Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Matthew 16:14
And they said, Some [say] [that thou art] John the Baptist: some, Elijah; and others, Jeremiah, or one of the prophets.
14. Jeremias ] Named by St Matthew only. He is mentioned as a representative of the Prophets, because in the Jewish Canon the book of Jeremiah came first of the Prophets, following the books of Kings. See Lightfoot, on ch. Mat 27:9.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
14. And they said, Some say thatthou art John the Baptistrisen from the dead. So that HerodAntipas was not singular in his surmise (Mat 14:1;Mat 14:2).
some, Elias(Compare Mr6:15).
and others, JeremiasWasthis theory suggested by a supposed resemblance between the “Manof Sorrows” and “the weeping prophet?”
or one of the prophetsor,as Luke (Lu 9:8) expresses it,”that one of the old prophets is risen again.” In anotherreport of the popular opinions which Mark (Mr6:15) gives us, it is thus expressed, “That it is a prophet[or], as one of the prophets”: in other words, That He was aprophetical person, resembling those of old.
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
And they said, some say that thou art John the Baptist,…. It was the opinion of some of the Jews, that he was John the Baptist risen from the dead. This notion was spread, and prevailed in Herod’s court, and he himself, at last, gave into it.
Some Elias; the Tishbite, because an extraordinary person was prophesied of by Malachi, under the name of Elias; and who was to come in his power and spirit before the great day of the Lord; and it being a prevailing notion with the Jews, that Elias was to come before the Messiah; See Gill “Mt 11:14” they concluded that he was now come:
and others Jeremias; this is omitted both by Mark and Luke; the reason why he is mentioned, is not because of what is said of him, in Jer 1:5 but because the Jews thought he was that prophet spoken of, in De 18:15 that should be raised up from among them, like unto Moses: and this is the sense of some of their writers g: and in their very ancient writings a parallel is run between Moses and Jeremy h.
“R. Judah, the son of R. Simon, opened De 18:18 thus: “as thee”, this is Jeremiah, who was, as he, in reproofs; you will find all that is written of the one, is written of the other; one prophesied forty years, and the other prophesied forty years; the one prophesied concerning Judah and Israel, and the other prophesied concerning Judah and Israel; against the one those of his own tribe stood up, and against the other those of his own tribe stood up; the one was cast into a river, and the other into a dungeon; the one was delivered by means of an handmaid, and the other by the means of a servant; the one came with words of reproof, and the other came with words of reproof.”
Now they fancied, either that the soul of Jeremy was transmigrated into another body, or that he was risen from the dead.
Or one of the prophets; one of the ancient ones, as Hosea, or Isaiah, or some other: they could not fix upon the particular person who they thought was risen from the dead, and did these wondrous works among them. From the whole it appears, that these persons, whose different sentiments of Christ are here delivered, were not his sworn enemies, as the Scribes and Pharisees, who could never speak respectfully of him; saying, that he was a gluttonous man, a winebibber, a friend of publicans and sinners, a very wicked man, and far from being one, or like one of the prophets: they sometimes represent him as beside himself, and mad, yea, as being a Samaritan, and having a devil, as familiar with the devil, and doing his miracles by his assistance; but these were the common people, the multitude that followed Christ from place to place, and had a great opinion of him on account of his ministry, and miracles: wherefore, though they could not agree in their notions concerning him, yet each of them fix upon some person of note and worth, whom they took him for; they all looked upon him as a great and good man, and as a prophet, as John the Baptist was accounted by all the people, and as one of the chief of the prophets, as Elias and Jeremiah; and they that could not fix on any particular person, yet put him into the class of the prophets: but still they came short of the true knowledge of him; they did not know him to be a divine person, which his works and miracles proved him to be: nor to be that prophet Moses had spoken of, who was alone to be hearkened unto, though his ministry was a demonstration of it: nor that he was the Messiah, so much spoken of in prophecy, and so long expected by the Jewish nation, though he had all the characters of the Messiah meeting in him. The chief reason why they could not entertain such a thought of him, seems to be the mean figure he made in the world, being of a low extract, in strait circumstances of life, regarded only by the poorer sort; and there appearing nothing in him promising, that he should deliver them from the Roman yoke, and set up a temporal kingdom, which should be prosperous and flourishing, which was the notion of the Messiah that then generally obtained: and since they could not, by any means, allow of this character as belonging to Jesus, though otherwise they had an high opinion of him; hence they could not agree about him, but formed different sentiments of him; which is usually the case in everything, where the truth is not hit upon and received.
