Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of 1 Peter 1:11

Searching what, or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ which was in them did signify, when it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should follow.

11. searching what, or what manner of time ] The two words have each a distinct force, the first indicating the wish of men to fix the date of the coming of the Lord absolutely, the second to determine the note or character of the season of its approach. Of that craving we find examples in the question “wilt thou at this time restore the kingdom to Israel?” which was met by our Lord with the answer “It is not for you to know the times and the seasons” (Act 1:6-7), in the over-heated expectations which St Paul checks in 2Th 2:1-12, in the hopes that were met by the mocking scorn which St Peter himself rebukes in 2Pe 3:3-8.

the Spirit of Christ which was in them ] It will hardly be questioned that the name thus given to the Spirit, as compared with Rom 8:9 and Gal 4:6, primarily suggests the thought of prophets who were living and working in the Christian Church rather than of those of the older Church of Israel.

when it testified beforehand the sufferings ] To the English readers these words naturally seem decisive in favour of the current interpretation, and against that which is here suggested. But they seem so only because they are a mistranslation of the original. When St Peter wishes to speak of the “sufferings of Christ,” he uses a different construction (chap. 1Pe 4:13, 1Pe 5:1), as St Paul does (2Co 1:5). Here the phrase, as has been noticed above, is different. St Peter speaks of the sufferings (which pass on) unto Christ. The thought is identical with that of St Paul’s, expressed in terms so analogous that it is a marvel that their bearing on this passage should have escaped the notice of commentators. “As the sufferings of Christ abound toward us,” St Paul says (2Co 1:5), “so also does our consolation.” He thinks of the communion between Christ and His people as involving their participation in His sufferings. Is it not obvious that St Peter presents in almost identical phraseology the converse of that thought, and that the “sufferings” spoken of are those which the disciples were enduring for Christ, and which he thinks of as shared by Him, flowing over to Him? That predictions of such sufferings, sometimes general, sometimes personal, entered largely into the teaching of the prophets of the New Testament we see from Act 11:28; Act 20:23; Act 21:11; 2Ti 2:3 ; 2Ti 2:12. That they dwelt also upon the “glories” that should come after the sufferings lies almost in the very nature of the case. Visions of Paradise and the third heaven, as in 2Co 12:1-5, of the throne and the rainbow and the sea of glass, and the heavenly Jerusalem, like those of St John, were, we may well believe, as indeed 1Co 2:9-10 sufficiently indicates, almost the common heritage of the prophets of the Apostolic Church.

Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges

Searching what – That is, examining their own predictions with care, to ascertain what they meant. They studied them as we do the predictions which others have made; and though the prophets were the medium through which the truth was made known, yet their own predictions became a subject of careful investigation to themselves. The expression used here in the original, rendered what, ( eis tina,) literally, unto what, may mean, so far as the Greek is concerned, either what time, or what people, or what person; that is, with reference to what person the prophecies were really uttered. The latter, it seems to me, is the correct interpretation, meaning that they inquired in regard to him, who he would be, what would be his character, and what would be the nature of the work which he would perform. There can be no doubt that they understood that their predictions related to the Messiah; but still it is not improper to suppose that it was with them an interesting inquiry what sort of a person he would be, and what would be the nature of the work which he would perform.

This interpretation of the phrase eis tina, (unto what or whom) it should be observed, however, is not that which is commonly given of the passage. Bloomfield, Rosenmuller, Doddridge, Whitby, Benson, and Grotius suppose it to refer to time, meaning that they inquired at what time, or when these things would occur. Macknight thinks it refers to people, ( laon,) meaning that they diligently inquired what people would put him to death. But the most obvious interpretation is that which I have suggested above, meaning that they made particular inquiry to whom their prophecies related – what was his rank and character, and what was to be the nature of his work. What would be a more natural inquiry for them than this? What would be more important? And how interesting is the thought that when Isaiah, for example, had given utterance to the sublime predictions which we now have of the Messiah, in his prophecies, he sat himself down with the spirit of a little child, to learn by prayer and study, what was fully implied in the amazing words which the Spirit had taught him to record! How much of mystery might seem still to hang around the subject And how intent would such a mind be to know what was the full import of those words!

Or what manner of time – This phrase, in Greek, ( poion kairon,) would properly relate, not to the exact time when these things would occur, but to the character or condition of the age when they would take place; perhaps referring to the state of the world at that period, the preparation to receive the gospel, and the probable manner in which the great message would be received. Perhaps, however, the inquiry in their minds pertained to the time when the predictions would be fulfilled, as well as to the condition of the world when the event takes place. The meaning of the Greek phrase would not exclude this latter sense. There are not unfrequent indications of time in the prophets, (compare Dan 9:24 ff) and these indications were of so clear a character, that when the Saviour actually appeared there was a general expectation that the event would then occur. See the notes at Mat 2:9.

The Spirit of Christ which was in them – This does not prove that they knew that this was the Spirit of Christ, but is only a declaration of Peter that it was actually so. It is not probable that the prophets distinctly understood that the Spirit of inspiration, by which they were led to foretell future events, was especially the Spirit of Christ. They understood that they were inspired; but there is no intimation, with which I am acquainted, in their writings, that they regarded themselves as inspired by the Messiah. It was not improper, however, for Peter to say that the Spirit by which they were influenced was in fact the Spirit of Christ, so called because that Spirit which suggested these future events to them was given as the great Medium of all revealed truth to the world. Compare Heb 1:3; Joh 1:9; Joh 14:16, Joh 14:26; Joh 16:7; Isa 49:6. It is clear from this passage:

(1)That Christ must have had an existence before his incarnation; and,

(2)That he must have understood then what would occur to him when he should become incarnate; that is, it must have been arranged or determined beforehand,

Did signify – Meant to intimate or manifest to them, edelou or what was implied in the communications made to them.

