Abbildungen der Seite
PDF
EPUB

2 He answered and said unto them, When it is evening, ye say, It will be fair weather: for the sky is red.

3 And in the morning, It will be foul weather to day: for the sky is red and lowering. O ye hypocrites, ye can discern the face of the sky; but can ye not discern the signs of the times?

were not the Pharisees from Jerusalem, mentioned in the preceding chapter, but persons of these sects residing in Galilee. Betwixt the Sadducees and Pharisees there were great differences of opinion; but in their enmity to Christ all were united, whether in Jerusalem or in other parts of the country.

And tempting him, desired that he would give them a sign from heaven.-To tempt signifies to put his claims as Messiah to the test. This test, however, was one devised by themselves; and, as in chap. xii. 38, it was to be the exhibition of a sign from heaven; by which they may be supposed to have meant a luminous appearance, or thunder, or the descent of fire, or some other prodigy similar to some of those mentioned in the Old Testament. It is not easy to say what led these Jewish sects to agree, as they appear to have done, in fixing upon a sign in the heavens as a proof of the appearance of Messiah. They have by some been thought to derive this from a literal interpretation of Dan. vii. 13, where "the Son of Man" is said to come with the clouds of heaven;" but as he is there represented as coming in this manner that he might appear before the Ancient of Days, it is scarcely to be admitted that they could so interpret this of his appearance among MEN; nor is there a portion of prophecy which speaks of any extraordinary appearance in, or sign from, heaven, as to be given by Messiah in demonstration of his claims. It is more probable, that, as there had been an agreement among the Pharisees, both in Jerusalem and in Galilee, to account for the miracles of Christ, and to destroy their evidence, as proofs of his divine mission, by attributing them to Satan; so, as they had observed that his extraordinary works

[ocr errors]

were chiefly miracles of healing, and dispensations of mercy which had in view the communication of some practical benefit, that they fixed upon signs of quite a different kind and order, as flaming fires, destructive thunderbolts, &c., as necessary proofs, well knowing that he was not likely to show them at their request, and thus to create a pretence for their own incredulity, and to counteract among the people the impression of his miracles, by disparaging them as not worthy to be compared to signs from heaven. Or this expectation might rest upon their own vain traditions; which is rendered somewhat probable by this, that their late writers speak of such phenomena as among the signs of Messiah. The appearance of an extraordinary rainbow, for instance, is mentioned as one of these indications. Whatever origin this notion might have, it was not for want of evidence that they continued in unbelief. This is sufficiently proved by their disregarding even signs from heaven. On one occasion there was a sign of this kind so manifest, that the people said, "An angel spoke to him;" yet the Pharisees did not believe. There were signs from heaven at the crucifixion; and, by the testimony of the Roman soldiers, on the morning of the resurrection; and, finally, on the day of Pentecost; and yet they continued contemptuously to reject the truth. It was therefore the state of their hearts which occasioned that blind and determined unbelief which ultimately caused their ruin. Their obstinate insensibility to the plainest evidence is reproved by what follows. See note on Mark viii. 12.

Verse 3. The signs of the times-By this our Lord doubtless means those strong proofs already given, in the very aspect of public events, of the Messiah being come,

4 A wicked and adulterous generation seeketh after a sign; and there shall no sign be given unto it, but the sign of the prophet Jonas. And he left them, and departed.

5 And when his disciples were come to the other side, they had forgotten to take bread.

6

Then Jesus said unto them, Take heed and beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees.

but which they utterly disregarded. One of these was the departure of the sceptre from Judah, according to the prediction of Jacob; for Judea was now a Roman province, and what remained of power in Galilee, and the neighbouring districts, to their last race of kings, Herod and his descendants, was fast passing away, and was indeed altogether dependent upon the Romans. Another was the appearance of the forerunner of our Lord in the person of the Baptist, who had so established the authority of his mission, that "all the people held John to be a prophet;" but, if a prophet of God at all, then his testimony was necessarily true; and he had pointed to Jesus himself as the Christ. To these were to be added the character and conduct of our Lord, which so exactly answered to prophetic description; the fact that a great and extraordinary teacher had appeared among them, learned in the law without being taught in their schools, speaking as never man spake, refuting all objections, exposing all errors, and instructing all who would follow him, in the purest doctrines, expressed with super-human eloquence, and confirmed by the greatest miracles, publicly wrought, extending to innumerable cases, conferring the most signal blessings, and filling the country with the most indubitable witnesses of his mission. These were the " signs of the times," strongly marked by the finger of God; which yet, plain and palpable as they were, the Pharisees and Sadducees disregarded. They could discern the face of the sky, and, by carefully marking the atmospheric phenomena of their climate, a matter to which their "wise men" applied themselves with attention, laid down

the prognostics of the weather which would follow; but they refused to apply the same carefulness and seriousness to mark" the signs of the times;" to consider their character, to inquire what they indicated, and to draw their conclusions as honestly, and as much without prejudice, as in the case of the signs of the weather. They are therefore called "hypocrites ;" and this part of their conduct proved how truly they were so. They professed to be in quest of evidence to ascertain whether Messiah had come, and they neglected all that had for years been urged upon them. They could not dispute it, but they rejected it, because they had not some other sign which God in his prophetic word had never promised to give, and which could not, in the nature of things, be more convincing than those already before their eyes. It was not truth, therefore, that they sought; and they were justly charged with hypocrisy for pretending it.

