Commentaires bibliques

Matthew 26:65-68. τότε: At last they have, or think they have, Him at their mercy.—διέρρηξεν, etc.: a very imposing act as the expression of true emotion; in reality a theatrical action demanded by custom and performed in accordance with rule: length and locality of rent, the garments to be rent (the nether; all of them, even if there were ten, said the Rabbinical rule: note the plural here, τὰ ἱμάτια), all fixed. A common custom among Eastern peoples. It was highly proper that holy men should seem shocked immeasurably by “blasphemy”.—ἐβλασφήμησεν: Was it blasphemy for a man to call Himself Messiah in a country where a messiah was expected? Obviously not. It might be to call oneself Messiah falsely. But that was a point for careful and deliberate examination, not to be taken for granted. The judgment of the high priest and the obsequious vote of the Sanhedrim were manifestly premature. But it does not follow from this that the evangelist’s account of the trial is unhistorical (Brandt, p. 62). The Sanhedrists, as reported, behave uo more.

Matthew 26:66. ἔνοχος θανάτου: death the penalty of blasphemy, Leviticus 24:15, and of being a false prophet, Deuteronomy 18:20.

Matthew 26:67-68 : to judicial injustice succeed personal indignities: spitting in the face (ἐνέπτυσαν), miting with the fist (ἐκολάφισαν, not Attic, κονδυλίζω used instead), or with the open hand (ἐρράπισαν, originally to beat with rods). Euthy. Zig. distinguishes the two last words thus: κολαφισμὸς is a stroke on the neck with the hollow of the hand so as to make a noise, ῥαπισμὸς a stroke on the face. The p petrators of these outrages in Mk. are τινὲς and οἱ ὑπηρέται, the former word presumably pointing to some Sanhedrists. In Mt. the connection suggests Sanhedrists alone. Incredible that they should condescend to so unworthy proceedings, one is inclined to say. Yet it was night, there was intense dislike and they might feel they did God service by disgracing a pretender. Hence the invitation to the would-be christ to prophesy (προφήτευσον) who smote him when he was struck behind the back or blindfolded (Mark 14:65). Thus did they fill up the early hours of the morning on that miserable night. Sceptical critics, e.g., Brandt, p. 69, also Holtz., H. C., suggest that the colouring of this passage is drawn from O. T. texts, such as Micah 4:14 (Sept[146] Matthew 5:1, A. V[147]), Isaiah 50:6; Isaiah 53:3-5, 1 Kings 22:24, and that probably the texts created the “facts”. That of course is abstractly possible, but the statement of the evangelist is intrinsically probable, and it is to be noted that not even in Mt. is there a “that it might be fulfilled”.

[146] Septuagint.

[147] Authorised Version.

Matthew 26:69-75. Peter’s denial (Mark 14:66-72, Luke 22:54-62). The discrepancies of the four accounts here are perplexing but not surprising. It would be difficult for any one present in the confused throng gathered within the palace gate that night to tell exactly what happened. Peter himself, the hero of the tale, had probably only hazy recollections of some particulars, and might not always relate the incident in the same way. Harmonistic efforts are wasted time. Comparative exegesis may partly explain how one narrative, say Mt.’s, arose out of another, e.g., Mk.’s (Weiss, Marcus-Evang.). But on the whole it is best to take each version by itself, as one way of telling a story, which in the main is accepted even by writers like Brandt as one of the certainties of the Passion history.

Matthew 26:69. ὁ δὲ Π.: δὲ resumes the Peter-episode introduced at Matthew 26:58.—ἐκάθητο, was sitting, while the judicial proceedings were going on.—αὐλῇ, here means the court, atrium; the trial would take place in a chamber within the buildings surrounding the court.—μία π., one servant girl, to distinguish from another referred to in Matthew 26:71 (ἄλλη).—καὶ σὺ, you too, as if she had seen Jesus in company with His disciples, Peter one of them, recognisable again, perhaps during the last few days.—Γαλιλαίου: He a Galilean; you, too, by your tongue.

Matthew 26:70. οὐκ οἶδα, etc.: affectation of extreme ignorance. So far from knowing the man I don’t even know what you are talking about. This said before all (ἔμπ. πάντων). First denial, entailing others to follow.

Matthew 26:71. εἰς τ. πυλῶνα, to or towards the gateway, away from the crowd in the court.—ἄλλη (παιδίσκη), another saw him, and said, not to him, but to others there (not easy to escape 1).—οὗτος, etc., this person, pointing to him, was, etc.

Matthew 26:72. μεθʼ ὅρκου: second denial, more emphatic, with an oath, and more direct: I know not the man (τὸν ἄν.).

Matthew 26:73. οἱ ἑστῶτες, loungers; seeing Peter’s confusion, and amusing themselves by tormenting him.—ἀληθῶς, beyond doubt, you, too, are one of them; of the notorious gang.—ἡ λαλιά: They had heard him speak in his second denial, which so leads up to a third. Galilean speech was defective in pronouncing the gutturals, and making שׁ = ת.