When it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ – As Isaiah, Isa 53:1-12; Daniel, Dan 9:25-27. They saw clearly that the Messiah was to suffer; and doubtless this was the common doctrine of the prophets, and the common expectation of the pious part of the Jewish nation. Yet it is not necessary to suppose that they had clear apprehensions of his sufferings, or were able to reconcile all that was said on that subject with what was said of his glory and his triumphs. There was much about those sufferings which they wished to learn, as there is much still which we desire to know. We have no reason to suppose that there were any views of the sufferings of the Messiah communicated to the prophets except what we now have in the Old Testament; and to see the force of what Peter says, we ought to imagine what would be our views of him if all that we have known of Christ as history were obliterated, and we had only the knowledge which we could derive from the Old Testament. As has been already intimated, it is probable that they studied their own predictions, just as we would study them if we had not the advantage of applying to them the facts which have actually occurred.

And the glory that should follow – That is, they saw that there would be glory which would be the result of his sufferings, but they did not clearly see what it would be. They had some knowledge that he would be raised from the dead, (Psa 16:8-11; Compare Act 2:25-28) they knew that he would see of the travail of his soul, and would be satisfied, Isa 53:11 they had some large views of the effects of the gospel on the nations of the earth, Isa. 11; Isa 25:7-8; 60; 66. But there were many things respecting his glorification which it cannot be supposed they clearly understood; and it is reasonable to presume that they made the comparatively few and obscure intimations in their own writings in relation to this, the subject of profound and prayerful inquiry.

Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible

Verse 11. The glory that should follow.] Not only the glory of his resurrection, ascension, exaltation, and the effusion of his Spirit; but that grand manifestation of God’s infinite love to the world in causing the Gospel of his Son to be everywhere preached, and the glorious moral changes which should take place in the world under that preaching, and the final glorification of all them who had here received the report, and continued faithful unto death. And we may add to this the ineffable glorification of the human nature of Jesus Christ, which, throughout eternity, will be the glorious Head of his glorified body, the Church.

Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible

Searching what? Whether near or farther off, or what particular part of time. This may relate particularly to Daniels weeks, Dan 9:1-27.

What manner of time; whether peaceable or troublesome, when the people were free or when in bondage; what were the qualities of the time, or signs by which it might be known, Jacob foretells Christs coming, when the sceptre was departed from Judah, Gen 49:10; Isaiah, in a time of universal peace, Isa 2:4; 11:6. This diligent inquiring after the time of Christs coming showed their earnest longing for it.

The Spirit of Christ; so styled, as being of the Son, no less than of the Father, both by eternal procession and temporal mission, Joh 14:16,26; 15:26. This shows, that not only Christ had a being under the Old Testament before his coming in the flesh, (for if Christ were not, there could be no Spirit of Christ), but likewise that Christ is God, because of his inspiring the prophets with the knowledge of future things, which none but God can do.

When it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ; what the prophets did foretell concerning Christ, was not their own conjecture, but what the Spirit did dictate to them.

And the glory that should follow; Greek, glories, in the plural number, i.e. the manifold glory which was to follow upon his many sufferings, the glory of his resurrection, ascension, sitting at the right hand of God, sending the Spirit, &c. Christs suffering and glory are often joined together, Psa 22:6; 110:1-7; Isa 53:3,10-12; Lu 24:26; Phi 2:8,9; Heb 2:9,10; to show that there is the same way (and no other) for the salvation of the members, as for the glory of the Head, viz. by sufferings.

Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole

11. whatGreek, “Inreference to what, or what manner of time.” Whatexpresses the time absolutely: what was to be the era ofMessiah’s coming; what manner of time; what events andfeatures should characterize the time of His coming. The “or”implies that some of the prophets, if they could not as individualsdiscover the exact time, searched into its characteristicfeatures and events. The Greek for “time” is theseason, the epoch, the fit time in God’s purposes.

Spirit of Christ . . . inthem (Ac 16:7, in oldestmanuscripts, “the Spirit of Jesus”; Re19:10). So JUSTINMARTYR says, “Jesuswas He who appeared and communed with Moses, Abraham, and the otherpatriarchs.” CLEMENT OFALEXANDRIA calls Him “theProphet of prophets, and Lord of all the prophetical spirit.”

did signify“didgive intimation.”

ofGreek, “thesufferers (appointed) unto Christ,” or foretold inregard to Christ. “Christ,” the anointedMediator, whose sufferings are the price of our “salvation”(1Pe 1:9; 1Pe 1:10),and who is the channel of “the grace that should come unto you.”

the gloryGreek,“glories,” namely, of His resurrection, of His ascension,of His judgment and coming kingdom, the necessary consequence of thesufferings.

that should followGreek,“after these (sufferings),” 1Pe 3:18-22;1Pe 5:1. Since “the Spiritof Christ” is the Spirit of God, Christ is God. It isonly because the Son of God was to become our Christ that Hemanifested Himself and the Father through Him in the Old Testament,and by the Holy Spirit, eternally proceeding from the Father andHimself, spake in the prophets.

Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible

Searching what, or what manner of time,…. The prophets made a very diligent inquiry into the exact time when Christ should come to work out the salvation of his people; to whom it was made known that his coming should be before the sceptre, or tribe of Judah, and all civil government in it, ceased; and before the second temple was destroyed, into which the Messiah, the messenger of the covenant, was to come, as the Lord and proprietor of it; and that it should be seventy weeks, or 490 years, from a date given in Da 9:24 as it was revealed to the Prophet Daniel; who particularly inquired, and diligently searched into this matter, and was eminently a man of desires this way, as he is styled, Da 9:23 and they not only searched into the exact time, but into the manner and quality of the time when the Saviour should come; and foretold that it would be, with respect to the nations of the world, a time of profound peace; with respect to the Jews, that it would be a time of great blindness, ignorance, unbelief, and hardness of heart; that such would be that generation, or age, for wickedness and barbarity, as could not be declared and expressed; and that few would believe the report of the Gospel; and that the Messiah would be rejected of men, and be wounded, bruised, and put to death; and with respect to the Gentiles, that the Gospel would be preached to them, and that they should seek to Christ, be gathered to him, and hope and trust in him; and that the followers of the Messiah should be persecuted, and greatly distressed, and yet comforted and sustained; and this should be the face of the times, and the state of things, when the salvation should be revealed: and all this, and much more,

