Chapter 16

1 The Pharisees require a sign. 6 Jesus warneth his disciples of the leaven of the Pharisees and Sadducees. 13 The people’s opinion of Christ, 16 and Peter’s confession of him. 21 Jesus foresheweth his death, 23 reproving Peter for dissuading him from it: 24 and admonisheth those that will follow him, to bear the cross.

1. Pharisees. [The Demand for a Sign, Matt. 16:1–12=Mark 8:11–12. Major comment: Matthew. See Retirement from Public Ministry; The Ministry of Our Lord.] There were at least two occasions on which Jesus discussed the demand for “a sign from heaven.” The first was in connection with the Sermon by the Sea, probably in the autumn of a.d. 29 (see on ch. 12:22, 38, 39). That of ch. 16:1–4 occurred about nine months or so later, probably in the early summer of a.d. 30. For incidents immediately preceding this, the second occasion on which a sign was demanded, see on ch. 15:21, 32.

With the Sadducees. Now, for the first time, the Sadducees united with the Pharisees in an attempt to silence Jesus. A few weeks previous to this Jesus had departed from Galilee to avoid these carping critics (see on ch. 15:21). Now, almost the moment He again sets foot on Galilean soil, they renew their attack upon Him.

Tempting. Gr. peirazoµ (see on ch. 4:1). Having earlier confronted Jesus with this very question, they no doubt surmised what His answer was likely to be (see on ch. 12:38). He would refuse, and this refusal they probably intended to present to the people as evidence that His claims to Messiahship were false. They were putting Jesus to the test, even as Satan had done in the wilderness (see on ch. 4:7), not with a sincere desire to see something that would convince them, but rather with the hope that He would fail to do so, and thus give them an opportunity to denounce Him and deny His claims. Obviously, Jesus had power to work such miracles, but He consistently declined to do so (see on chs. 4:3-11; 7:6). He could, but refused, because it would be inconsistent with principle to do so (see DA 366).

Sign. See p. 208.

From heaven. See on ch. 12:38, 39. By this time Jesus had performed all kinds of miracles, including demonstrations of power over disease, demons, death, and the forces of nature. Every miracle had been His answer to genuine need (DA 366). The fact that every miracle resulted in blessing to humanity was, in fact, the best possible evidence of the divine power by which all His miracles were accomplished. But the Pharisees and Sadducees wanted “a sign from heaven,” and denied that the many miracles Jesus had wrought were satisfactory evidence of the divine origin of His mission. Apparently they sought a sign entirely removed from the realm of human control, such as thunder out of season (see on 1 Sam. 12:17), or fire from heaven (see on 2 Kings 1:10), or the sun standing still (see on Joshua 10:12), and were ready to affirm that unless Jesus did so He was not even as great as the ancient prophets, such as Samuel or Elijah. Though they knew of the angel’s announcement to the shepherds of Bethlehem (Luke 2:8–14), of the star that brought the wise men to Jerusalem (Matt. 2:1–6), and of the descending dove and the voice from heaven (ch. 3:16, 17)—all of them miracles that could be classed as “signs from heaven”—they refused to acknowledge these direct evidences that Jesus was the Son of God (see on ch. 13:13–16). They were without knowledge because they chose to reject light (see on Hosea 4:6).

2. When it is evening. Textual evidence may be cited (cf. p. 146) for the omission of the remainder of v. 2, beginning with these words, and all of v. 3. Luke 12:54–56 is similar in thought though somewhat different in form. The illustration is clearly one such as Christ often used, and, here in Matthew, fully appropriate to the context.

Fair weather. Jesus refers to the weather of Palestine. Wind and clouds from the Mediterranean to the west commonly brought rain, whereas wind from the Arabian Desert to the southeast meant hot, dry weather.

3. Foul weather to day. Literally, “today, a storm.”

Lowring. Gr. stugnazoµ, “to appear gloomy,” or “to look sad” (see Mark 10:22). Here stugnazoµ means “overcast,” or perhaps “threatening.”

O ye hypocrites. Textual evidence favors (cf. p. 146) the omission of these words. There is, of course, no doubt that these Pharisees and Sadducees were hypocrites (see ch. 23:13–29; etc.; cf. DA 409).

Discern. Gr. diakrinoµ, “to discriminate,” “to separate,” or “to make a distinction.”

Signs of the times. See v. 2; p. 208. The very attitude of the Pharisees and Sadducees was in itself a “sign” of the “times,” a token of the “foul weather” in the Jewish climate of opinion concerning the Messiah.

4. Wicked and adulterous. “Wicked” in the sense that it lacked moral and spiritual perception; “adulterous” in the sense that it was disloyal to God (see on ch. 12:39).

No sign. Jesus’ critics were in need of spiritual regeneration within, not of some outward token (see DA 406). The very words Christ spoke were in themselves an impressive “sign,” would they but give heed.

The prophet Jonas. Christ here points, first to the converting power of the preaching of Jonah as a “sign” to the people of Nineveh, even as His own preaching was a sign to the people of His day (see DA 406), and second,to the time element—three days and three nights—in the experience of Jonah (see pp. 248-250).

