Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Mark 8:29
And he saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am? And Peter answereth and saith unto him, Thou art the Christ.
29. Thou art the Christ ] To the momentous question, But whom say ye that I am? St Peter, as the ready spokesman of the rest of the Apostles, made the ever-memorable reply, Thou art the Christ, the Messiah (Mat 16:16; Luk 9:20), the Son of the living God (Mat 16:16), but in the Gospel written under his eye the great announcement respecting his own memorable confession and the promise of peculiar dignity in the Church the Lord was about to establish, find no place.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
Verse 29. Thou art the Christ.] Three MSS. and some versions add, the Son of the living God.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
Luke reports no more of this than Mark, but Matthew reports it much larger, giving us a further reply of Christ to Peter; See Poole on “Mat 16:15“, and following verses to Mat 16:20, which we have there discoursed largely upon. I shall only say here; That if so great a point as Peters primacy had been understood by Christs disciples of that age to have been settled by that answer of our Saviour, it is likely two of the evangelists would not have omitted an account of it. If they had forgotten it, there is no doubt but some or other of Christs disciples would have put them in mind of it. Our Saviours charge that they should tell no man of him, seemeth to him, that although our Saviour was willing to be taken notice of as a prophet, yet he was not willing as yet to be taken notice of as the Messiah, or Son of God, which latter Matthew reports as added to his confession; and perhaps both Mark and Luke, in their following words, give us the reason, for if we observe it, he immediately falls into a discourse of his suffering, and he might possibly think, that a weak faith of his Divine nature would be overthrown by the sight of his subsequent sufferings. So that he reserved the publication of himself to be the Son of God, until such time when (as the apostle said, Rom 1:4) he was declared so with power, according to the spirit of holiness, by his resurrection from the dead.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
And he saith unto them, but whom say ye that I am?…. It was for the sake of this question he put the former;
[See comments on Mt 16:15];
and Peter answereth and saith unto him, thou art the Christ; the Messiah that was long ago promised and so often prophesied of in the books of Moses and the prophets; and whom the Jews have so much and long expected. This confession of Peter’s in which all the apostles agreed with him speaks out what Jesus really was, and exceeds the most exalted sentiments which the people had of him: he was not the harbinger of the Messiah but the Messiah himself; not Elias in whose Spirit his forerunner was to come and did come; nor any one of the prophets; but he who was spoken of by all the holy prophets; which have been since the beginning of the world. Not one of the various opinions of the people being just, and answering the true character of Jesus, he demands the sense of his disciples which is here given by Peter in their name, and which was right; and on account of which he declared Peter blessed and ascribed his knowledge of him not to flesh and blood but to the revelation of his Father. The Syriac and Persic versions add, “the Son of the living God”; and so Beza found it in one ancient copy; but it may be it is only taken from Mt 16:16;
[See comments on Mt 16:16].
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
Thou art the Christ ( ). Mark does not give “the Son of the living God” (Mt 16:16) or “of God” (Lu 9:20). The full confession is the form in Matthew. Luke’s language means practically the same, while Mark’s is the briefest. But the form in Mark really means the full idea. Mark omits all praise of Peter, probably because Peter had done so in his story of the incident. For criticism of the view that Matthew’s narrative is due to ecclesiastical development and effort to justify ecclesiastical prerogatives, see discussion on Matt 16:16; Matt 16:18. The disciples had confessed him as Messiah before. Thus John 1:41; John 4:29; John 6:69; Matt 14:33. But Jesus had ceased to use the word Messiah to avoid political complications and a revolutionary movement (Joh 6:14f.). But did the disciples still believe in Jesus as Messiah after all the defections and oppositions seen by them? It was a serious test to which Jesus now put them.
Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament
He saith [] . More correctly, he questioned or asked. So Rev. Mark omits the commendation of Peter. See Introduction.
On verses 31 – 33, compare notes on Mt 16:21 – 28.