g Baal Hatturim in Deut. xviii. 15. R. Abraham Seba; Tzeror Hammor, fol. 127. 4. & 143. 4. h Pesikta Rabbati apud R. Abarbinel, Praefat. ad Jer. fol. 96. 2.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
And they said ( ). They were ready to respond for they knew that popular opinion was divided on that point (14:1f.). They give four different opinions. It is always a risky thing for a pastor to ask for people’s opinions of him. But Jesus was not much concerned by their answers to this question. He knew by now that the Pharisees and Sadducees were bitterly hostile to him. The masses were only superficially following him and they looked for a political Messiah and had vague ideas about him. How much did the disciples understand and how far have they come in their development of faith? Are they still loyal?
Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament
14. Some [say,] John the Baptist. This inquiry does not relate to the open enemies of Christ, nor to ungodly scoffers, but to the sounder and better part of the people, who might be called the choice and flower of the Church. Those only are mentioned by the disciples who spoke of Christ with respect; and yet, though they aimed at the truth, not one of them reaches that point, but all go astray in their vain fancies. Hence we perceive how great is the weakness of the human mind; for not only is it unable of itself to understand what is right or true, but even out of true principles it coins errors. Besides, though Christ is the only standard of harmony and peace, by which God gathers the whole world to himself, the greater part of men seize on this subject as the occasion of prolonged strife. Among the Jews, certainly, the unity of faith related solely to Christ; and yet they who formerly appeared to have some sort of agreement among themselves now split into a variety of sects.
We see too how one error quickly produces another; for a preconceived opinion, which had taken a firm hold of the minds of the common people, that souls passed from one body to another, made them more ready to adopt this groundless fancy. But though, at the time of Christ’s coming, the Jews were divided in this manner, such a diversity of opinions ought not to have hindered the godly from desiring to attain the pure knowledge of him. For if any man, under such a pretense, had given himself up to sloth, and neglected to seek Christ, we would have been forced to declare that there was no excuse for him. Much less then will any man escape the judgment of God who is led by the variety of sects to entertain a dislike of Christ, or who, disgusted by the false opinions of men, does not deign to attach himself to Christ.
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
(14) And they said, Some say that thou art John the Baptist.The passage is of the greatest possible interest as one of the very few that indicate the impressions shaped into beliefs that were floating among the people as to our Lords character and mission. They were based, it will be seen in each case, upon a popular doctrine of transmigration, to which the Pharisees had given a place in their system of teaching. The great actors of the past were still in existence. They might, at any great national crisis, reappear to continue and complete their work. Each of the answers has a further special interest of its own. (1.) The identification of our Lord with the Baptist has already met us as coming from the lips of the tetrarch Antipas, adopted, but not originated, by him as explaining our Lords mighty works (Mat. 14:2; Luk. 9:7). (2.) The belief that Elijah had reappeared was of the same nature. He was expected as the forerunner of the Messiah (Mal. 4:5). The imagination of the people had at first seen in the Baptist the reappearance of the Tishbite, but he, though working in the spirit and power of Elijah, had disclaimed the character which was thus ascribed to him, and it was natural that the imagination of the people should now turn to One who appeared to them as simply continuing his work. The character of our Lords recent miracles, corresponding as it did to that which was recorded as wrought by Elijah for the widow of Sarepta (1Ki. 17:14), had probably strengthened that impression. (3.) The name of Jeremiah introduces a new train of legendary thought. The impression made by that prophet on the minds of men had led to something like a mythical after-growth. It was said that the spirit of Jeremiah had passed into Zechariah (see Note on Mat. 27:9), and on that assumption another reappearance might well seem probable. He, it was believed, had hidden the ark, and the tabernacle, and the altar of incense in a cave in the mountain where Moses climbed up and saw