He left them. See on chs. 10:14, 23; 15:21. Jesus refused to argue further with these hypocrites. It was useless to do so, for nothing was to be gained, either by way of convincing them or of enlightening the bystanders. Further discussion could serve only to confuse the people and to confirm the Pharisees and the Sadducees in their course of deliberate disbelief and deception.

5. Other side. Their destination was Bethsaida Julias (see on Matt. 11:21; Mark 6:31; 8:22), about 8 mi. (c. 13 km.) from Magdala. The account in Mark (ch. 8:13–22) may, at first glance, seem to imply that the conversation between Jesus and the disciples occurred in the boat on the way across the lake. But Matthew plainly states that it was after they had reached “the other side” (see DA 407).

Forgotten. That is, in their hasty departure from Magdala, occasioned by the controversy with the Pharisees and Sadducees. Bethsaida Julias itself was in Gentile territory, and a Jew would ordinarily carry provisions in order to avoid purchasing food from non-Jews (see Additional Note on Chapter 15).

6. Leaven of the Pharisees. See on ch. 13:33. Here “leaven” refers specifically to the “doctrine” of the Pharisees and the Sadducees (see ch. 16:12), that is, to their principles and teachings. As leaven permeates a lump of dough, so the principles a man accepts permeate his life. The comparison is apt indeed, whether the principles be good or evil. The spirit, teachings, and character of the religious leaders, revealed in their hypocrisy, pride, ostentation, and formalism, would inevitably affect the lives of those who esteemed them and complied with their instructions. In this particular instance Jesus referred to the spirit of the Pharisees and Sadducees (cf. Mark 8:15) that led them to ask for a sign. Later Jesus compared their hypocrisy to leaven (see Luke 12:1; cf. Matt. 23:2, 3).

7. Reasoned. Or, “deliberated,” among themselves.

No bread. See on v. 6. That is, no adequate supply. The disciples did have one small loaf, but no more (see Mark 8:14) They misconstrued Jesus’ warning against the “leaven” of the Pharisees to mean that they should avoid purchasing bread from a baker who chanced to be a Pharisee or a Sadducee (see DA 408). How slow the disciples were to reason from cause to effect and to grasp the spiritual truths Christ sought to impart to them! (See Additional Note on Chapter 15.)

8. Jesus perceived. He knew what the disciples were thinking even if He did not hear what they were saying (see on Mark 2:8).

Ye of little faith. See on Matt. 8:26; cf. Matt. 6:30; Heb. 11:6. Faith is necessary to the perception of spiritual truth. Part of the disciples’ difficulty was that they did not perceive the true character of the Pharisees and the Sadducees (see DA 398, 408). They were still taking these religious leaders for what they pretended to be rather than for what they really were, blind to the hypocrisy that lurked behind a mask of simulated piety.

9. Do ye not yet understand? Jesus was disappointed at their slowness to perceive spiritual truth (see on Mark 6:37). Only a few hours before, He had provided food for 4,000 men, and a few weeks earlier, for 5,000. Why should they think that He was concerned because of a lack of literal bread?

Five thousand. See on Mark 6:30–44.

10. Four thousand. See on ch. 15:32–39.

13. Jesus came. [Withdrawal to Caesarea Philippi: The Great Confession, Matt. 16:13–28=Mark 8:27 to 9:1=Luke 9:18–27. Major comment: Matthew. See Retirement from Public Ministry; The Ministry of Our Lord.] The withdrawal to Caesarea Philippi probably occurred during the mid-summer of a.d. 30, during the half year of retirement from public ministry which Jesus devoted primarily to instructing His disciples. This phase of Christ’s ministry continued from His rejection at Capernaum, about the time of the Passover (see on John 6:66) in the spring, to the Feast of Tabernacles in the fall (see on John 7:2). To avoid conflict with the Jewish leaders and the spies assigned to follow Him (see on Mark 7:1), Jesus had already spent several weeks beyond the borders of Galilee, in Phoenicia and Decapolis (see on Matt. 15:21, 22; Mark 7:31). But immediately upon His return to Galilee the spies commissioned by the Sanhedrin again challenged Him (see on Matt. 16:1), and He left Galilee for Bethsaida Julias, in the territory of Herod Philip (see p. 65; see on Mark 8:22; see Palestine During the Ministry of Jesus). The spies did not follow.

Coasts. See on ch. 15:21.

Caesarea Philippi. Leaving Bethsaida Julias, Jesus and His disciples journeyed about another 25 mi. (40 km.) northward to the vicinity of Caesarea Philippi, the chief city of Ituraea, which was under the administration of Philip, a brother of Herod Antipas, tetrarch of Galilee (see p. 65; see Palestine During the Ministry of Jesus). Caesarea Philippi, originally known as Paneas, has been identified with the modern village of BaЖniyaЖs. Paneas was named after Pan, the Greek god of flocks, pastures, forests, and wildlife, and patron god of shepherds and hunters. From a grotto, formerly dedicated to Pan, in a lofty cliff in the vicinity of Paneas (Caesarea Philippi), springs forth a perennial stream, the BaЖniyaЖs, one of the chief sources of the Jordan River. Philip rebuilt and beautified the city of Paneas and named it Caesarea Philippi, after himself and Tiberius Caesar (Josephus Antiquities xviii. 2. 1; War ii. 9. 1 [168]).

