apply specially to S. Peter, it is difficult not to be drawn to the conclusion that the whole of the passage, vv. 17-19, inserted in S. Mark, is the work of the Evangelist. The motive must have been to emphasise the prominence of S. Peter in the Christian body as foretold and sanctioned by Christ Himself. Throughout the Gospel the twelve Apostles are everywhere represented in a more favourable light than in Mk. Rebukes addressed to them by Christ are softened, see on 8:26, 16:9. Statements that they did not understand, or did not know what to say, or disputed, are passed over, cf. Mark 6:52, Mark 6:9:5, Mark 6:10, Mark 6:32, Mark 6:33, Mark 6:34, Mark 6:14:40. On the other hand, it is expressly said that they did understand, Matthew 16:12, Matthew 17:13. They had left all to follow Christ; but when He sat on the throne of His glory they would sit on twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel, 19:28. And amongst them Peter was pre-eminent. He was πρῶτος, 10:2. He had shown remarkable ventures of faith, 14:29-31. To him Christ had given the keys, and the power of “binding” and “loosing.” It is, therefore, possible that 16:17-19 are in their present order and connection the work of the Evangelist compiling detached sayings in honour of the great Apostle. The Jewish colouring in these sayings is very remarkable; σὰρξ καὶ αἶμα, ὁ πατήρ μου ὁ ἐν τοῖς οὐρανοῖς, πύλαι ᾅδου, τὰς κλεῖς, ἡ βασιλεία τῶν οὐρανῶν, the “binding” and “loosing,” the literary contrast of “earth” and “heaven,” were probably all commonplaces of Jewish theological thought. The single word ἐκκλησία alone lies open to the suspicion of betraying Christian influence, and it may easily be explained as representing a more specifically Jewish or less Christian word.

(M) 20. Then He charged the disciples that they should tell no one that He was the Christ.] Mk. has: “And He charge d them that they should speak to no man about Him.”—τότε] see on 2:7.—διεστείλατο] Mk. here has ἐπετίμησεν, but διεστείλατο in 5:48, 7:36, 9:9. The verb occurs only here in Mt. B.* D S1 S2 have ἐπετίμησεν.—τοῖς μαθηταῖς] Mk. has αὐτοῖς, but the insertion of vv. 17-19 makes the explicit reference to the disciples necessary.—ὃτι αὐτός ἐστιν ὁ χριστός] for Mk.’s περὶ αὐτοῦ. For similar explanatory glosses, see v. 22, 26:67, 73.

(M) 21. From that time Jesus began to show to His disciples that He must go to Jerusalem, and sufer much from the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed, and be raised again on the third day.]—ἀπὸ τότε] Mk. has καί. Cf. 4:17. The Galilean mission to the common people is over. Henceforth the Lord devotes Himself mainly to instructing His disciples. The τοῖς μαθηταῖς for Mk.’s αὐτοῖς assists the emphasis.—αὐτόν] Mk. has τὸν υἱὸν τοῦ�1 Corinthians 15:4), the writer of the Acts (10:40), and the first and third Evangelists. Mark 8:31, Mark 9:31, Mark 10:34 and Matthew 12:40, Matthew 27:63 retain the “three days.” The order πρεσβυτέρων καὶ�1 Tat.), which Mt. omits as being of doubtful meaning.

(ME) 22. And Peter took Him, and began to rebuke Him, saying, (God) be gracious to Thee, Lord: that shall not happen to Thee.] Mk. has: “And Peter took Him, and began to rebuke Him.” The words from λέγων are an explanatory gloss of the editor to explain Mk.’s ἐπιτιμᾷν; see on v. 20.—Ἰλεώς σοι] Cf. Ἰλεώς μοι = חָלִילָח לִּי 1 Chronicles 11:19, 1 Chronicles 11:2 S 20:20; Letronne, Recueitl des Inscripts grecques et latines de l’Egypte, ii. p. 286, ἵλεώς σοι, Ἀλύπι: “(Sarapis) help thee, Alypius”; or with the subject inserted, ib. 221, ἵλεως ἡμῖν Πλάτων καὶ ἐνταῦθα, quoted by Moulton, Class. Rev. 1901, p. 436.—οὐ μὴ ἔσται] For the fut. ind. after οὐ μή, see Blass, p. 209; Moulton, p. 190.—προσλαμβάνειν] occurs only here in Mt. and Mk. Its presence in Mt. is due to Mk.

