Coke's Commentary on the Holy Bible · Matthew Chapter 16

Matthew 16:1. The Pharisees also— Dr. Campbell reads the last verse of the last chapter and the prefect verse, Then having dismissed the multitude, he embarked, and sailed to the coast of Magdala. Thither some Pharisees and Sadducees repaired, who, to try him, desired that he would shew them a sign in the sky. Whilst Jesus wasinDalmanutha,orMagdala,thePharisees, having heard of the second miraculous dinner, and fearing that the whole body of the people would acknowledge him for the Messiah, resolved to confute his pretensions fully and publicly: for this reason they came forth with the Sadducees, who, though the opposers and rivals of the Pharisees in all other matters, joined them in their design of oppressing Jesus, and together with them demanded of him the sign from heaven. It seems that the Jews, from Dan 7:13 expected that the Messiah would make his first appearance in the clouds of heaven, and take unto himself glory and a temporal kingdom. See the note on ch. Matthew 12:38-39. Agreeable to this, Josephus, describing the state of the affairs in Judaea under Felix, tells us, "That the deceivers and impostors pretending to inspiration, endeavouring to bring about changes, and so making the people mad, led them into the wilderness, as if it had been to shew them signs of liberty:" Wherefore when the Pharisees desired Jesus to shew them the sign from heaven, they certainly meant, that he should demonstrate himself to be the Messiah, by coming in a visible and miraculous manner from heaven with great pomp, and by wresting the kingdom out of the hands of the Romans. These hypocrites craftily feigned an inclination to believe, if he would but give them sufficient evidence of his mission: however, their true design was, that by his failure in the proof which they required, he should expose himself to general blame. It was upon the same principles that they continued their demands in the Apostles' time (see 1 Corinthians 1:22.); though so many signs from heaven had then been given, in the voice from thence, in the preternatural darkness at our Lord's crucifixion, in the descent of angels in repeated instances, and in that of the Holy Spirit in a visible form, as well as in most sensible effects. See Josephus's Jewish War, b. 2. 100. 12 and Lardner's Credibility, lib. 1. 100. 5.

return to '

Matthew 16:5. And when his disciples were come, &c.— This would be rendered more properly, Now the disciples, going to the other side, had forgotten to take bread; for it is more agreeable to the nature of the thing to suppose, that this conversation happened as they sailed, than when they were come to the other side, where they might easily have been supplied with bread. The version of 1729 renders it, Now at their departure to go to the other side, &c. And with it, Dr. Heylin and the Prussian editors agree. It seems Jesus and the disciples had remained so long in Dalmanutha, that they had consumed the seven baskets of fragments which they had taken up after the late miraculous dinner. Our Saviour hence took occasion to give his disciples a solemn charge to beware of the doctrine of the Pharisees and Sadducees, which he called leaven, because of its pernicious influence to sour men's tempers with pride and other evil passions. For as these hypocrites chiefly enjoined the observation of frivolous traditions, their doctrine was a great enemy to the principles of true piety, and puffed men up with a high conceit of their own sanctity. The slowness of the disciples' understanding shewed itself on this occasion, as it had done on many others. As they had forgotten to take bread with them, and had often heard the doctors prohibit the use of the leaven of heathens and Samaritans, they thought that he forbade them to buy bread from bakers of either sects, lest it might be made with impure leaven; and so they looked on the advice as an indirect reproof of their carelessness.

Our Saviour, after properly reproving them, soon gave them to understand his meaning. See Matthew 16:12. Mac-knight and Calmet.

return to '

Matthew 16:13. When Jesus came into the coasts, &c.— When Jesus came into the territories of, or was going towards, Cesarea Philippi, he asked his disciples, saying, Whom do men say I am? the son of man? Heylin. Cesarea Philippi, while it was possessed by the Canaanites, was called Leshem, Jos 19:47 and Laish, Judges 18:27. But when the children of Dan took it, they named it after their progenitor. In later times it was called Paneas, from the mountain beneath which it stood. The situation of Paneas pleased Philip the tetrarch so exceedingly, that he resolved to make it the seat of his court; for which purpose he enlarged and adorned it with many sumptuous buildings, and called it Cesarea in honour of the Roman emperor: the tetrarch's name, however, was commonly added to distinguish it from the other Cesarea, so often mentioned in the Acts, which was a fine port in the Mediterranean sea, and had been rebuilt by Herod the Great, and named in honour of Augustus Caesar. See the note on Acts 8:40. Josephus gave Philip so good a character, that some have thought our Lord retired into his territories for security from the insults of his enemies elsewhere. See Beausobre and Lenfant, Introduction, p. 27.