Asked. Or, “began to question,” implying protracted discussion. Christ’s retirement to this Gentile region was partly to escape from the spies, who gave Him no respite so long as He remained in Galilee, and also to have opportunity to instruct His disciples and prepare them for the hour of crisis that would soon bring His brief ministry to a close (DA 411). The following discussion evidently took place during the course of the travels of Jesus and His disciples (see Mark 8:27), at the close of one of His seasons of prayer (see Luke 9:18). These incidental details of the narrative suggest the possibility that Jesus and the disciples had spent the night in the open, somewhere in the foothills of Mt. Hermon, and that He had either devoted the night to prayer or had risen early and gone apart from the disciples for a season of prayer in some quiet, secluded place. He was about to begin instruction with respect to the closing scenes of His earthly ministry. Accordingly He sought guidance in opening to them these unwelcome thoughts, and prayed that they might be prepared to receive what He had to impart (see DA 411).

Whom do men say? Jesus opened the discussion of His coming passion by directing the thoughts of His disciples to Himself as the Messiah, a subject He seems never to have approached directly before. It was essential that they recognize Him as the Messiah before they could in any way appreciate the meaning of His vicarious sacrifice on Calvary. If He were recognized only as a “teacher come from God” (see on John 3:2), or as one of the ancient prophets risen from the dead (see on Matt. 16:14), His death could have no more significance than that of any other great and good man. It would be exemplary rather than vicarious. It would have no atoning power. He who would find salvation in the cross of Calvary must first recognize that the One who hung upon the cross was none other than the Son of God, the Saviour of the world, the Messiah, the Christ. It is only on the basis of the Messiahship of Jesus of Nazareth that the cross can be understood and appreciated in its true perspective. Jesus, of course, knew well what the people thought of Him. He knew also of their mistaken concept of the nature of the kingdom He had come to establish (see on Luke 4:19). His reason for asking the disciples this question was to appear their minds for the next question—what they themselves had come to think of Him (Matt. 16:15). The faith of the disciples was all the more remarkable in contrast with the unbelief or the half belief of the rest of their fellow countrymen. To be sure they had been closely associated with the Master for some time.

Son of man. See on Mark 2:10.

14. Some say. The disciples mention four opinions they had heard expressed concerning Jesus. But the difficulty with all these opinions was that although they recognized Jesus as being a great man, they all fell short of recognizing Him as God. Thus it had been with Nicodemus (see on John 3:2). For an earlier statement of public reaction to the person of Jesus see on Mark 6:14–16.

Thou art John. A tribute indeed to John and to the impression his brief ministry had made upon the thinking of the people, even, in fact, upon the dull conscience of Herod Antipas (see on Matt 3:1; Mark 6:14–16). The various opinions men held of Jesus were a sad admission that in spite of all the evidence provided by Heaven, “his own” had failed to recognize Him for what He was in truth, the Messiah of OT prophecy (see John 1:11; Luke 24:25–27).

Elias. See on John 1:19–25.

One of the prophets. See on Deut. 18:15.

15. Whom say ye? The emphasis of the Greek construction is, “But you, who do you say that I am?” For a somewhat similar conversation between Jesus and His disciples see John 6:66–69. Constant companions of Jesus now for more than a year, and some of them for more than two years, the disciples had had opportunities to observe the many evidences of the divinity of Jesus (see on John 1:1–3) far exceeding those of other men. Now Jesus gave them an opportunity to testify to their faith. Though their understanding of Him was even yet far from perfect, Andrew, Philip, and Nathanael had apparently believed from the very beginning that Jesus was the Messiah (see John 1:40–49; DA 141). After the storm on the lake all the disciples had worshiped Him (see on Matt. 14:33), and after the crisis in Galilee they had professed faith in Him as the Son of God (John 6:68, 69).

16. Peter answered. That is, not on his own behalf alone (DA 412, 415), but as spokesman for the Twelve, as upon previous occasions (see John 6:69; see on Matt. 14:28; Mark 3:16).

Thou art the Christ. For the significance of the title Christ see on ch. 1:1. Though many had already rejected the idea that Christ could possibly be the Messiah of prophecy (see on ch. 16:13, 14), the disciples were still loyal to Him as such, even though they understood but imperfectly all that was involved in it. Later, of course, they did understand (cf. Luke 24:25–34). Except as they grasped this fundamental truth by faith and held firmly to it, they too would fail utterly to grasp the truth that the Messiah must suffer. As it was, when His hour of extremity came, “all the disciples forsook him, and fled” (Matt. 26:56). Even so, Jesus was basing the future hopes of the church on this little band of witnesses, and unless they believed Him to be the Christ, what hope was there that other men would ever believe this sublime truth? See on John 1:11, 12.

The fiction that Jesus was merely a great and good man, perhaps the best man who ever lived, but nothing more, is as absurd as it is incredible. He claimed to be the very Son of God, and expected His followers to concur in this belief. Either He was or He was not. And if He was not, He perpetrated the greatest hoax and fraud of history. One who would make such a claim and encourage others to consider Him the Saviour of the world, when He was not, could hardly be worthy of admiration, to say nothing of worship. Jesus of Nazareth was either the Christ, the Son of the living God, or He was the most colossal impostor of all time.