Fuente: Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament
1)“And He saith unto them,” (kai autos eperota autous) “And He (then) questioned them,” His disciples of the church, who had companied with Him from the beginning, in Galilee, Joh 15:16; Joh 15:27; Act 1:21-22; Act 10:37.
2) “But whom say ye that I am?” (humeis de tina me legete einai) “Then whom do you all say I am?” indicating that He expected from them a different kind of answer, from that of the world, Mat 16:15;
3) ”And Peter answereth and saith unto Him,” iapokritheis ho Petros legei auto) “Peter replying (immediately) said to Him,” on behalf of the rest, as well as himself. Mat 16:16; addressed Him as the anointed one, Lord, 1Co 12:3; Joh 1:41.
4) ”Thou art the Christ.” (su ei ho Christos) “You are (exist as) the (one and only) Christ,” as also confirmed, Joh 6:68-69; Joh 11:27; Mat 14:33; Act 9:20.
Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary
‘And he asked them, “But who do you say that I am?” Peter answers and said to him, “You are the Messiah.” And he charged them that they should tell no man of him.’
Jesus then became more direct and challenged them as to how they saw Him. At the challenge of Jesus (the ‘you’ is emphatic) Peter made clear that, in spite of all their bafflement, they did recognise that He was the Messiah, God’s unique, long promised Deliverer. And it was a title which He accepted as is shown by the fact that He charged them not to let anyone else know. But the title was dangerous for the wrong reasons. It gave the wrong impression of why He had come and would have made Him appear to the Romans and to Herod as bent on violent political success. So while pleased at His disciples’ recognition (Mat 16:17) He wanted the title left well alone. And in Mark Jesus immediately goes on to reinterpret the Messianic idea in terms of the suffering Son of Man. This is the emphasis that Mark is getting over. Jesus is the Messiah (Mar 1:1), but His Messiahship expresses itself through suffering first, and then through final triumph in resurrection and glory. Jesus thus did not want His Messiahship made known at this stage because it would turn men’s minds in the wrong direction. For that was not how men saw the Messiah.
In Matthew the confession is described more emphatically, and there it is clearly a turning point in Jesus’ ministry as is witnessed by ‘from that time —’, but in Mark the main turning point lies in the changing direction of His teaching about Himself, not in the actual confession itself. This is especially significant as Mark has previously tended to stress appellations given to Jesus. Had we not had Matthew we would not have laid such an emphasis on this confession. One reason for extracting it from the disciples as far as Mark was concerned, was precisely so that He could correct the wrong impression it gave. For at this stage the disciples only saw dimly, like the partly healed blind man in Mar 8:22-26.
One prominent ancient manuscript (aleph) adds here ‘the Son of God’. A few add ‘the Son of the living God.’ But the majority of the most ancient manuscripts add nothing. The latter phrase would seem to have been introduced from Mat 16:16, to make the confession here more prominent. But that is not Mark’s intention. He passes quickly on to Jesus reinterpretation. He is not concerned with the title but what it signifies in the purpose and plan of God.
‘The Christ’ (Messiah – anointed One). In the Old Testament those who were set apart for God as either king, priest or prophet were anointed with oil as an indication of their setting apart (Exo 29:7; Exo 29:21; 1Sa 10:1 ; 1Sa 16:13; 1Ki 19:16). They were looked on as ‘the anointed of God’ and therefore not to be harmed (1Sa 24:6; 1Sa 24:10 ; 2Sa 23:1; Psa 105:15 compare Act 23:5). Thus the coming great prophet would be anointed by God (Isa 61:1). It was a term applied in Daniel to a coming ‘prince’ (nagid) who would be cut off and have nothing (Dan 9:25-26). The term came to be applied par excellence to the Coming One who was expected to deliver Israel, as king or ruling priest, or both, who would thus be ‘the Anointed One’, the Messiah. In popular thought he would come and rouse the people by force of arms to bring political freedom to Israel, and the term was probably applied by them to a number of political troublemakers who in the end failed their expectations. Thus the Roman authorities were wary of ‘Messiahs’. But the essence of the idea was that he would come as the Deliverer and Restorer (Joh 4:25-26).