return to '

Matthew 16:14. And they said, Some, &c.— Perhaps those who held Christ to be Elias, did not think him the Messiah, but only his forerunner; this being the received opinion of the whole nation, that Elias was to come before the Messiah, and anoint him when he came. Those who thought that he was John the Baptist risen from the dead, spoke suitably to the opinion of the Pharisees, "who (says Josephus) held that there was for good men an easy return to life." That he was Jeremiah, or one of the prophets, was the consequence of an opinion which prevailed, that the Messiah was to come not from the living, but from the dead: As they thought noneof that age of piety sufficient to bear him, and that the resurrection was to begin with his kingdom, they might easily be induced to think that he would be one who should rise from the dead; and as God had said of Jeremiah, that he was set to root out, pull down, and destroy kingdoms, &c. ch. Matthew 1:5-10.; and as it was their opinion that the great business of the king Messiah was to pull down all the nations whichruled over them, and make them tributaries and servants to the Jews; they might on this account pitch on him, as the fittest person to be the Messiah. See Whitby, Craddock's Harmony, and Malachi 2:5; Malachi 2:5. Messrs. Beausobre and Lenfant think, that they mentioned Jeremiah rather than any other prophet, because the ancient Jews used to place Jeremiah at the head of the prophets. It seems to follow, both from the question in the preceding and in the following verse, that Jesus had not as yet directly assumed the title of the Messiah at least in their hearing.

return to '

Matthew 16:19. And I will give unto thee the keys— As stewards of great families, especially of the royal household, bore a key, (probably a golden one, as Lords of the bed-chamber do with us, in token of their office,) the phrase of giving a person the key naturally grew into an expression of raising him to great power. See the note on Isaiah 22:22. The keys of the kingdom of heaven, which on this occasion are given to Peter, are to be understood metaphorically: for our Lord's meaning was, that Peter should open the gates of the kingdom of heaven, or Gospel dispensation, both to Jews and Gentiles; that is to say, should be the first who preached the Gospel to them, particularly the latter; and in this sense Peter seems to have understood the matter himself, Acts 15:7. Or by the keys, we may understand prayer and authority, which is sometimes the meaning of the metaphor: and according to this interpretation, the power of binding and loosing, added to the power of the keys, maybe considered as explicatory thereof: "After my ascension into heaven, I will give thee, and thy companions in the apostolate, authority to order all the affairs of my church; so that whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth, shall be bound in heaven, &c." It can be no objection against this interpretation, that it connects the idea of binding and loosing with that of the keys, contrary to the exact propriety of the two metaphors; for all who have studied the Scriptures know, that in many passages the ideas and expressions are accommodated to the subject matter, rather than to the precedent metaphors. The power of binding and loosing now conferred on Peter, and afterwards on all the Apostles, (see ch. Matthew 18:18.) was a power of declaring the laws of the Gospel, and the terms of salvation; for in the Jewish nation, to bind and loose are words made use of by the doctors to signify the unlawfulness or lawfulness of things. Wherefore our Lord's meaning was, "Whatever things thou shalt bind up from men, or declare forbidden on earth, shall be forbidden by heaven; and whatsoever things thou shalt loose to men, or bid to be done, shall be lawful and obligatory in the esteem of heaven." Accordingly it may be observed, that the gender made use of in both passages agrees to this interpretation: in that under consideration it is ο, not ον; in the other it is οσα, not οσους. This high power of declaring the terms of salvation, and precepts of the Gospel, the Apostles did not enjoy in its full extent till the memorable day of Pentecost, when they received the Holy Ghost in the plenitude of his gifts. After this their decisions on points of doctrine and duty being all given by inspiration, were infallible definitions, and ratified in heaven. Here then was an immense honour conferred on theApostles, and what must yield great consolation to all believers. There is nothing doubtful in the Gospel, much less false; but we may safely rest the salvation of our souls on the discoveries made to us there, since they are all originally derived from God. See Doddridge, Macknight, Lightfoot, Bishop Hoadly, and the other writers on this controverted passage of Scripture.

return to '