Son of the living God. See on Luke 1:35. Although Jesus accepted this title, He seems to have used it of Himself only infrequently. Jesus commonly referred to Himself as the Son of man (see on Matt. 1:1; Mark 2:10), which was the very title He had used in addressing the question to them upon this occasion (Matt. 16:13). “Who is the Son of man?” Jesus asks; “The Son of the living God,” the disciples answer (see on John 1:1–3, 14; Additional Note on John 1).

17. Blessed. See on ch. 5:3. Jesus solemnly accepts Peter’s confession of faith. Inasmuch as Peter was spokesman for all the disciples (see on v. 16), the blessing now addressed to him belongs to them also, to the extent that their faith measured up to his.

Simon Bar-jona. That is, “Simon, son of Jonah [or John]” (see on John 21:15; cf. on Mark 3:16). This was Peter’s full name, according to Jewish custom.

Flesh and blood. That is, human beings. This was a common Jewish idiom designating mankind in whole or in part (cf. Gal. 1:16, 17).

My Father. See John 6:45; 1 Cor. 2:10. For Jesus’ use of the term “Father” to refer to God see on Matt. 6:9.

18. I say also. The father had revealed one truth (v. 17); Jesus now adds to it another.

Thou art Peter. Addressing Simon Bar-jona (v. 17) as Peter, Jesus used the name He had given Peter upon first meeting him (see John 1:40–42; see on Matt. 4:18).

Upon this rock. These words have been variously interpreted: (1) that Peter is “this rock,” (2) that Peter’s faith in Jesus as the Christ is “this rock,” (3) that Christ Himself is “this rock.” Persuasive reasons have been set forth in favor of each of the three explanations. The best way to determine what Christ meant by these cryptic words is to inquire of the Scriptures themselves what this figure of speech meant to Jewish listeners, particularly to those who heard Jesus use it upon this occasion (see MB 1). The testimony of the writings of the disciples themselves is obviously superior to what men have since thought Jesus meant. Fortunately, some of those who were eyewitnesses upon this occasion (see 2 Peter 1:16; 1 John 1:1–3) have left a record that is clear and unequivocal.

For this part, Peter, to whom the words were addressed, emphatically disclaims, by his teachings, that the “rock” of which Jesus spoke referred to him (see Acts 4:8–12; 1 Peter 2:4–8). Matthew records the fact that Jesus again used the same figure of speech, under circumstances that clearly call for the term to be understood of Himself (see on Matt. 21:42; cf. Luke 20:17, 18). From very early times the figure of a rock was used by the Hebrew people as a specific term for God (see on Deut. 32:4; Ps. 18:2; etc.). The prophet Isaiah speaks of Christ as “a great rock in a weary land” (see on ch. 32:2), and as “a precious corner stone, a sure foundation” (see on ch. 28:16). Paul affirms that Christ was the “Rock” that went with His people in ancient times (see 1 Cor. 10:4; cf. Deut. 32:4; 2 Sam. 22:32; Ps. 18:31). In a secondary sense the truths Jesus spoke are also a “rock” on which men may build safely and securely (see on Matt. 7:24, 25), for He Himself is the living “Word” “made flesh” (see John 1:1, 14; cf. Mark 8:38; John 3:34; 6:63, 68; 17:8).

Jesus Christ is the “rock of our salvation” (Ps. 95:1; cf. Deut. 32:4, 15, 18; DA 413). He alone is the foundation of the church, for “other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ” (1 Cor. 3:11), “neither is there salvation in any other” (Acts 4:12). Closely associated with Jesus Christ as “the chief corner stone” in the foundation of the church are “the apostles and prophets” (Eph. 2:20). In the same sense that Christ is the Rock, “a living stone, disallowed indeed of men, but chosen of God,” all who believe in Him, “as lively stones, are built up a spiritual house” (1 Peter 2:4, 5), “fitly framed together … an holy temple in the Lord” (Eph. 2:21). But Jesus is ever and only the “Rock” on which the entire structure rests, for without Him there would be no church at all. Faith in Him as the Son of God makes it possible for us also to become sons of God (see John 1:12; 1 John 3:1, 2). The realization that Jesus Christ is indeed the Son of God, as Peter emphatically affirmed upon this occasion (see Matt. 16:16), is the key to the door of salvation (see DA 412, 413). But it is incidental, not fundamental, that Peter was the first to recognize and declare his faith, which, upon this occasion, he did as spokesman for all the disciples (see on v. 16).

Augustine (c. a.d. 400), the greatest of Catholic theologians of the early Christian centuries, leaves it for his readers to decide whether Christ here designated Himself or Peter as “the rock” (Retractiones i. 21. 1). Chrysostom, the “golden-tongued” preacher, another Father of the early centuries, says that Jesus promised to lay the foundation of the church upon Peter’s confession [not on Peter], but elsewhere calls Christ Himself truly our foundation (Commentary on Galatians, ch. 1:1–3; Homilies on 1 Timothy, No. xviii, ch. 6:21). Eusebius, the early church historian, quotes Clement of Alexandria as declaring that Peter and James and John did not strive for supremacy in the church at Jerusalem, but chose James the Just as leader (Church History ii. 1). Other early Fathers of the church, such as Hilary of Arles, taught the same.