the heritage of Godi.e., in Nebo, or Pisgah (2Ma. 2:1-7)and was expected to come and guide the people in the time when God should gather His people together to the place of concealment. He had appeared to Judas Maccabeus in a vision as a man with grey hairs, and exceeding glorious, and as the guardian prophet of the people, praying for them and for the Holy City, had given him a golden sword as the gift of God (2Ma. 15:13-16). As the prophet who had foretold the new covenant and the coming of the Lord our Righteousness (Jer. 23:6; Jer. 31:31) he was identified, as thoroughly as Isaiah, with the Messianic expectations of the people. Something, we may add, there may have been in our Lords human aspect, as a Man of sorrows and acquainted with grief, which may have helped to suggest this identification with the prophet who was, above all others of the goodly company, a prophet of lamentations and tears and woe. (4.) The last conjecture was more vague and undefined, and was probably the resource of those who were impressed with wonder at our Lords words and works, and yet could not bring themselves to acknowledge Him as what He claimed to be. All the four conjectures, it will be seen, fell far short of the recognition of the Christ.
Interpreted in connection with the vision of Dan. 7:13, the words of the question, Whom do men say that I, the Son of Man, am? did, in fact, assume His claim to be the Christ. But it remained to be seen whether the disciples had risen to their Lords meaning in thus speaking of Himself, and would, on their part, adopt that interpretation. The report which they made of the belief of others shows how little, at this time (whatever may have been the case earlier or later), He was regarded as the Messiah by the mass of the people.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
14. Some say They might have said, Some say thou art the agent of Beelzebub. But none but the few malignant Pharisees said that; and they could not indoctrinate the people with so dark a calumny. On the heart of the masses Jesus had at least left a reverent impression of himself.
Jeremias This prophet was held by the Jews to be the greatest of the prophetic class.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
‘And they said, “Some say John the Baptist; some, Elijah; and others, Jeremiah or one of the prophets.” ’
Their reply brings out something about Jewish expectations. We already know about the rumour that Jesus was John the Baptist risen from the dead (Mat 14:2), and it is clear from this that it was quite widespread. Herod believed it out of fear, many, who had been smitten on hearing of his death, believed it out of hope. There was also a great expectation of the return of Elijah, as promised in Mal 4:5-6, a promise that Jesus saw as fulfilled in the coming of John the Baptist (Mat 11:14; Mat 17:10-14, compare Luk 1:17). This made sense to people as in their eyes Elijah had never died (2Ki 2:11). He had been taken up to Heaven. The Jews still await his coming. And clearly there were also various expectations of the return of Jeremiah or other prophets. The background to these expectations come out in Jewish literature. There were, for example, many tales about Jeremiah, In 2Es 2:18 it was stated ‘for your help I will send my servants Isaiah and Jeremiah.’ In 2Ma 15:14 Judas Maccabaeus received a vision of Onias, a former High Priest, who spoke with a venerable and glorious old man and learned that he was Jeremiah the prophet of God ‘who prays much for the people and the holy city’ and who gave to Judas a golden sword as a gift from God with which to strike his enemies. So it is not surprising that some saw Jesus as a returning Jeremiah, especially in view of His expectation of suffering and subjection to the hatred of the Jewish leaders which was reminiscent of Jeremiah, and possibly also because He was seen as a prophet of doom (e.g. Mat 11:20-24; Mat 12:41-42). The expectation of ‘one of the prophets’ demonstrates how expectant the people were that God was going to act. Thus many saw Jesus as an ‘end of the age’ figure. But their beliefs fell short of the reality. Nor did it result in the repentance that alone could have brought them through to the truth.
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
Mat 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. Mat 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 2Ma 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.
Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke
Mat 16:14 f. .] Their opinion is similar to that of Antipas, Mat 14:2 .
] These cannot , therefore, have realized in the person of the Baptist that coming of Elias which was to precede the advent of the Messiah.