(M) 23. And He turned, and said to Peter, Go behind Me, Satan: thou art a stumbling-block to Me: because thou thinkest not the things of God, but the things of men.] So Mk., without σκάδαλον εἴ ἐμοῦ, which is inserted by the editor to explain the use of the harsh Σατανᾶ with reference to the Apostle. Mk. also has ἐπιστραφείς for στραφείς (for στρέφω, which Mk. never uses, cf. 9:22), and adds καὶ ἰδὼν τοὺς μαθητὰς αὐτοῦ, which seems to emphasise the publicity of the rebuke. The editor omitted it for this reason, or because he missed the point of it here. ὀπίσω, see on 3:11.—οὐ φρονεῖς τὰ τοῦ θεοῦ, κ.τ.λ.] seems to mean: “Your ideas of the Messiah and His destiny are superficial. You can imagine a career of splendour for Him, but fail to understand that suffering and death are a part of the career planned out for Him by God.”

σκάδαλον εἶ ἐμοῦ] So א* B. 13; εἶ μοῦ, אc C; εἶ ἐμοί, D latt; μοῦ εἶ, E F al Abbott, Johannine Grammar, 2566 c, suggests that the original may have been εἰμί σοι = “I am a stumbling-block [it seems], to Thee!” But Σατανᾶ suggests that the following σκάνδαλον is used of S. Peter, not of the Lord. In trying to set aside thoughts of the coming Passion, Peter was at once Christ’s adversary and His stumbling-block. And this interpretation alone explains the following ὅτι.

21-23. Mt. and Lk. agree against Mk. in the following:�Mat_21, Luk_22.

21. ὁ Ἰησοῦς] So אc b C al S2; Ἰησοῦς Χριστός, א* B.*. The latter can hardly be original. It is the work of a scribe who wished to emphasise the fact that this was a turning-point in Christ’s ministry and teaching.

(M) 24. Then Jesus said to His disciples, If any one wishes to come after Me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow Me.] Mk. has: “And having called the multitude, with His disciples, He said to them,” etc. For the saying about the cross, see note on 10:38, where another form of the saying has been inserted. Here the meaning clearly is that the disciples must be ready to face death in allegiance to their Master, and after His example. The cross need mean no more than violent death; see on 10:38.

(M) 25. For whosoever wishes to save his life shall lose it, and whosoever shall lose his life for My sake shall find it.] See on 10:39.—ὅς—ἐάν] See on 11:27.—ἕνεκεν ἐμοῦ] Mk. adds καὶ τοῦ εὐαγγελίου. For Mt.’s omission of one of two synonymous clauses, see on 8:16; and cf. 19:29 ἕνεκεν τοῦ ἐμοῦ ὀνόματος for Mk.’s ἕνεκεν ἐμοῦ καὶ ἕνεκεν τοῦ εὐαγγελίυ.—εὑρήσει] Mk. σώσει. Mt. assimilates to 10:39 in order to form an antithesis to�

(M) 26. For what shall a man be profited if he gain the whole world, but be deprived of his life? or what will a man give as exchange for his life?] Mk. has: “For what will it profit a man to gain the whole world and to be deprived of his life? For what would a man give as exchange for his life?” The meaning seems to be: “Suppose a man to shrink from martyrdom, he will, indeed, ‘save’ his physical life. But he will ‘lose’ the higher life of the soul. To gain the whole world, and to lose this higher life, is a profitless proceeding; because this higher life cannot be purchased. No money can buy it.”—ὠφεληθήσεται] For Mt.’s preference for passives, see on 4:1.—ζημιωθῇ] ζημιοῦν is to “fine” or “confiscate”; so in the passive, “to suffer confiscation or loss of”; cf. Philippians 3:8 τὰ παντα ἐζημιώθην.—ἀντάλλαγμα] is the price paid for anything; cf. Ecclus 6:15 φίλου πιστοῦ οὐκ ἔστιν�Class. Rev. 1901, p. 37; Gram. p. 55. Mt. substitutes the easier fut. ind.