It was only when scriptural support was sought in behalf of the claims of the bishop of Rome to the primacy of the church (see Vol. IV, p. 836) that the words of Christ upon this occasion were taken from their original context and interpreted to mean that Peter was “this rock.” Leo I was the first Roman pontiff to claim (about a.d. 445) that his authority came from Christ through Peter. Of him, Kenneth Scott Latourette, a leading church historian, says: “He insisted that by Christ’s decree Peter was the rock, the foundation, the door-keeper of the kingdom of heaven, set to bind and loose, whose judgments retained their validity in heaven, and that through the Pope, as his successor, Peter continued to perform the assignment which had been entrusted to him” (A History of Christianity [1953], p. 186). Strange indeed it is, that if this is really what Christ meant, neither Peter nor any other of the disciples, nor other Christians for four centuries thereafter, discovered the fact! How extraordinary that no Roman bishop discovered this meaning in Christ’s words until a fifth-century bishop considered it necessary to find some Biblical support for papal primacy. The significance attributed to Christ’s words, by which they are made to confer primacy upon the so-called successors of Peter, the bishops of Rome, is completely at variance with all the teachings Christ gave to His followers (see ch. 23:8, 10).

Perhaps the best evidence that Christ did not appoint Peter as the “rock” on which He would build His church is the fact that none of those who heard Christ upon this occasion—not even Peter—so construed His words, either during the time that Christ was on earth or later. Had Christ made Peter chief among the disciples, they would not thereafter have been involved in repeated arguments about which of them “should be accounted the greatest” (Luke 22:24; see Matt. 18:1; Mark 9:33–35; etc.; DA 817; see on Matt. 16:19).

The name Peter is derived from the Gr. petros, a “stone,” generally a small slab of stone. The word “rock” is the Gr. petra, the large mass of rock itself, a “ledge” or “shelf of rock,” a “rocky peak.” A petra is a large, fixed, immovable “rock,” whereas apetros is a small “stone.” To what extent Christ may have had this distinction in mind, however, or may have explained it as He spoke, is a matter that cannot be determined from these words themselves, because Christ certainly spoke Aramaic—the common language of Palestine at that time. The Gr. petros undoubtedly represents the word kephaХ (cephas) in Aramaic (see on ch. 4:18). And, very likely, petra also represents the Aramaic word kephaХ though there is a possibility that Christ used some other synonym or expression in Aramaic, which would agree with the distinction between petros and petra that is made by the gospel writers in Greek. It seems probable that Christ must have intended to make such a distinction, however, or Matthew, writing in Greek and guided by the Holy Spirit, would not have made one.

Obviously a petros, or small stone, would make an impossible foundation for any edifice, and Jesus here affirms that nothing less than a petra, or “rock,” could suffice. This fact is made even more sure by the words of Christ in ch. 7:24: “Whosoever heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them” is like “a wise man, which built his house upon a rock [Gr. petra].” Any edifice built upon Peter, petros, a weak, erring human being, as the Gospel record makes plain, has a foundation little better than shifting sand (see on ch. 7:27).

Church. Gr. ekkleµsia. See on ch. 18:17.

Gates. In ancient cities the gate was the meeting place of the city fathers and the key place in the defense of the city against an attacking army (see on Gen. 19:1; Joshua 8:29). Hence to capture the gate would make possible the capturing of the entire city.

Christ’s triumph over death and the grave is the central truth of Christianity. It was not possible for Satan to hold Christ with the cords of death (see Acts 2:24), nor will it be possible for him to hold any of those who believe in Christ (see John 3:16; Rom. 6:23). Figuratively speaking, Satan holds the “gates of hell,” but Christ, by His death, entered Satan’s stronghold and bound the adversary (see on Matt. 12:29). Upon this sublime fact rests the Christian’s hope of deliverance from the wiles of Satan in this life, from his power over the grave, and from his presence in the life to come. “The last enemy that shall be destroyed is death” (1 Cor. 15:26). Death and the grave will eventually be “cast into the lake of fire” (Rev. 20:14).

To make Christ’s words mean that the “gates of hell” are not to prevail against Peter is to deny Christ’s own explanation in Matt. 16:21 (to which vs. 13–20 are introductory), and to make Peter’s reaction meaningless (see vs. 22, 23).

Hell. See on ch. 11:23.

Not prevail. Figuratively, the “gates of hell” prevailed against Peter when he thrice denied his Lord (see DA 413), and literally at his death (see John 21:18, 19).

The full significance of what Christ meant when He said that “the gates of hell” would “not prevail” can best be understood in terms of the fact that immediately He proceeded to speak about how He would “be killed, and be raised again the third day” (see on Matt. 12:40; cf. DA 418). Christ triumphed gloriously over all of Satan’s power, and by that triumph, He provided assurance that His church on earth would also triumph.