‘He charged them.’ The Greek word is that same as that translated ‘rebuke’ in Mar 8:32-33. It was a stern charge which contained an implied equally stern rebuke on any who disobeyed. Jesus did not want to be linked with Messianic speculations (once He was dead, of course, the situation changed. There was no danger then of misinterpretation, which was why He was then spoken of as the Christ).
Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett
The confession of Peter:
v. 29. And He saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am? And Peter answereth and saith unto Him, Thou art the Christ.
v. 30. And He charged them that they should tell no man of Him. The first answer had been given willingly enough, for the information could be easily supplied. But now Christ puts the direct question to all disciples, emphasizing the pronoun: How about you? What is our opinion and confession? Note: The words are spoken to all apostles, not to a single one, nor to a group; Jesus wanted a frank, clear statement of their belief. The answer of Peter, therefore, can be understood properly only in this sense, as a confession of them all: Thou art the Christ. They hereby declared it as their firm conviction that their Master was the promised Messiah, and ascribed to Him all the attributes with which the prophets had endowed this greatest prophet of all. The confession of Peter is the confession of all true believers of all times. The question, What think ye of Jesus? is the great test question of the ages. By his personal relation to Jesus Christ, the Son of God, will the fate of every person be determined. It makes and posits the difference between believing Christians and unbelievers, the children of this world. People in general consider Christ a mere man, endowed, indeed, with many unusual virtues and with exceptional wisdom, but, after all, a mere man. But the Christians believe that this man is Jesus Christ, by God’s counsel and will the Savior and Redeemer of the world, that He is true God, born of the Father from eternity. After commending the confession very highly, Jesus charged His disciples, He spoke in a tone of menace, almost threateningly, as if expecting foolish talk in this sacred matter, or to prevent the spread of false ideas regarding the work of the Messiah. For that in itself was the most difficult problem, to keep the disciples and others from indulging in all kinds of carnal hopes of a worldly empire, of a kingdom of this world. In our days such an objurgation would be needed with double emphasis, since the work of the millennialists is advancing rapidly and their literature is being spread broadcast over the country. We need no new Gospel, but we need the right, the simple understanding of the old Gospel, unclouded and unspoiled by the dreams of men that have no proper conception either of the person or of the work of Christ.
Fuente: The Popular Commentary on the Bible by Kretzmann
29 And he saith unto them, But whom say ye that I am? And Peter answereth and saith unto him, Thou art the Christ.
Ver. 29. Thou art the Christ ] This was much in few. Here is not Thou art Peter, and upon this rock, &c. Which if either St Mark or St Peter had esteemed (as Papists now do) the foundation of the Christian Church, it had not been here omitted (as Beza well observeth), since it goes for current among the ancients, that St Mark wrote this Gospel at St Peter’s mouth.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
Mar 8:29 . , etc.: a very pointed question given by all the Synoptists in the same terms. The reply, on the other hand, is different in each. Vide on Mat 16:16 . : we have here an aorist participle of identical action with a finite verb in the present tense . It usually goes with the aorist ( cf. Mat 16:17 , ).
Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson
he saith unto them = He was further saying.
the Christ = the Messiah. App-98. .
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
But: Mar 4:11, Mat 16:15, Luk 9:20, 1Pe 2:7
Thou: Mat 16:16, Joh 1:41-49, Joh 4:42, Joh 6:69, Joh 11:27, Act 8:37, Act 9:20, 1Jo 4:15, 1Jo 5:1
Reciprocal: Mar 9:9 – he charged
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
THE GREAT CONFESSION
Whom say ye that I am? And Peter answereth and saith unto Him, Thou art the Christ.
Mar 8:29
This incident arose out of a conversatfon by the way. Happy are those journeys in which time is not wasted on trifles.