] a distinct class of opinion which, whatever may have been the subsequent view, was not at that time understood to be in any way connected with the expected coming of Elias. For , comp. note on 1Co 12:9 ; 1Co 15:40 ; 2Co 11:4 ; Gal 1:6 . As forerunner of the Messiah they expected Jeremiah , who at that time was held in very high repute (Ewald, ad Apoc . XI. 3), or some other ancient prophet (risen from the dead). Bertholdt, Christol . p. 58 f.
.] where we are not to suppose to be understood (Fritzsche), but should rather regard the persons in question as intending to say (in a general way): it is .! without mentioning any one in particular . For , see note on Mat 8:19 .
] from them He expected a very different kind of confession, and He was not disappointed.
Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary
14 And they said, Some say that thou art John the Baptist: some, Elias; and others, Jeremias, or one of the prophets.
Ver. 14. Some say that thou art John, &c. ] His body they saw was not John’s, but they held then (and the Jews to this day hold) the Pythagorean transanimation, or passing of souls out of one body into another. So because they received not the love of the truth, God gave them up to the efficacy of error, even the better sort of them, 2Th 2:11 : for there were those who held Christ neither the Baptist, nor Elias, but a drunkard, a demoniac, &c. Who now can think to escape variety of censures? And why should any stumble at the diversity of opinions touching Christ and his kingdom?
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
14. ] It is no contradiction to this verdict that some called him the Son of David (ch. Mat 9:27 ; Mat 12:23 ; Mat 15:22 ); for either these were or were about to become His disciples, or are quoted as examples of rare faith, or as in ch. Mat 12:23 , it was the passing doubt on the minds of the multitude, not their settled opinion. The same may be said of Joh 7:26 ; Joh 7:31 ; Joh 4:42 . On our Lord’s being taken for John the Baptist, see ch. Mat 14:2 , from which this would appear to be the opinion of the Herodians .
. = . , Luk 9:19 . It was not a metempsychosis, but a bodily resurrection which was believed. On , see note at ch. Mat 11:14 . Jeremiah was accounted by the Jews the first in the prophetic canon (Lightfoot on Mat 27:9 ).
Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament
Mat 16:14 . Reply of disciples : the general effect being: opinions of the people, favourable but crude, without religious definiteness and depth, with no promise of future outcome. ., ., . Historic characters, recent or more ancient, redivivi that the utmost possible: unable to rise to the idea of a wholly new departure, or a greater than any character in past history; conservatism natural to the common mind. All three personages whose return might be expected; the Baptist to continue his work cut short by Herod, Elijah to prepare the way and day of the Lord (Mal 4:5 ), Jeremiah to bring back the ark, etc., which (2 Maccab. Mat 2:1-12 ) he had hid in a cave. Jeremiah is classed with the other well-known prophets ( . .), and the supporters of that hypothesis are called , as if to distinguish them not merely numerically ( ) but generically: a lower type who did not connect Jesus with Messiah in any way, even as forerunner, but simply thought of Him as one in whom the old prophetic charism had been revived.
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson
John. Risen from the dead.
some = others. Greek. allos. App-124.
Elias = Elijah.
others = different ones. Greek. heteros.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
14.] It is no contradiction to this verdict that some called him the Son of David (ch. Mat 9:27; Mat 12:23; Mat 15:22); for either these were or were about to become His disciples, or are quoted as examples of rare faith, or as in ch. Mat 12:23, it was the passing doubt on the minds of the multitude, not their settled opinion. The same may be said of Joh 7:26; Joh 7:31; Joh 4:42. On our Lords being taken for John the Baptist, see ch. Mat 14:2, from which this would appear to be the opinion of the Herodians.
. = . , Luk 9:19. It was not a metempsychosis, but a bodily resurrection which was believed. On , see note at ch. Mat 11:14. Jeremiah was accounted by the Jews the first in the prophetic canon (Lightfoot on Mat 27:9).