the Spirit of Christ in them did signify; or “make manifest”: from whence it appears, that Christ then existed, as he did before there were any prophets, and even from everlasting, being the eternal God; and that the Spirit is from him, as well as from the Father; and as here, so he is often by the Jews a called , “the Spirit of the Messiah”, or “Christ”; and that the Spirit is truly God, since he could declare beforehand the exact time of Christ’s coming, and the finality of the age in which he came, as well as bear a previous testimony to his sufferings and glory; as also, that he was in the prophets, and they were inspired by him, and spake as he moved and directed them:

when, it testified before hand the sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should follow. The “sufferings of Christ” are what the Jews call b , “the sorrows of the Messiah”. These are particularly testified of in Ps 22:1. The glory, or “glories”, as it may be rendered, design his resurrection from the dead, his ascension to heaven, his session at the right hand of God, and having all power, authority, and judgment committed to him; and which are eminently and distinctly prophesied of in Ps 16:10.

a Zohar in Gen. fol. 19. 3. & passim. b T. Bab. Sabbat, fol. 118. 1. & passim.

Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible

Searching (). Present active participle of , late form for older (both in the papyri), uncompounded verb (Joh 7:52), the compound occurring in verse 10 above.

What time or what manner of time ( ). Proper sense of (qualitative interrogative) kept here as in 1Cor 15:35; Rom 3:27, though it is losing its distinctive sense from (Ac 23:34). The prophets knew what they prophesied, but not at what time the Messianic prophecies would be fulfilled.

The Spirit of Christ which was in them ( ). Peter definitely asserts here that the Spirit of Jesus Christ (the Messiah) was in the Old Testament prophets, the Holy Spirit called the Spirit of Christ and the Spirit of God (Ro 8:9), who spoke to the prophets as he would speak to the apostles (Joh 16:14).

Did point unto (). Imperfect active of , to make plain, “did keep on pointing to,” though they did not clearly perceive the time.

When it testified beforehand (). Present middle participle of , a late compound unknown elsewhere save in a writer of the fourteenth century (Theodorus Mech.) and now in a papyrus of the eighth. It is neuter here because is neuter, but this grammatical gender should not be retained as “it” in English, but should be rendered “he” (and so as to Ac 8:15). Here we have predictive prophecy concerning the Messiah, though some modern critics fail to find predictions of the Messiah in the Old Testament.

The sufferings of Christ ( ). “The sufferings for (destined for) Christ” like the use of in verse 10 ( for you).

The glories that should follow them ( ). “The after these things (sufferings) glories.” The plural of is rare, but occurs in Exod 15:11; Hos 9:11. The glories of Christ followed the sufferings as in 1Pet 4:13; 1Pet 5:1; 1Pet 5:6.

Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament

Did signify [] . Imperfect tense : better, was declaring, all along through the prophetic age, in successive prophets. See the same verb in 1Co 3:13; 2Pe 1:14.

When it testified beforehand [] . Only here in New Testament.

Of Christ [ ] . Lit., unto Christ. So Rev., in margin. The sufferings destined for Christ, as in ver. 10 he speaks of the grace, eijv uJmav, unto you; i e., destined to come unto you. Peter was especially concerned to show that the sufferings of Christ were in fulfilment of prophecy, because it was a subject of dispute with the Jews whether the Christ was to suffer (Act 3:18; Act 26:22, 23).

The glory [ ] . Rev., correctly, the glories. The plural is used to indicate the successive steps of his glorification; the glory of his resurrection and ascension, of the last judgment, and of the kingdom of heaven.

Fuente: Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament

1) “Searching what, or what manner of time.” (Gk. Ereunontes) Intently seeking to determine at what time or manner (Gr. poion) or condition of time -the prophets all seem to have earnestly searched the Word for signs of the Lord’s coming. Do we today?

2) “The Spirit of Christ which was in them did signify” -Old Testament saints and prophets are here declared to have had the Spirit of Christ (the Holy Spirit) “in” them. It was the same Spirit that gave them unction to speak and write prophetically 2Pe 1:20-21. The Spirit did (Gk. edelou – make clear) His virgin birth, place of birth, tribe and family, Isa 7:14; Mic 5:2; Luk 1:27-35, Mat 2:1-7.

3) “When it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ.” (Gk. promarturomen) means to bear witness before an event. The omniscient Holy Spirit empowered prophets to do this concerning the coming suffering of Christ Isa 53:1-12

4) “And the glory that should follow.” The Spirit also enabled prophets to foretell that after the cross would come the crown, reign, and glories of the Lord.”

Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary

11. And what they inquired is pointed out when he adds, Searching what, or what manner of time There was a difference between the law and the gospel, a veil as it were being interposed, that they might not see those things nearer which are now set before our eyes. Nor was it indeed proper, while Christ the Sun of righteousness was yet absent, that the full light should shine as at mid-day. And though it was their duty to confine themselves within their prescribed limits, yet it was no superstition to sigh with a desire of having a nearer sight. For when they wished that redemption should be hastened, and desired daily to see it, there was nothing in such a wish to prevent them patiently to wait as long as it pleased the Lord to defer the time. Moreover, to seek as to prophecies the particular time, seems to me unprofitable; for what is spoken of here is not what the prophets taught, but what they wished. Where the Latin interpreters render, “of future grace,” it is literally, “of the grace which is to you.” But as the meaning remains the same, I was not disposed to make any change.

It is more worthy of observation, that he does not say that the prophets searched according to their own understanding as to the time when Christ’s kingdom would come, but that they applied their minds to the revelation of the Spirit. Thus they have taught us by their example a sobriety in learning, for they did not go beyond what the Spirit taught them. And doubtless there will be no limits to man’s curiosity, except the Spirit of God presides over their minds, so that they may not desire anything else than to speak from him. And further, the spiritual kingdom is a higher subject than what the human mind can succeed in investigating, except the Spirit be the guide. May we also therefore submit to his guidance.