I. The variety of opinions about Christ.Every kind of opinion appears to have been current, excepting that one which was true. We may see the same thing on every side at the present day. Christ and His Gospel are just as little understood and are the subject of just as many different opinions now as they were then.
II. The great confession.St. Peter witnessed, Thou art the Christ. His strong faith was not stumbled by our Lords poverty and low estate. His confidence was not shaken by the opposition of scribes and Pharisees, and the contempt of rulers and priests. None of these things moved Simon Peter. He believed that He Whom he followed, Jesus of Nazareth, was the promised Saviour.
Bishop J. C. Ryle.
Illustration
Whom say ye that I am? Not one of us will get to heaven by what other people think and do; no use to us that other people serve God, it is what we think, what we do, how we serve Christ, and the lesson is a straight question for each of us. Who answered? Not they, but St. Peter. Just at that moment he saw the truth; he was afraid of nobody, stopped to think of nobody, answered just what was in his heart, warm, as such an impulsive heart would be. Thou art the Christa rush of words, so quick that they must have come of sincere belief, and the sudden conviction sent by God that all the wonderful things he had seen Jesus do were of God. On a dark night out over the sea there is nothing to be discerned. Suddenly a flash-lightsearchlightshines out full and steadily, and all sorts of craft appearboats which had been there all the time, but unseen because of the dark. The light revealed them! So it was the light of God the Holy Spirit, which on the sudden shined in Peters heart, and he knew and saw Jesus as God (Mat 16:17, and 1Co 2:10). Have we ever seen Jesus in that way? If not, it is because we are in the dark, our eyes cannot pierce the blackness of our sin, our habits, or it may be we are not looking! No light, however strong, could be of any use if we will not turn the way it comes. Peter was looking, so Peter saw; and we shall only have ourselves to blame if we end in the dark.
(SECOND OUTLINE)
WHO IS THIS?
In this utterance it is evident all the twelve concurred. It is difficult for us to understand how decided an advance they have now made upon the position they had formerly occupied, and in what manner the great truth dawned upon their minds. Marks brevity here condenses the fuller saying of the Apostle, as recorded in the other gospels.
I. What think ye of Christ?Consider the immense importance of the answer to be given to this question which Jesus puts to all readers and hearers of the Gospel.
II. Only one answer.There is an utter inadequacy in every answer to this question save one. Your view of Jesus may be a just and scriptural view as far as it goes; but this is insufficient, unless you give the answer which St. Peter gave and Christ accepted.
III. Complete satisfaction.The true answer to this question, when sincerely given, and this alone, can afford complete satisfaction. Upon the Divine character and the Divine mission of Christ you may build your earthly life and your immortal hopes.
Illustration
In the Creed (as Augustine reminds us), the Faith is given to Christians to hold in few words, that by believing they may be made subject unto God; having been made subject, they live rightly; by living rightly, may cleanse their hearts; with a cleansed heart, may understand what they believe. Call thy Faith to mind continually, look into thyself, let the Creed be as it were a mirror unto thee. Therein see thyself, whether thou dost believe all which thou professest to believe, and so rejoice day by day in thy Faith. Let it be thy wealthlet it be, in a sort, the daily clothing of thy soul; for this Faith is at once a garment and a breastplatea garment against shame, a breastplate against adversity. But when we shall have arrived at that place where we shall reign, no need will there then be to say the Creed. We shall see God. God Himself will be our Vision; the Vision of God will be the reward of our present Faith.
Fuente: Church Pulpit Commentary
9
Whom say ye was addressed to all the apostles, but Peter usually was the spokesman and he made the confession of faith on behalf of the others.