19. The keys. The “keys” to the kingdom of heaven are the words of Christ (see DA 413; cf. John 1:12; 17:3). It is important to note that Christ Himself speaks of the “key” here referred to as “the key of knowledge” of how to enter the kingdom (see Luke 11:52). The words of Jesus are “spirit” and “life” to all who receive them (see John 6:63). It is the words of Christ that bring eternal life (see John 6:68). The word of God is the key to the new-birth experience (1 Peter 1:23).

As the words spoken by Jesus convinced the disciples of His divinity, so their repeating of His words to other men, as His ambassadors, was to “reconcile” them to God (see 2 Cor. 5:18–20). The saving power of the gospel is the only thing that admits men and women into the kingdom of heaven. Christ simply bestowed upon Peter and all the other disciples (see on Matt. 18:18; John 20:23) the authority and power to bring men into the kingdom. It was Peter’s perception of the truth that Jesus is indeed the Christ that placed the “keys” of the kingdom in his possession and let him into the kingdom, and the same may be said of all Christ’s followers to the very close of time. The argument that Christ bestowed upon Peter a degree of authority greater than, or different from, that which He gave to the other disciples, is without scriptural basis (see on Matt. 16:18). As a matter of fact, among the apostles it was James and not Peter who exercised administrative functions over the early church in Jerusalem (see Acts 15:13, 19; cf. chs. 1:13; 12:17; 21:18; 1 Cor. 15:7; Gal. 2:9, 12). Upon at least one occasion Paul “withstood” Peter “to the face” for a wrong course of action (see Gal. 2:11–14), which he certainly would not have done had he known anything about Peter’s enjoying the rights and prerogatives that some now claim for him upon the basis of Matt. 16:18, 19.

Kingdom of heaven. As frequently used throughout the ministry of Christ, the “kingdom of heaven” here refers to the kingdom of divine grace in the hearts of those who become its citizens, here and now (see on chs. 4:17; 5:2). No one can ever hope to enter the future kingdom of glory (see on ch. 25:31, 34) who has not first entered the present kingdom of His grace.

Bind. The entire statement reads literally, “Whatever you bind on earth shall have been bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall have been loosed in heaven.” The meaning evidently is this, that the church on earth will require only what heaven requires and will prohibit only what heaven prohibits. This seems to be the clear teaching of the Scriptures (see on Matt. 7:21–27; Mark 7:6–13). As the apostles went forth to proclaim the gospel, according to the commission entrusted to them (see Matt. 28:19, 20), they were to teach converts “to observe all things whatsoever” Christ had commanded—no more and no less.

To extend the meaning of “bind” and “loose” to the authority to dictate what members of the church may believe and what they may do, in matters of faith and practice, is to read into these words of Christ more than He meant by them, and more than the disciples understood by them. Such a claim God does not sanction. Christ’s representatives on earth have the right and the responsibility to “bind” whatever has been “bound in heaven” and to “loose” whatever has been “loosed in heaven,” that is, to require or to prohibit whatever Inspiration clearly reveals. But to go beyond this is to substitute human authority for the authority of Christ (see on Mark 7:7–9), a tendency that Heaven will not tolerate in those who have been appointed to the oversight of the citizens of the kingdom of heaven on earth.

20. Tell no man. Until the very close of His ministry—until the triumphal entry into Jerusalem, in fact—Jesus avoided public discussion of His Messiahship. He never claimed publicly to be the Messiah. Apparently to avoid publicity as the Messiah (see on Mark 1:24, 25), Christ repeatedly enjoined the evil spirits not to address Him as “the Holy One of God” (see Mark 1:24, 25, 34; 3:11, 12; Luke 4:34, 35, 41). The Twelve, on their tour through Galilee, were not to discuss the question of whether Jesus was the Messiah (see DA 350), because the popular misconceptions entertained concerning Messiah (DA 30, 414, 415; see on Luke 4:19) would tend to thwart the proclamation and reception of the gospel. Men would have construed such a proclamation in a political sense, as they did at the time of the triumphal entry into Jerusalem (see on Matt. 21:1, 5; John 6:15).

21. From that time forth. The conversation of vs. 13–20 was a fitting introduction to the subject Jesus now introduced for the first time—His imminent sufferings, death, and resurrection (see on v. 13). Whether the instruction and conversation of vs. 21–28 took place immediately after the preceding section, or very shortly after, is not known. Another slight interval of time may have intervened between vs. 23 and 24 (see Mark 8:34; DA 416). Be that as it may, it is clear that all the conversation and discussion recorded in vs. 14–28 took place in the region of Caesarea Philippi (see on v. 13; cf. DA 411, 418). It was now probably in the latter part of the summer, a.d. 30 (see on v. 13).

Prior to this occasion Jesus had not discussed His Messiaship even with the Twelve (see on vs. 13, 16), nor had He mentioned to them the fact that, as the Messiah, He must die for the sins of the world. He had, it is true, alluded to His death in an enigmatic statement at the time of the First Cleansing of the Temple, more than two years earlier (see on John 2:19), and to Nicodemus He had plainly, though privately, set forth both the fact and the nature of His death (see John 3:14). From this time forth, however, Jesus repeatedly discussed the matter with His disciples, in an endeavor, no doubt, to wean their minds away from the false, popular concepts the Jews then entertained concerning the Messiah and His kingdom (see on Luke 4:19). Their reluctance upon this occasion to accept and entertain the idea that the Messiah must suffer and die (see Matt. 16:22) emphasizes the difficulty Christ had in disabusing their minds of this misconception. Again (ch. 17:22, 23) and again (ch. 20:17–19) He discussed the matter with them. But their disappointment, when the time finally arrived, showed that it was only with partial success that Jesus pressed upon them the instruction He now had to impart to them.