The Spirit of Christ which was in them First, “who was in them,” and secondly, “testifying,” that is, giving a testimony, by which expression he intimates that the prophets were endued with the Spirit of knowledge, and indeed in no common manner, as those who have been teachers and witnesses to us, and that yet they were not partakers of that light which is exhibited to us. At the same time, a high praise is given to their doctrine, for it was the testimony of the Holy Spirit; the preachers and ministers were men, but he was the teacher. Nor does he declare without reason that the Spirit of Christ then ruled; and he makes the Spirit, sent from heaven, to preside over the teachers of the Gospel, for he shews that the Gospel comes from God, and that the ancient prophecies were dictated by Christ.

The sufferings of Christ That they might bear submissively their afflictions, he reminds them that they had been long ago foretold by the Spirit. But he includes much more than this, for he teaches us, that the Church of Christ has been from the beginning so constituted, that the cross has been the way to victory, and death a passage to life, and that this had been clearly testified. There is, therefore, no reason why afflictions should above measure depress us, as though we were miserable under them, since the Spirit of God pronounces us blessed.

The order is to be noticed; he mentions sufferings first, and then adds the glories which are to follow. For he intimates that this order cannot be changed or subverted; afflictions must precede glory. So there is to be understood a twofold truth in these words, — that Christians must suffer many troubles before they enjoy glory, — and that afflictions are not evils, because they have glory annexed to them. Since God has ordained this connection, it does not behove us to separate the one from the other. And it is no common consolation, that our condition, such as we find it to be, has been foretold so many ages ago.

Hence we learn, that it is not in vain that a happy end is promised to us; secondly, we hence know that we are not afflicted by chance, but through the infallible providence of God; and lastly, that prophecies are like mirrors to set forth to us in tribulations the image of celestial glory.

Peter, indeed, says, that the Spirit had testified of the coming afflictions of Christ; but he does not separate Christ from his body. This, then, is not to be confined to the person of Christ, but a beginning is to be made with the head, so that the members may in due order follow, as Paul also teaches us, that we must be conformed to him who is the first-born among his brethren. In short, Peter does not speak of what is peculiar to Christ, but of the universal state of the Church. But it is much fitted to confirm our faith, when he sets forth our afflictions as viewed in Christ, for we thereby see better the connection of death and life between us and him. And, doubtless, this is the privilege and manner of the holy union, that he suffers daily in his members, that after his sufferings shall be completed in us, glory also may have its completion. See more on this subject in the third chapter of the Epistle to the Colossians, and in the fourth of the first Epistle to Timothy.

Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary

(11) Searching.This further explains the inquired and searched above; it particularises the object of the inquiry. They knew that they spoke concerning a salvation, but they did not know the details. The present passage is perhaps the most striking in the whole New Testament in regard to the doctrine of prophetic inspiration. Assuming that the prophets did not speak simply of their own human calculation, but somehow under the influence of the Divine Spirit, we are brought to face the question, how far their utterances were their own, and how far suggested to them from on high. The doctrine of Montanism, which has not altogether died out of the Church yet, asserts that from first to last prophecy is superhuman; that every word and letter is forced upon the man by a power not his own, which leaves him no choice. God, and God alone, is responsible for every syllable. The human will and intelligence need not even concur in the message they deliver, nor even be conscious that they are delivering it. Thus Montanus makes God to say through him: Lo, man is as a lyre, and I am as that which strikes the chords: the man is unconscious, and I alone wake. On the other hand, some of the early opponents of Montanism went so far as to say that the inspired writers had a clear and immediate perception, a complete insight into the mysteries which they foretold,that Isaiah, for instance, saw, as plainly as we do, Mary and Jesus in his prophecy of Immanuel. Our present verses show a doctrine between the two. The prophets find themselves impelled to say words which they are conscious of choosing and using, but which they feel to have a deeper meaning than they themselves were conscious of intending. It is clear to them (1Pe. 1:12) that what they meant primarily as applying to present circumstances, was in reality being overruled by the Spirit to apply more fully to the future. But what that future was they struggled, and half in vain, to know. We may apply to them what Keble says of the Greek poets:

As little children lisp, and tell of Heaven,
So thoughts beyond their thoughts to those high bards were given.

What, or what manner of time.If this be right, it must mean, what exact or approximate date. But the simplest translation would be, to whom, or what period, the Spirit of Christ in them was pointing. This would give new significance to the sentence. They were aware that they were speaking of a Messiah; but who the man should be who would hold that office, or at what period of their history he would arise, this was what they longed to know. They foresaw a Christ, but they could not foresee Jesus; they could give to their Christ no definite position in future history. (Comp. Mat. 22:42; Luk. 3:15; Luk. 23:35; Joh. 3:28; Joh. 7:26; Joh. 7:41; Act. 2:36, and often.)

The Spirit of Christ which was in them.They are conscious of a power within them which is not themselves, moving them. And this power is described as the Spirit of Christ. Now, observe that a change has come over St. Peters way of speaking. Hitherto, he has always said, Jesus Christ, his object being to keep constantly before the eyes of these Hebrews the truth which he was the first man to enunciate, viz., Thou art the Christ (Mat. 16:16), that Jesus was the person who fulfilled all that was expected of the Messiah. Christ is not once used by St. Peter (as it is often by St. Paul) as a proper name: it always marks the office, not the person. Therefore we may not prove by this expression two doctrines, however true they may be in themselves, which are commonly sought to be supported by it, viz., the preexistence of our Lord, and the procession of the Holy Ghost from Him as well as from the Father. In spite of a well-quoted passage in Barnabas (1 Peter 5), The prophets had the gift from Him, and prophesied of Him, it cannot here mean, the Holy Ghost given them by our Lord Himself. Besides, it is theologically incorrect to say that Christ as the Anointed had any pre-existence, except as an indefinite hope in the minds of the Hebrews. The Son, the unincarnate Word, pre-existed, but it is Apollinarianism to say that Jesus had any existence before the Incarnation,still more Christ, since it may be doubted whether the Incarnate Word became Christ until His baptism. That, at least, appears to be St. Peters doctrine (Act. 10:38). The Spirit of Messiah, then, at any rate when applied to the ages before Christ came, must have a different meaning. Probably not exactly the Spirit that was to anoint and be in the Messiah, but rather, the Messiah-spirit or the Messianic spirit. The prophets wondered who the man was, and where he would live, to whom this Messianic inspiration which they felt within was pointing. St. Peter himself, we repeat, was the first person who fully knew the answer.