Matthew 16:20. Then charged he his disciples, &c.— Jesus forbade his disciples to tell any man that he was the Messiah, because he was to suffer the punishment of death;—a circumstance, which could not fail to give his followers great offence, as they did not yet understand the nature of his kingdom; for which reason he thought it better to leave every one to form a judgment of his character from his doctrine and miracles, than in all places to assume the title of Messiah publicly under such disadvantages. Or, his meaning may have been, "Because it is determined that the Messiah shall suffer death, it is not proper to assume that title publicly, lest the people, declaring in my behalf, endeavour to prevent the execution of the divine counsel." The Romans certainly, say some, would not have suffered him to proceed, if he had gone about preaching that he was the king whom the Jews expected; unless he had interfered by his divine and irresistible power. Such an accusation would have been instantly brought against him by the Jews, if they could have heard it out of his own mouth; and if that had been his public doctrine to his followers, which was openly preached by his Apostles after his death, and of which they are accused, Acts 17:5-9. Though the magistrates of the world had no great regard to the talk of a king who had suffered death, and appeared no longer upon earth; yet, if our Saviour had openly declared this of himself in his lifetime, with a train ofdisciples and followers everywhere owning and crying him up for their king, the Roman governors of Judea could not have forborne to take notice of it, and to make use of their force against it. In this the Jews were not mistaken, and therefore they made use of it as the strongest accusation, and the likeliest to prevail with Pilate against him, for the taking away his life; it being treason, and an unpardonable offence, which could not escape death from a Roman deputy, without the forfeiture of his own life. See Luk 23:2 and the note on Matthew 12:16. Dr. Campbell, following many of the manuscripts, leaves out the word Jesus: then he forbade his disciples to tell any man that he is the Messiah.

return to '

Matthew 16:21. From that time forth began Jesus, &c.— Though all the circumstances mentioned in this verse were marks of the Messiah, yet, says a commentator, how little they were understood by the Apostles, or suited to their expectation of the Messiah, appears from the manner in which they were received by Peter, Matthew 16:22. Peter had twice before acknowledged Jesus to be the Messiah, and yet here he cannot bear the thought that he should suffer, and be put to death, and be raised again: whereby we may perceive how little Jesus had at this time explained to the Apostles what personally concerned himself. They had been a good while witnesses of his life and miracles, and thereby being grown into a belief that he was the Messiah, were in some degree prepared to receive the particulars which were to fill up the character, and answer the prophesies concerning him. This from henceforth he began to open to them, though in a way out of which the Jews could not form an accusation; the time of the accomplishment of all, in his sufferings, death, and resurrection, now drawing on, (for this was in the last year of his life,) he being to meet the Jews at Jerusalem but once more at the passover, and then they were to have their will upon him; wherefore he might now begin to be a little more open concerning himself, though yet so as to keep himself out of the reach of any accusation, which might appear just or weighty to the Roman deputy.

return to '

Matthew 16:22. Then Peter, &c.— Then Peter—began to expostulate with him, &c. Dr. Doddridge renders the original word προσλαβομενος, by taking him by the hand: Dr. Fuller supposes that phrase Ιλεως σοι, should be rendered, may God have compassion upon thee: Heinsius, Grotius, and Le Clerc give the same interpretation; and the accurate Dr. Scott, who is followed by Dr. Heylin, renders it, Mercy on thee! which is most literal. The phrase,as used by the LXX, generally signifies God forbid! or, as we render it, be it far from thee. See 1 Samuel 14:45. 2 Samuel 20:20. 1Ki 21:3. 1 Chronicles 11:19. Compare 1Ma 2:25 and see Doddridge, and Wetstein.

return to '

Matthew 16:23. Get thee behind me, Satan!— See Luke 4:8. The word Satan, which is originally Hebrew, and has thence been taken into several languages, is often used in the Old Testament, as we have had occasion to observe, to signify an adversary; and the expression has appeared so harsh to some, as coming from the mouth of Christ to one of his Apostles, that they have rather chosen to translate it, O mine adversary. The version of 1729, reads the verse, But he frowned upon Peter, and said, Out of my sight, pernicious obstacle to my designs! your views are all worldly, regardless of what is divine. But as the Evangelists have made use of the word Σατανα, which must be owned to have a found as harsh in the Greek, as it has now with us; we may conclude that it was used by Christ, or his rebuke to Peter would have been otherwise expressed by some Greek word signifying an adversary. Nor can the word appear at all too harsh, when we consider that the tendency of Peter's saying, though it might be spoken out of a singular affection to his Master, was to obstruct the great design for which he came into the world; and none but Satan could desire to prevent what he was ready to submit to for the salvation of lost sinners. Dr. Young, in his sermons, vol. 2: p. 137 rendering the phrase Ιλεως σοι, favour thyself, supposes that our Lord calls Peter, Satan, because he now fell on that advice, which Satan uses the most successfully of all his artifices to undo men,—that of self-indulgence, and so makes this Scripture an introduction to his discourse on self-denial. See Romans 8:5. Php 3:19 and Colossians 3:2. It is remarkable, that our Lord, immediately after conferring upon St. Peter the high dignity before mentioned, openly, in the hearing of all his disciples, calls him Satan, or adversary; and declares that he had then no particular relish for the divine appointments, but was influenced merely by human views and expectations of worldly interest. If the papists rightly attended to this passage of the Sacred History, they would see their fancies of the primacy of St. Peter, which they built upon it, in a better light than they seem to do. See Macknight, Doddridge, and Beausobre and Lenfant.