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
Jesus stressed "you" when He asked this question. He wanted to know whom the disciples, in contrast to the multitudes, believed He was. Peter spoke for the disciples. The other disciples evidently agreed with his statement and made no objection. This is the first time in Mark that Peter acted as spokesman for the Twelve. Yet from this time on, Peter was the prominent representative of the other disciples. Peter’s name appears twice in Mark before and 16 times after this incident. It occurs five times before this incident in Matthew , 18 times after, four times in Luke before and 16 times after, and four times in John before and 29 times after. [Note: Hiebert, p. 203, footnote 3.]
". . . Peter’s name, ’Rock,’ is ironic, for he thinks he is like a rock. He happens to be the opposite of what his nickname suggests, for he falls asleep and later falls apart under the incriminating remarks of a maid of the High Priest." [Note: Rhoads and Michie, p. 60.]
"Christ" is the English transliteration of the Greek christos that translates the Hebrew masiah meaning "anointed one." Originally this Hebrew term had a broad meaning and included anyone anointed by God, including priests, kings, and prophets. Later in the Old Testament it came to have the technical meaning of the divine Davidic king who would appear to deliver Israel and establish a worldwide kingdom (Psa 110:1; Dan 9:25-26). In Mark, Jesus rarely used this term Himself (cf. Mar 9:41; Mar 12:35; Mar 13:21), and He never used it of Himself. Probably He avoided it because of its political connotations and the popular misunderstanding of it, but Jesus accepted the title when others applied it to Him (cf. Mar 14:6-62; Joh 4:25-26).
". . . the title . . . was particularly fitted to express his true relation both to the OT and to the people of God. . . . the title, applied to Jesus, designates him as the true meaning and fulfillment of the long succession of Israel’s anointed kings and priests, the King and Priest . . .; the Prophet anointed with the Spirit of God, who fulfills the long line of Israel’s prophets, and the One in whom the life of the whole nation of Israel finds its fulfillment and meaning, in whom and for whose sake the people of Israel were, and the new Israel now is, the anointed people of God." [Note: Cranfield, pp. 270-71. See Bateman, pp. 537-59.]
The timing of this question in Jesus’ ministry was very important. The disciples had believed that Jesus was the Messiah from the beginning of their contact with Him (Joh 1:41; Joh 1:51). However their understanding of the Messiah then was the traditional one of their day, namely, that of a political leader. The multitudes likewise failed to understand that Jesus was much more than that. The religious leaders were becoming increasingly antagonistic. The disciples were about to receive new revelation regarding Jesus that would have costly implications for them. Therefore it was necessary for them to confess Jesus’ identity clearly and unmistakably now.
Why did Mark only record that Peter said, "You are the Messiah," rather than his complete statement, "You are the Messiah, the Son of the living God" (Mat 16:16)? Mark’s emphasis throughout his Gospel was on Jesus’ humanity, as we have seen. By omitting the last part of Peter’s statement, Mark did not mean that Peter failed to acknowledge Jesus’ deity. This is precisely what Peter was confessing. However in Mark the term Messiah includes the concept of deity, as it does in the Old Testament. When the disciples said they had found the Messiah before Jesus called them to be His disciples, they used the title in the popular way (Joh 1:41; Joh 1:51). Mark did not record those statements. He presented the disciples using the term "Messiah" in its true biblical meaning for his Gentile readers.
"For the Christians of Rome who read Mark, the confession ’You are the Messiah’ was precisely their profession of faith . . ." [Note: Lane, p. 292, n. 67. Cf. 1 John 5:1.]
Peter’s confession constitutes a high-water mark in the disciples’ understanding of and commitment to Jesus. They still had much to learn about the significance of Jesus being the Messiah that the Old Testament promised and its implications. Nevertheless now Jesus could build on their faith and commitment.
". . . Jesus’ identity is progressively unveiled in three stages, though only from the standpoint of the reader. . . .
"The first stage in the progressive disclosure of Jesus’ identity is the confession of Peter on behalf of the disciples (Mar 8:27-30)." [Note: Kingsbury, p. 43. Cf. 10:46-11:11 (and 12:35-37); and 11:12-15:39.]