When it testified beforehand.A much more solemn word in the original than it looks in the English, and used by no other writer than St. Peter. It does not mean simply, when it bore witness beforehand; but testifying means an appeal to Heaven to mark and record the words so spoken: when with a solemn appeal it announced beforehand. Was he not thinking of the awful appeal in Dan. 12:7?

The sufferings of Christ.This unduly contracts the fulness of the Greek, which reads, the sufferings for Christ (just as we had before the grace for you), i.e., these sufferings in reserve for Messiah. The Old Testament passages which may be supposed to be chiefly indicated are Isaiah 53 and (still more) Dan. 9:24-26. If it be asked how St. Peter knew that the prophets had these longings and doubts, we answer, that it was not only a probable guess, but the result of a study of Daniel, who records again and again the prophetic agony of his search into the future. Beware of treating the title Christ as a proper name. Eight out of the ten times that St. Peter uses the word by itself, i.e., without Jesus or the Lord, it is in direct connection with suffering (here, and in 1Pe. 1:19; 1Pe. 2:21; 1Pe. 3:18; 1Pe. 4:1; 1Pe. 4:13-14; 1Pe. 5:1). Conversely, he never speaks of the sufferings of Jesus Christ. That is to say, he loves to dwell upon the Passion of our Lord, not in its personal but its official aspect. The striking point is that the Messiah should have suffered thus. It was especially necessary to show this in any effort to retain the faith of the Hebrews. Comp. Luk. 24:26-46 (Peter present); Act. 3:18 (Peter speaking); Act. 17:3 (to Hebrews); Act. 26:23. And we can see a reason for the insistence in St. Peters history. The very same day, apparently, when he had announced his belief that Jesus was the Messiah, he took Him to task for speaking of sufferings and shame. He never could forget the reprimand, like a sword-cut, which he received. The whole Epistle may be said to be an expansion of what Jesus said in answer (Mat. 16:23-27). Some commentators include in this phrase of the sufferings in reserve for Messiah, the thought of the sufferings of the Church as well; but it seems far-fetched, especially when we see the true meaning of the word Christ. Finally, we may add, that some would join very closely together the words for signify and testifying beforehand, which would give us this sense: examining, in reserve for whom, or for what period, the Spirit, with its solemn appeal beforehand, was pointing out these sufferings in reserve for Messiah. This is possible, and keeps the same sense, but it unnecessarily complicates the sentence.

And the glory that should follow.Literally, and the glories after them. The plural glories corresponds to the plural sufferings,the one as multiform as the other; resurrection, ascension, reassumption of the divine glory (Joh. 17:5), triumphs of Church history, restitution of all things. The sufferings and subsequent glories of the Christ form, of course, together the whole of the gospel.

Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)

11. Searching A special point of inquiry related to the time of the advent; what, referring to the date; and what manner, to events preceding and accompanying it, and characterizing the period. The case of Daniel furnishes a notable illustration. Dan 7:16-28; Dan 9:22-27; Dan 12:8.

The Spirit of Christ The Holy Spirit who inspired them. 2Pe 1:21. As he is the Spirit of God, it follows that Christ is God. In his office of revealing the truths relating to Christ, he testified to the prophets of the coming redemption.

Sufferings The term includes not only the fact, but the occasion of it as well, as in consequence of sin, and in voluntarily bearing its penalty. See Isa 53:4-7. The Jews lost sight of the Messiah as a sufferer in their hope of him as a triumphing king, forgetting that through suffering he was to attain his crown. Yet this was the central point to which the institutions and teachings of the Old Testament converged.

Glory Better, glories; meaning, in his victory over death, in his resurrection, his ascension to heaven, his sending the Holy Spirit, and whatever belongs to him in his glorious exaltation to the mediatorial throne, including the conversion, sanctification, and glorification of believers. These, equally with his sufferings, were distinct subjects of prophecy; and the sufferings are represented as introducing the glories.

Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments

‘Searching what time or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ which was in them did point to, when it testified beforehand the sufferings of (or ‘unto’) Christ, and the glories that should follow them. To whom it was revealed, that not unto themselves, but to you, did they minister these things, which now have been announced to you through those who preached the gospel to you by the Holy Spirit sent forth from heaven; which things angels desire to look into.’

For the prophets had within them ‘the Spirit of the Messiah’, as through the Holy Spirit Christ had revealed to them beforehand the truth concerning His coming, and the times that lay ahead, including both His sufferings and all the glories that would follow. And that is why, in the final analysis, the prophets recognised that the time was not yet, and that their prophetic message was not for themselves but for us, and they thus ministered to us. To Peter, as to Jesus and Paul, Christ’s ‘congregation’ (Mat 16:18) is the renewed Israel, so that all the promises concerning Israel apply to us, and it was us who were in God’s mind when the prophets prophesied.

‘Searching.’ The prophets did not just placidly wait for inspiration. They studied the Scriptures. ‘To the law (the torah) and to the testimony. If they speak not according to this word, surely there is no morning for them’ (Isa 8:20). They studied God’s Instruction (the Torah, the first five books of the Bible). They studied the prophets who came before them. E.g. Isa 2:2-4 parallels Mic 4:1-3; Jeremiah regularly takes up the ideas of earlier prophets, as does Daniel specifically (Dan 9:2); and so on. How much more then should we be searching the Scriptures (Act 17:11; 2Ti 2:15; 2Ti 3:15-16).