Fuente: The Greek Testament
Mat 16:14. – – , some-some-and others) It is not sufficient that we should know the various opinions of others, we ought ourselves to have a fixed faith, which then may make progress, even by the opinions of others, though vain in themselves.– , John-or one of the prophets) There is no need to refer this to the notion of a metempsychosis believed by the Pharisees; for they expected the return of Elias himself in person, who was not dead, or the resurrection of the others from the dead;[735] see ch. Mat 14:2 : Luk 9:8; Luk 9:19.-, Jeremiah) who was at that time expected by the Jews.-, one) i.e. some one indefinitely. They did not think that anything greater could come than they had already had. They did not compare Jesus with Moses.
[735] The suspicion they formed was not that the soul of Elijah or others had passed into the body of Jesus, according to the Pythagorean doctrine of metempsychosis, but an actual return of Elijah in person, or a resurrection of the others named.-ED.
Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament
John: Mat 14:2, Mar 8:28
Elias: Mal 4:5, Mar 6:15, Luk 9:18, Luk 9:19, Joh 7:12, Joh 7:40, Joh 7:41, Joh 9:17
Reciprocal: 1Ki 17:1 – Elijah Mat 3:1 – John Mat 21:11 – This Joh 1:21 – Art thou that Joh 7:39 – Of Joh 9:2 – who
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
6:14
All of the persons named had died, hence the reference to them in connection with Jesus was on the theory of the transmigration of souls. See the explanation of that subject with the comments on chapter 14:2.
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
And they said, Some say that thou art John the Baptist: some, Elias; and others, Jeremias, or one of the prophets.
[But others, Jeremias.] The reason why they name Jeremiah only of all the prophets, we give at Mat 27:9. You observe that recourse is here made to the memory of the dead, from whom the Messias should spring, rather than from the living: among other things, perhaps, this reason might persuade them so to do, that that piety could not in those days be expected in any one living, as had shined out in those deceased persons. (One of the Babylonian Gemarists suspects that Daniel, raised from the dead, should be the Messias.) And this perhaps persuaded them further, because they thought that the kingdom of the Messias should arise after the resurrection: and they that were of this opinion might be led to think that the Messias himself was some eminent person among the saints departed, and that he rising again should bring others with him.
Fuente: Lightfoot Commentary Gospels
Mat 16:14. Some say. The people had never been fully convinced that He was the Messiah. In the presence of opposition they only held that He was a remarkable personage.
John the Baptist. Herods opinion, see chap. Mat 14:2.
Elijah. The forerunner of the Messiah.
Jeremiah, etc. Some really believed that the old prophets would reappear in another form. As His preaching became more denunciatory, they would think of Jeremiah. The whole verse shows the change in popular opinion throughout Galilee.
Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament
Verse 14
Elias. The Jews understood Malachi 4:5, as predicting that Elijah would rise, in person, from the dead, as the forerunner of Christ. The prophecy was, however, fulfilled in John the Baptist, who came in the spirit and power of Elijah.
Fuente: Abbott’s Illustrated New Testament
16:14 And they said, Some [say that thou art] {i} John the Baptist: some, Elias; and others, Jeremias, or one of the prophets.
(i) As Herod thought.
Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes
There were many different opinions about who Jesus was. Some, including Herod Antipas, believed He was the resurrected John the Baptist (Mat 14:2). Others believed He was the fulfillment of the Elijah prophecy, namely, the forerunner of the Messiah (Mal 4:5-6; cf. Mat 3:1-3; Mat 11:9-10; Mat 17:10-13). Some concluded that Jesus was the resurrected Jeremiah probably because of similarities between the men and their ministries. For example, both men were quite critical of Israel generally, and both combined authority and suffering in their ministries. Still other Jews thought Jesus was some other resurrected prophet. It is interesting that the disciples did not say that some said Jesus was the Messiah. That opinion was not a popular one, reflecting the widespread unbelief in Israel.
"What we must recognize is that christological confession was not cut and dried, black or white. It was possible to address Jesus with some messianic title without complete conviction, or while still holding some major misconceptions about the nature of his messiahship, and therefore stopping short of unqualified allegiance or outright confession." [Note: Ibid., p. 365.]