He must. Literally, “it is necessary for him” (see on Luke 2:49), that is, in the sense that it was necessary for Him to do so in order to fulfill the plan for His life while on earth (cf. Mark 8:31; 9:12; etc.). There was no way in which He could accomplish His mission but by the way of the cross.

Jerusalem. Whither, a few months later—perhaps three or four—He “stedfastly set his face to go” (see on Luke 9:51).

Suffer many things. As had been prophesied (see Ps. 22:1, 7, 8, 15–18; Isa. 53:3–10; etc.). Jesus’ sufferings have meaning for us in terms of His being the Son of God, the Messiah of OT prophecy, and the Redeemer of mankind. Because He was the Messiah, He must suffer.

The elders. The use of a single definite article in the Greek indicates that the three classes of leaders—elders, chief priests, and scribes—are here treated as a single group and not as three separate groups. Probably, therefore, this was the Sanhedrin, which is known to have been composed of these three groups. For comment on the “chief priests” see on ch. 2:4. For comment on the “scribes” see on Mark 1:22. The Sanhedrin was the supreme legislative and judicial body of Israel, consisting of 71 members (see p. 67).

Be killed. Again and again Jesus plainly set forth the facts, both of the crucifixion and of the resurrection. Nevertheless, the disciples failed to comprehend Christ’s meaning (Mark 9:10, 32), blindly choosing to believe what they wanted to believe and passing by what they found displeasing to their preconceived opinions (see DA 30).

The third day. See pp. 248-250.

22. Peter took him. Literally, “Peter took him to himself,” implying that he took Jesus off to one side to talk to Him.

Began to rebuke him. Peter “began,” but Jesus stopped him before he could finish. Later, Peter’s boldness was again in evidence when he took the sword in an attempt to defend Jesus (see John 18:10; cf. Matt. 26:33–35).

Be it far from thee. A common Jewish idiom translated into Greek and meaning “God be merciful to thee.” Peter could not understand how the Messiah would suffer; the idea of a “Messiah” and a “suffering Servant” seemed irreconcilable in his mind (cf. Isa. 52:13 to 53:1). By his protest Peter revealed his own selfishness. He wanted to follow Jesus, but did not relish the idea of being associated with a program destined to lead to suffering and death (see DA 415, 416; see on Matt. 16:24, 25).

This shall not be. In the Greek there is a double negative, an emphatic way of saying, “In no case shall this be.”

23. He turned. It seems that Christ turned away from Peter toward the other disciples (see Mark 8:33), though His words were addressed to Peter as He did so.

Get thee behind me. The sentiment expressed by Peter was that of the tempter, and Christ’s reply was directed to the unseen foe who had prompted it. These were the very words with which Christ had repulsed the tempter in the wilderness (see Luke 4:8), and are expressive of the most severe rebuke ever spoken by Jesus. The command means, literally, “Get away from me!” or more freely, “Go away!” or “Get out of my sight!” Peter had permitted “the gates of hell,” as it were, to prevail upon him to be the mouthpiece of the prince of evil (see on Matt. 16:18). However, Christ’s words were addressed, not so much to the disciple, as to the one who had prompted his words.

Offence. Gr. skandalon, properly, the trigger of the trap on which bait is placed, and metaphorically, “a hindrance.” Here the Lord refers to Peter as a hindrance to Him on His way to the cross (see on v. 21).

Savourest. Gr. phroneoµ, “to have understanding,” “to feel,” or “to think.” The English verb, “to savor,” has the archaic meaning, “to understand,” or “to perceive.” Moments before, Peter had expressed a divine truth concerning Jesus, which had been revealed to him by the Father (v. 17); now he spoke what had been suggested to him by the enemy of all good. How soon Peter had changed sides in the great controversy!

24. If any man. Jesus now addressed all the disciples (see Luke 9:23), and Mark (ch. 8:34) adds that there were some others besides His disciples present—perhaps some Jews of the region who had come to believe on Him, and who had heard of all His wonderful works in Galilee. For comment on the thought expressed in Matt. 16:24, 25 see on ch. 10:38, 39.

Deny himself. That is, “renounce himself,” submit his will to Christ, henceforth to live for Christ rather than for himself.

Take up his cross. That is, assume the responsibilities that accompany discipleship, even though by doing so he be called upon to pay the supreme price. The cross was not a Jewish, but a Roman, instrument for executing criminals (see on ch. 10:38). However, during these decades the cross was well known in Palestine.