‘The Spirit of Christ.’ Peter had been present in the Upper Room when Jesus had indicated that the Spirit would come at His behest and in His Name (Joh 14:16; Joh 14:26; Joh 15:26; Joh 16:7) when He had entered into His glory. Thus the Holy Spirit would come from Christ in His glory. But Jesus had at the same time also emphasised that He had previously had that same glory with the Father from Whom He had come (Joh 17:3; Joh 17:5). He was God’s Anointed One from before time began (1Pe 1:20). Thus Peter applies the same idea to the past experiences of the prophets. They too had benefited from Christ sending the Holy Spirit to them from His glory (compare 2Pe 1:21). Thus the use of the term ‘the Spirit of Christ’ links up with the fact that the Spirit had come to them to reveal the ‘sufferings unto Christ’, which were foreknown and determined before the foundation of the world (1Pe 1:20; compare Act 2:23). He was very much involved with the Godhead’s plan of redemption for the world.

‘The sufferings unto Christ.’ The point is that grace has come ‘unto us’ (1Pe 1:10) because of the sufferings that came ‘unto Christ’. Both are God’s activity. But the use of eis (unto), (used instead of saying ‘of Christ’), may also be intended to link Christ’s sufferings with his readers’ sufferings. Suffering had come to Him, and suffering comes to us in His Name (just as the sanctifying Spirit was ‘unto obedience’ so our sufferings are ‘unto Christ’), and both were prophesied of old. For His people share with Him in His sufferings. But in view of the contrast with ‘grace unto us’, and of the references in Act 3:18; Act 17:3; Act 26:23 where there is an emphasis on Christ’s sufferings as ‘fulfilling’ prophecy, we must certainly see the idea as primarily including the sufferings of Christ Himself. Significantly both ‘the Son of Man’ and ‘the Servant of the Lord’, prophetic titles claimed by Jesus, were terms which indicated an individual who came out of suffering (Isa 50:3-8; Isa 52:13 to Isa 53:12; Dan 7:13-14 with 21-22), while at the same time incorporating a group who did the same (Isa 49:3; Dan 7:21-22; Dan 7:25; Dan 7:27; compare Dan 7:17 where the wild beasts are ‘kings’ with 23 where the wild beasts are ‘kingdoms’).

Peter’s emphasis on the ‘suffering’ of Christ in his letter contrasts widely with New Testament emphasis elsewhere. In all his letters Paul only refers three times to the sufferings of Christ, firstly in Rom 8:17, where he writes ‘if we suffer with Him (Christ), we shall also be glorified with Him’; secondly in 2Co 1:5 where ‘the sufferings of Christ abound towards us’; and thirdly in Php 3:10, where Paul desires to enter into ‘the fellowship of His (Christ’s) sufferings’. He does of course refer to the death and sacrifice of Christ in other terminology, but in his letters he clearly reserves the idea of His suffering to times when he is speaking of our participation with Him in His sufferings. Thus He lays no emphasis on the fact of His sufferings as something in itself, but only in relation to His people’s sufferings. It was a little different in his evangelistic preaching for the term is twice applied to his preaching in Acts, both in an evangelistic context. Firstly where he taught ‘from the Scriptures’ that the Christ must suffer (Act 17:3), and secondly where he speaks of the prophets declaring that the Christ must suffer (Act 26:23). In both these cases he is drawing on the Old Testament depictions of the sufferings of the Christ (e.g. Isa 50:3-8; Isaiah 53; Psalms 22; Daniel 7), and the idea of suffering is seen to link with what was prophesied. Interestingly apart from these examples, and in Hebrews, no other letters refer to the ‘sufferings’ of Christ.

Hebrews refers more regularly to the suffering of Jesus/Christ, five times in all. ‘Jesus — was made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death’ (to pathema) ‘tasting death for every man’ (Heb 2:9); He (Jesus) was ‘made perfect through sufferings’ (Heb 2:10); ‘though He (Christ) was a Son yet He learned obedience through the things that He suffered’ (Heb 5:8); He (Christ) did not offer Himself as an atoning sacrifice annually otherwise He must often have suffered since the foundation of the world (Heb 9:26); in order that He (Jesus) might ‘sanctify His people by His own blood He suffered outside the gate’ (of Jerusalem – Heb 13:12). Here three of the references are to His suffering as a sacrificial offering on our behalf, while two refer to the purifying effects of suffering on Jesus Christ Himself. Note also that three of the references (a different three) refer to the sufferings of ‘Jesus’, while two refer to the sufferings of ‘Christ’. In the first two cases it is because He is there being closely allied with His manhood and His incarnation. He is suffering because He was made man, but in the third case the reason for the difference is not so obvious, although it might have been in order to stress His oneness with His people for whom He was dying as a human being. However what is clear in these references is the emphasis on the fact that Jesus Himself did suffer as a human being, and that He suffered as the Messiah.

But to Peter the idea of the sufferings of Christ is more central and constantly emphasised. In his short letter he refers to it seven times, always with reference to ‘Christ’, and with different emphases. The first example parallels Paul’s usage in Acts, referring to the prophecies of the sufferings of the Messiah, and connecting that suffering with His people. ‘The Spirit of Christ — testified beforehand the sufferings unto Christ and the glories that should follow’ (1Pe 1:11). The second connects His sufferings with His people’s sufferings, in a similar way to Paul in his letters. ‘Christ suffered for you leaving you an example that you should follow in His steps’ (1Pe 2:21). The third lifts Him up as an example of how to behave under duress. ‘When He (Christ) suffered He did not threaten’ (1Pe 2:23). In the fourth case He is dying as a sacrificial offering as in Heb 13:12; compare Heb 9:26. ‘Christ also suffered for sins once, the righteous for the unrighteous, that He might bring us to God’ (1Pe 3:18), although again it is connected with the suffering of His people. In the fifth case His suffering is used as a call to His people to be willing to suffer as He did, for their own good, as it will be an aid towards their being made perfect, as it was for Christ in Heb 2:10; Heb 5:8. ‘Forasmuch then as Christ has suffered in the flesh, arm yourselves with the same mind, for he who has suffered in the flesh has ceased from sin (by dying with Him)’ (1Pe 4:1). In the sixth case suffering for His sake, and thus participating in His sufferings, is a cause for rejoicing because of the ultimate joy and glory that it will bring. ‘Insomuch as you are partakers of Christ’ sufferings, rejoice, that at the revelation of His glory also you may rejoice, with exceedingly great joy’ (1Pe 4:13). In the seventh case there is a very personal reminiscence of His sufferings. ‘I — who am — a witness of the sufferings of Christ, who am also a partaker of the glory that shall be revealed’ (1Pe 5:1).