Mt. and Lk. agree against Mk. in this verse in the following ὠφεληθήσεται ἄνθρωπος—δέ, Mt. = ὠφελεῖται ἄνθρωπος—δέ, Lk. Mk. has ὠφελεῖ ἄνθρωπον—καί.

(M) 27. For the Son of Man is about to come in the glory of His Father with His angels. And then He shall give to each man according to his work.] Mk. has: “For whosoever shall be ashamed of Me and my words in this adulterous and sinful generation, the Son of Man shall be ashamed of him when He shall come in the glory of His Father with the holy angels.” Mt. has already inserted words parallel to the first clause of Mk. in 10:33. He therefore omits them here, and makes of ὅταν ἔλθῃ a main clause, μέλλει γὰρ—ἔρχεσθαι. μέλλειν, which here emphasises the nearness of the coming, is characteristic of Matthew 17:12; Matthew 17:22Matthew 17:22 μέλλει—παραδίδοσθαι for Mk.’s παραδίδοται, 20:17, 22, 24:6. He then adds, by way of compensation for the omitted clause of Mk., καὶ τότε�Enoch 61:8 “The Lord of Spirits placed the Elect One on the throne of glory,” 62:2 “The Lord of Spirits seated Him on the throne of His glory”; and Test. Lev_18Lev_18.

καὶ τότε�Enoch 45:3 “On that day Mine Elect One will sit on the throne of glory, and make choice amongst their deeds,” 69:27 “And He sat on the throne of His glory, and the sum of judgement was committed to Him, the Son of Man.” The terms seem to be borrowed from Ps 61:13 σὺ�Proverbs 24:12, Ecclus 32:24.

(M) 28. Verily I say to you, That there are some of those who stand here who shall not taste of death until they see the Son of Man coming in His kingdom.] Mk. has: “And He was saying to them, Verily I say to you, that there are some here of the bystanders who shall not taste of death until they see the kingdom of God come with power.” The ἔλεγεν αὐτοῖς of Mk. may be a hint that this saying was not spoken on the same occasion as the preceding. However that may be, Mt. Omits καὶ ἔλεγεν αὐτοῖς, and connects the words closely with the foregoing. By substituting τὸν υἱὸν τοῦ�Die Sprache and Heimat des Vierten Evangelisten, p. 35. It occurs in John 8:52, Hebrews 2:9.

M the Second Gospel.

E editorial passages.

al i.e. with other uncial MSS.

X passages in which Mt. and Lk. agree closely, borrowed from an unknown source or sources.

S Syriac version: Sinaitic MS.

S Syriac version: Curetonian.

Polyb. Polybius.

1 ἔχουσιν. So B. D has εἷχαν, and a b i q haberent. S1 has “there is no bread.” א A C al assimilate to Mt. by substituting ἔχομεν and inserting λέγοντες. But Mk.’s ἔχουσιν is ambiguous. The clause might be rendered, “They were disputing (cf. 9:34) because they have no bread,” without any apparent reference to the leaven of the preceding verse, which does not appear again in Mk.’s narrative. Mt. by inserting λέγοντες and changing ἔχουσιν into έλάβομεν, connects the “reasoning” with the preceding saying, and so prepares for his insertion of vv. 11, 12.

O quotations from the Old Testament borrowed from a collection of Messianic prophecies. See pp.61 f.

L the Matthæan Logia.

Win.-Schm. Winer-Schmiedel.

Dalm. Dalman.

B. Babylonian Talmud.

Ps.-Sol. The Psalms of Solomon.

Tat. Tatian.

Class. Rev. Classical Review.