A criminal condemned to die by crucifixion literally did “take up his cross,” or at least the crossbar to it, which he carried to the scene of execution, and it is probably this to which Christ here alludes. In the context in which Christ here mentions cross bearing, it seems that He refers, not so much to the minor difficulties and obstacles to be encountered by disciples, but rather to the need of being ready to face death itself (see ch. 16:21, 22). Peter had just attempted to persuade Jesus to abandon the divine plan that called Him to take up His cross. Jesus replies that this is impossible, for such is not the will of the Father, and that, furthermore, if Peter is to continue as a disciple he must be willing to pay the same price, as, indeed, he eventually did (see on John 21:18, 19). Elsewhere Christ presented the additional thought that disciples must take up their crosses “daily” (see Luke 9:23), in consecration to the life of service to which they are called. If men hated Jesus, they might also be expected to hate His representatives, the disciples (see John 15:18; 16:33; see on Matt. 10:22).

Follow me. The would-be disciple must first renounce himself, his own plans, his own desires; then he must be willing to bear any cross that duty calls him to “take up;” finally, he must “follow” in the footsteps of Jesus (see 1 Peter 2:21). To “follow” Jesus is to pattern our lives after His life, and to serve God and our fellow men, as He did (see 1 John 2:6).

25. Save his life. See on ch. 10:39. To “save” one’s life is to seek first the things of the present life, forgetting “the kingdom of God, and his righteousness” (see ch. 6:33).

Lose his life.A man “loses” his life for the sake of Christ when he “denies,” or “renounces,” himself and takes up the cross of Christ (see on Matt. 5:11; 16:24; cf. 1 Peter 4:12, 13).

Find it. Another aspect of this great gospel paradox. For the Christian there can be no crown without a cross, though Satan in the wilderness offered Christ the crown of this world by another route than the cross (see on chs. 4:8, 9; 16:22).

26. World. Gr. kosmos, here designating what the world has to offer in material wealth, benefits, etc. To “gain the whole world” has ever been the ambition of the forces of evil, seen and unseen, in the present as in the past.

Soul. Gr. psucheµ (see on ch. 10:28).

Give in exchange. Christ here uses a powerful illustration to make vivid an eternal truth. There is no adequate answer to the question proposed.

27. Son of man. Jesus’ usual title for Himself (see on Mark 2:10).

Come in the glory. Those who lose their life for Christ’s sake are assured of finding it when the Lord returns in glory at the close of the age (1 Cor. 15:51–55; 1 Thess. 4:16, 17). It is then that every man may expect to receive his reward (see 2 Tim. 4:8; Rev. 22:12). Christ had just been speaking of Christians losing their lives (see Matt. 16:25) for His sake. If their “reward” for the sacrifice were to be received at death, as popular theology has it, it is strange that Christ here specifically declares that this reward is not given until He Himself shall return in glory at the close of the age (see on ch. 25:31).

With his angels. Compare Matt. 24:31; 1 Cor. 15:52; 1 Thess. 4:16.

According to his works. That is, according to what he has done in this life. Christ taught the same truth most emphatically in the parables of the Sheep and the Goats (ch. 25:31–46), the Rich Man and Lazarus (Luke 16:19–31), the Tares (Matt. 13:24–30), the Dragnet (ch. 13:47–50), and the Marriage Feast (ch. 22:1–14). Nothing in the teachings of Christ can be construed to mean that there will be a time when men will be given a second chance, an opportunity to escape the “reward” of their evil deeds in this present life. The Scriptures consistently present this life as the “day of salvation” (Isa. 49:8; 2 Cor. 6:2), the time when a man is to “work out”—by faith in Christ and under the enabling power of the Holy Spirit—his “own salvation with fear and trembling” (Phil. 2:12).

28. Verily. See on ch. 5:18.

Till they see. It is significant that all three Synoptic Gospels record the narrative of the Transfiguration immediately following this prediction. There is no break in the narrative—no chapter or verse division in the Greek original—and furthermore all three mention the fact that the Transfiguration occurred about a week after this statement, implying that the event was the fulfillment of the prediction. The connection between the two sections of narrative seems to preclude the possibility that Jesus here referred to anything but the Transfiguration, which was a miniature demonstration of the kingdom of glory. Undoubtedly Peter so understood it (see 2 Peter 1:16–18).

Son of man. See on Matt. 1:1; Mark 2:10; see Additional Note on John 1.

Ellen G. White comments

1–28DA 405–418

1     DA 405

3     8T 28

3, 4 DA 406

5     DA 408

6     DA 407

13–16DA 411

16   DA 415

16–18DA 412

18   AA 11, 194, 198; DA 413; PK 596; RC 53; 1T 471

19   DA 413, 442; 3T 428, 450

20   DA 414

21   AA 26; EW 150, 161; SR 43, 205

21, 22  DA 415

22   AA 525; Ed 88

23   1T 152; 5T 409

23, 24  DA 416

24   AA 523, 560; AH 379, 381; CD 165; CH 223, 319; CS 44, 227, 252, 289, 302; CT 23; FE 463, 511; LS 114; MB 14; MM 132, 251; MYP 314; 1T 286; 2T 491, 651; 3T 41, 81, 388; 4T 251, 626; 5T 40, 78, 307, 515; 6T 251, 378; 7T 49, 240; 8T 45; WM 116

24–27CW 22

25   2T 304

25–28DA 417

26   COL 106; SC 126; 2T 496

27   GC 479; PP 339; 2T 41, 277, 300; 3T 525

28        EW 164