return to '

Matthew 16:24. If any man will come after me— Because Peter's improper behaviour, just before mentioned, proceeded from his love to the world and its pleasures, Jesus declares publicly, that all who would be his disciples, and share with him in the glory of his kingdom, must deny themselves; that is to say, be in constant readiness to renounce every earthly pleasure, with life itself, when called to do so, (See Luke 14:33.); and, in ordinary cases, take up his cross; see on ch. Matthew 10:38. After having undergone many afflictions, the disciples of Christ may still look for more; which, when laid upon them, they must sustain with equal patience, followingtheir Master in the footsteps of his afflictions. This indeed is a hard and difficult lesson, but at the same time it is absolutely necessary; because if, in order to preserve our temporal life, we displease Christ, Mat 16:25 we shall lose what is really and truly our life,—the eternal happiness of our souls: whereas, if we will die rather than disobey him, we shall obtain infinite and endless joys. See the next note. Dr. Clarke paraphrases the latter part of Matthew 16:25,: "Whoever parts with his virtue and good conscience to save his temporal life, shall lose that which is eternal; and, by escaping the first death for a time, shall incur the penalty of the second death for ever." See sermon 4: vol. 7 and for an exposition of Mat 16:17-18 his 17th sermon, vol. 8.

return to '

Matthew 16:26. For what is a man profited, &c.— To carry home the argument more closely, he puts them in mind of the method according to which men estimate things. If God should offer the riches of Solomon, the strength of Samson, the policy of Ahithophel, the beauty of Absalom, the eloquence of Apollos, universal monarchy, and all kinds of pleasures, and say, Take them for one hour, and then die,—who is the man that would not immediately reject the proposed condition, and reply that life is better than them all? But will men forego every earthly thing for life,—the life of the body? and will they not part with them, nay, and with life itself, for their souls? since the longest any one can enjoy this life with all its pleasures is, in comparison of eternity, no longer than he enjoys the good things before mentioned, who dies in the same hour that he receives them. The latter part of this verse may be rendered, and lose his own life; Ψυχη, (the same word is used, Matthew 16:25.) or what shall a man give as a ransom for his life? The Greek word ανταλλαγμα, properly signifies a ransom; and in this connection leads us to reflect, how willing a condemned malefactor would be, to give up all that he had gotten by his crimes to buy his pardon, and how vain his attempt must in this case prove. The phrase Την Ψυχην ζημιωθεσθαι, does not merely signify to lose the life, which might be applied to a man who accidentally met death in the pursuit of gain,—as a merchant who should be lost in his voyage; but it properly imports the undergoing a capital execution; which is an idea of much greater terror, as well as of much stricter propriety in the present case. See Job 2:4.Luke 9:25; Luke 9:25. Raphelius's Annotations, and Archbishop Tillotson's Sermons, vol. 3.

return to '

Matthew 16:27. For the Son of man shall come, &c.— That the argument in the preceding verse, by which the necessity of self-denial is so clearly established, might have the greater weight, our Lord spake more particularly concerning the rewards and punishments of a future state; assuring his disciples, that they are all to be distributed by himself, the Father having appointed him universal Judge; so that his enemies cannot flatter themselves with the hope of escaping condign punishment, nor his faithful friends be in the least afraid of losing their reward: and to encourage them the more, he told them, that he would come to judge the world, not in his present low and contemned state, but most magnificently arrayed, both in his own glory, and in his Father's. See Luke 9:26. He would come, not attended by twelve weak disciples, but surrounded with numberless hosts of mighty angels, to reward every man, not with the honours of a temporal kingdom, great offices and large possessions, but with the joys of immortality. See the Inferences and Reflections at the end of this chapt

return to '