Verse 4. A wicked and adulterous generation.-See note on chap. xii. 39.

And he left them, and departed.—As persons wholly incorrigible, he took no further pains with them, but departed to the vessel in which he had arrived, and passed over to the other side of the lake.

Verse 5. Forgotten to take bread.-For they had no more, says St. Mark, than one loaf in the ship; and had probably been so intent upon our Lord's discourse, and had embarked so suddenly, as to forget to purchase provision, which was the more necessary, as they landed in an unfrequented place, and had before them a considerable journey towards Cæsarea Philippi.

7 And they reasoned among themselves, saying, It is because we have taken no bread.

8 Which when Jesus perceived, he said unto them, O ye of little faith, why reason ye among yourselves, because ye have brought no bread?

9 "Do ye not yet understand, neither remember the five loaves of the five thousand, and how many baskets ye took up? 10 Neither the seven loaves of the four thousand, and how many baskets ye took up?

C

11 How is it that ye do not understand that I spake it not to you concerning bread, that ye should beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees?

12 Then understood they how that he bade them not beware of the leaven of bread, but of the doctrine of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees.

d

13 When Jesus came into the coasts of Cæsarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, saying, Whom do men say that I the Son of Man am?

[blocks in formation]

Verse 7. And they reasoned among themselves, saying, It is because we have taken no bread.-Lightfoot illustrates the meaning by referring to a practice of the Jewish doctors, who frequently forbade their disciples to buy the bread of Heathens and Samaritans, which was a partaking of their leaven. This well connects the observation of our Lord with the occasion, although the disciples were perplexed as to his meaning. They could not understand him literally, for they were not likely to buy bread of the opulent Pharisees and Sadducees, nor were they in a place where they could buy it at all, being in a desert; and they did not as yet lay hold of the spiritual meaning of his words. On this account they reasoned among themselves, both as to the supply of their necessities, and what might be the meaning of their Lord's words. This clearly appears, because our Lord's reproof relates both to their want of faith as to supplies, and their want of a prompt spiritual discernment.

d Mark viii. 27; Luke ix. 18.

is

Verse 12. But of the doctrine of the Pharisees and Sadducees.-Leaven usually the metaphor for evil affections; but here and in Gal. v. 9, it is used for bad doctrine, which actively diffuses itself, and in the results corrupts and vitiates. St. Mark says, "And the leaven of Herod," because Herod was a Sadducee, and the head therefore of the Sadducees of Galilee, with whom the conversation had been held.

Verse 13. Cæsarea Philippi.—This city was situated at the foot of the mountain Paneas, whence flow the springs or source of the river Jordan. It was anciently called Laish and Paneas, and was rebuilt by Philip the tetrarch, who gave it the name of Cæsarea in honour of Tiberius Cæsar, and added Philippi from his own name, to distinguish it from Cæsarea, a sea-port on the Mediterranean, formerly called Strato's Tower, and magnificently rebuilt by Herod the Great, Philip's father, and named in honour of Augustus Cæsar. The city is destroyed, but th circuit of the walls is still discerni1

14 And they said, Some say that thou art John the Baptist: some, Elias; and others, Jeremias, or one of the prophets.

A few miserable huts inhabited by Maho- therefore a most unsupported opinion of metans stand upon its site.

Whom do men say that I, the Son of Man, am? This question, as we learn from Mark, was put to the disciples as he was travelling to visit the towns of this district; and from St. Luke we have the further particulars, that it was when he was alone with them, and had been engaged in prayer.

[ocr errors]

Some, by altering the pointing, resolve this question into two, Whom do men say that I am? The Son of Man?" But, though the ancient Mss. were written without points, and to supply them is the work of criticism, regard must always be paid to the most obvious sense, and to the construction; and as the second question is made to begin without any interrogative particle, as μn, or μn, usage is violated. Beside, it is clear from the answer that our Lord did not inquire whether the people said that he was the Son of Man or Messiah, to which their reply is as indirect an answer as can be conceived; but indefinitely, what were the reports respecting him. The question

Our

must, therefore, be taken as one. Lord declares himself, as he had often done, to be THE SON OF MAN; and asks, Whom do men, the people in general, say that I am? There is, however, no reason to suppose, with other commentators, that our Lord intended, by calling himself "the Son of Man," to intimate, emphatically, his low and humbled condition. This is the title of Messiah, as given by Daniel, who, by using it, doubtless predicted his incarnation; but it is one which does not necessarily imply humiliation, inasmuch as he is now, though glorified, as much the Son of Man as when he sojourned upon earth; that is to say, as truly a human being. Stephen saw THE SON OF MAN standing at the right hand of God. This was the prophetic designation of the Messiah, and as such our Lord had adopted it; and no other reason can indeed be assigned for its use. It is