Thus he has seven references in all, and all teaching varying lessons, although most also connect with His people’s sufferings. We may possibly also add Act 3:18, where Peter speaks of ‘the things that God foreshowed by the mouth of all the prophets, that His Christ should suffer’, which ties in with 1Pe 1:11 (compare Luk 24:26). Thus to Peter the sufferings of the Messiah lay at the root of every aspect of the Gospel, as something deeply imbedded in his own heart. Like Hebrews Peter reveals himself as more intensely aware of the fact that ‘Christ’ did actually ‘suffer’, yet nevertheless it is not the suffering itself which is in most cases the central emphasis in what he has to say, except in so far as it is an example to us. While the sufferings of His Master do clearly affect him, they do not prevent him from applying the lessons that arise. His thought is not sentimental. He is equally concerned with why He suffered.

This great emphasis on His suffering ties in with what happened at Caesarea Philippi, when Jesus spoke of His coming suffering in a way that upset Peter enough to make him denounce the idea, only for Peter to be put firmly in his place (Mat 16:21-23), and with the fact that Jesus did later constantly emphasise to His disciples His coming suffering (Mat 17:12; Luk 17:25; Luk 22:15; Luk 24:26), and with the fact that Peter was a witness of His sufferings, especially in the Garden of Gethsemane and in the courtyard of the High Priest. Peter thus had cause to be very much aware of the sufferings of Christ, and of its importance in the scheme of things.

‘The glories that should follow.’ These glories will arise both in this world and the next. For the glories that would follow in this world see Isa 53:10-12 a and Psa 22:22-31 where we enter into the aftermath of Messiah’s coming. ‘He will see His seed’ as they receive life through Him (Isa 53:10 b). ‘The pleasure of the Lord will prosper in His hand’ as the Good News goes out to the whole world, and the many become obedient to Him (Isa 53:10 b). ‘By His humiliation many will be accounted righteous’ (Isa 53:11). The meek will eat and be satisfied and will praise God (Psa 22:6). ‘All the ends of the earth will remember and turn to the Lord, and all the kindreds of the nations will worship before Him, for the Kingly Rule will be the Lord’s and He will rule over the nations’ (Psa 22:27-28). For the glories to come in the next world compare 1Pe 1:4; 1Pe 1:7 ; 1Pe 1:21; 1Pe 4:13-14; 1Pe 5:1; Rom 8:18; Rom 8:29-39.

‘The Spirit of Christ.’ The fact that Peter can speak in terms of ‘the Spirit of Christ’ speaking through the prophets clearly indicates his recognition of the pre-existence of Christ, for elsewhere such activity is connected with ‘the Spirit of God’ or ‘the Spirit of the Lord’ or ‘the Holy Spirit’, Who is also the Spirit of Christ (Rom 8:9) because He makes Christ known to men.

And we are told here that these words of the prophets have come to us through those who have preached the Gospel by the Holy Spirit Who has been sent down from Heaven, those who are the successors to the prophets. They have come through evangelists and teachers. For He has made clear to those who have preached the Gospel what the teaching of the prophets was really pointing to. There is here a clear reference to Pentecost. Not only did the Prophets receive their guidance from the Spirit, but the same Spirit was now at work through Christian preachers and Christian prophets. From the day of Pentecost onwards Peter had been aware of the consequences of that new beginning. The Kingly Rule of God was coming with power (Mar 9:1) through the proclamation of the Gospel empowered by the Holy Spirit. And he recognises that ‘these things’ are of such vital importance that it is the desire of all who are in Heaven to ‘stoop down and look into them’ and understand them fully.

Note On The Use Of The Term Prophets.

Some have sought to interpret these verses as referring exclusively to New Testament prophets. But this view must be seriously questioned:

Firstly because to any Jew like Peter the term ‘the prophets’ standing on its own would always indicate the Old Testament prophets (they called their Scriptures, ‘the Law and the Prophets’). And this was so even though there had been large numbers of ‘prophets’ in Judaism which were not included in this their natural use of the term in 1st century AD, whom for that purpose they ignored. Compare also 2Pe 3:2 where the holy Prophets precede the Apostles. All knew who were in mind when a Jew spoke of ‘the Prophets’

Secondly because it is unlikely that an Apostle of Jesus Christ would have so spoken of New Testament prophets as seen independently of the Apostolate (he would in that case have said ‘the Apostles and prophets’. It is ‘first Apostles, and then prophets’ – 1Co 12:28). Note that he does not say ‘we prophets’.

Thirdly because he speaks of what they prophesied about as spoken ‘not unto themselves but unto you’. But had this referred to New Testament prophets it would have been very much for themselves as well as for Peter’s readers. It would have been intended for them all. The point is that the prophets had not benefited because they died before these things happened.

Fourthly because the indications are that the reason that the New Testament prophets were distinctive from other Christian preachers was because they spoke ‘under inspiration’ (1Co 14:29-32) and received direct divine intimations (Act 11:28; Act 13:2; Act 20:23; Act 21:10-11) not because they searched diligently. Searching diligently was not a special attribute of New Testament prophets. All Christians, and especially preachers, were supposed to search diligently. But all knew that the Old Testament prophets distinctively researched the Scriptures, and cited previous or contemporary prophets.