Macknight, that our Lord had not yet directly declared to his disciples that he was the Messiah. The use of this very title, from the commencement of his ministry, was a declaration of it; beside that all those of his apostles who had been disciples of John the Baptist had left their master and joined Christ, on the ground of the former having borne his testimony that Jesus was the Messiah of whom he himself was the forerunner. Under this persuasion too, all his other disciples had joined themselves to him. The question then in the text is the same as if he had said, "Whom do men say that I, THE MESSIAH, am? What are the opinions of those who have not acknowledged me under that character?" Lightfoot, indeed, conjectures that Christ inquires what kind of person they thought him to be; since Twa, rendered whom, often relates to the quality of the person : but quality here is no further intended than as it would be involved with the particular character men might judge our Lord to be, as the answer of the disciples sufficiently proves. Some мss. omit μe, which, however, makes no difference in the sense, since Christ is evidently speaking of himself. Griesbach marks it as only doubtful; but, as it has been well observed, it would be less difficult to account for its omission in some мss. than for its insertion in others.

Verse 14. John the Baptist, &c.—From this answer of the disciples it has been contended by some commentators, that the Pharisees held the doctrine of the transmigration of souls, and supposed that the soul of John, or Elijah, or of one of the prophets had assumed the body of our Lord; forgetting that these opinions of Christ were not those of the Pharisees, who had no views so honourable of our Saviour, but of the people at large, and especially those of Galilee, among whom this doctrine of the Greek and oriental philosophy was not probably

e

15 He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am? 16 And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.

e John vi. 69.

heard of. Nor is it at all clear that any of the Jewish sects held this notion of the metempsychosis. The Sadducees, who were materialists, could not entertain it; and all the evidence for the Pharisees having adopted it, is an equivocal passage in Josephus, which appears rather to regard the resurrection of the body at the last day. But the case is determined by other considerations. It appears from chap. xiv. 2, that Herod had heard it as a common rumour that John had risen from the dead in the person of Jesus; not that his soul had passed into a new body. And with respect to the prophets also mentioned, St. Luke has it," And others say, that one of the old prophets is risen again;" so that whether they thought Jesus to be John, or Elias, or one of the prophets, they conceived of him as one "risen from the dead." The notion that Jesus was John the Baptist raised from the dead, could only exist in those parts of the country, distant from the scenes of their joint or neighbouring ministrations. This was, however, in a limited district, and John's public ministry soon terminated after that of Christ commenced. The report, however, shows the great veneration in which John was held, for the popularity of our Lord in Galilee was now very great. As for Elijah, the Jews taking the prophecy of Malachi literally, expected that illustrious prophet in person; (See note on chap. xi. 14;) and being greatly perplexed as to the mysterious character of our Lord, the solution in which others rested was, that Elias had risen and appeared in him, though under another name. That the Jews expected Jeremiah, rather than any other of the prophets in particular, appears from this passage, although the addition of, or one of the prophets, shows that they were not very confident. Several reasons have been given by commentators for their having fixed upon Jeremiah, but none of

them are satisfactory. They are chiefly taken from the Rabbinical writings, and are the speculations of later ages, without having sufficient proof that they preserve the sentiments of our Lord's time on this point, which was indeed less a Rabbinical than a popular notion. Here too it is to be noted, that our Lord makes no remark upon these various opinions, or he suffers the statement of them by the disciples to pass in silence; the only reason for his asking the question, as to the opinion entertained of him by others, being to give them an occasion of solemnly declaring their own. Hence he subjoins, But whom say ye that I am?

Verse 16. And Simon Peter answered and said, Thou art the Christ, &c.-On this confession of Peter it may be remarked, 1. That it was made by Peter in the name of the rest of the apostles, for the question was put to them collectively, "Whom say YE that I am?" and the answer is to be taken in the same way 2. That the confession has two great parts, "Thou art THE CHRIST," is the first part; and the Messiah, taken alone, might be held without any higher conceptions of his nature than were entertained by the majority of the Jews and their teachers in that day. That the views entertained of the Messiah by the Jews of that age were very various, is not only a natural inference, for ancient truth does not all at once vanish from the minds of a whole people, but is made certain by the different opinions entertained of our Lord during his ministry, by those who either did acknowledge him to be the Christ, or were withheld from doing so, not by their want of conviction, but from the fear of persecution. A few only, such as Nathanael, attached the ancient idea of divinity to the title Messiah; others seem to have regarded the Messiah as a glorious but middle being between God and men; others an angel, others a supernaturally endowed man. The two

« ZurückWeiter »