Fifthly because while the term ‘the Spirit of Christ’ could certainly be seen as applicable to the Spirit, especially as sent by Christ to His Apostles (Joh 20:22) and the wider group (Act 2:1-4), and to the church as a whole (Gal 4:6; compare Rom 8:9) in response to what He had promised in John’s Gospel, nevertheless when connected with the New Testament prophets it is always as ‘the Spirit’ or ‘the Holy Spirit’ (Act 11:28; Act 13:2; Act 20:23; Act 21:11 ; 1Co 12:3-4; 1Co 12:7-8; 1Co 12:11 ; 1Co 12:13, as applying to 1Co 12:28; 1Co 14:29-32), and there is a distinction between Christ and the Holy Spirit (1Co 12:12-13). But see Act 16:7, ‘the Spirit of Jesus’, although that may simply be signifying behaving in a Christlike way because Peter was already evangelising there. The Spirit of Jesus is not, however, necessarily the equivalent of ‘the Spirit of Christ’. On the other hand there is good reason for seeing ‘the Spirit of the Messiah’ as referring to the inspiration by which the Old Testament prophets proclaimed the Messiah’s coming.

End of note.

Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett

1Pe 1:11. The Spirit of Christ It is well worthy of our notice, that the Spirit which dictated to the prophets is called the Spirit of Christ; which both proves his existence before his incarnation, and his supreme Godhead; and illustrates the full view that he himself had of all he was to do and suffer under the character of our Redeemer. The apostle, in discoursing so largely concerning the prophets, seems to have a special reference to the converted Jews, who would enter more thoroughly into this part of his reasoning, than the converted Gentiles. It has been with great propriety observed, that if the prophets and righteous men of old, to whom the word of God came, did not clearly understand the things they foretold, but employed themselvesinsearchingandexaminingthe prophetical testimonies of the Spirit which was in them; it is evident that the prophesies themselves were obscure: and for good reason they were so; because they were not delivered so much for their sakes, as for the sake of those who lived in the times when they were accomplished.

Fuente: Commentary on the Holy Bible by Thomas Coke

1Pe 1:11 stands in close grammatical connection with the preceding, being conjoined with the verba finita of 1Pe 1:10 ; what follows states the object of the .

] refers to the time itself, to its character. [70] Steinmeyer (appealing without justification to Rom 4:13 ) explains incorrectly: vel potius; vel, ut rectius dicam.

] not: “ referred to” (Luth. or significaret, Vulg. ), but: “ revealed ,” as Heb 9:8 ; Heb 12:17 , etc. Vorstius supplies: gratiam illam exstituram, de qua et ipsi vaticinabantur; this is incorrect. is conjoined rather directly though not as its real object, but as a secondary determination with . An object is not to be supplied (neither nor , Steiger), as is in intimate union with the participle (de Wette, Brckner, Wiesinger, Schott), by which “at once the act of and its object are exactly determined” (de Wette).

] By this the revealing subject is mentioned: the prophets only expressed what the Spirit within them communicated to them; “the is to be taken as a special act of ” (Wiesinger), cf. besides, Mat 22:43 and 2Pe 1:21 . [71]

This Spirit is characterized as the , not in that it bears witness of Christ (Bengel: Spiritus Christi: testans de Christo; thus also Grotius, Augustine, Jachmann), for is the subjective and not the objective genitive, but because it is the Spirit “which Christ has and gives” (Wiesinger); see Rom 8:8 . The expression is to be explained from the apostle’s conviction of the pre-existence of Christ, and is here used in reference strictly to the . . . directly conjoined with it. Barnabas, chap. 1 Peter 5 : prophetae ab ipso habentes donum in illum prophetarunt.

[70] Bengel: in quod vel quale tempus; quod innuit tempus per se, quasi dicas aeram suis numeris notatam: quale dicit tempus ex eventibus variis noscendum.

[71] Hofmann is indeed not mistaken in saying that . . is a designation of the Spirit working prophetic knowledge in the prophets, and not of a constant indwelling of it, only it must be observed that the expression here employed says nothing as to how or in what manner the Spirit dwelt in the prophets.

REMARK.

By far the greater number of the interpreters rightly see in the term here applied to the Spirit a testimony to the real pre-existence of Christ. Not so de Wette, who finds in it merely the expression of the view “that the work of redemption is the same in both the O. and N. T., and that the Spirit of God at work in the former is identical with the Spirit of Christ;” and Weiss (pp. 247 249), who explains the name thus: that the Spirit which was at work in the prophets was the same as “that which Christ received at His baptism, and since then has possessed;” similarly Schmid also ( bibl. Theol . p. 163), “the Spirit of God which in after time worked in the person of Christ.”

Weiss seeks to prove, indeed, that “Christ had in the pre-existent Messianic Spirit an ideal, or in a certain sense a real pre-existence,” but in this way reflex ideas are attributed to the apostles, which certainly lay far from their mind. Besides, Weiss himself admits that in 1Co 10:4 ; 1Co 10:9 , reference is made to the pre-existent Christ; but it cannot be concluded from Act 2:36 that Peter did not believe it. Schott, too, in his interpretation, does not abstain from introducing many results of modern thought, when he designates . . here as the Spirit “of the Mediator continually approaching the consummation of salvation(!), but as yet supernaturally concealed in God.” Steinmeyer does not touch the question of the pre-existence of Christ; he finds an adequate explanation of the expression in the remark of Bengel, although he takes as a subject. gen.

] This verb. compos. occurs nowhere else in the N. T., and in none of the classical writers; the simplex means properly: “to call to witness;” then, “to swear to, to attest;” is therefore: “ to attest beforehand .” [72]

The object of . is ] On this Luther remarks, that it can be understood of both kinds of suffering, of those which Christ Himself bore, as well as of those which we endure. The majority of interpreters conceive the reference to be to the former: Oecumenius, Theophyl., Erasmus, Grotius, Aretius, Piscator (cf. Luk 24:26 ), Vorstius, Hensler, Stolz, Hottinger, Knapp, Steiger, de Wette, Brckner, Steinmeyer, Wiesinger, Weiss, Luthardt, Schott, Fronmller, Hofmann, etc.; but not so Calvin: non tractat Petr. quod Christo sit proprium, sed de universali ecclesiae statu disserit; Bolten and Clericus explain it of the sufferings of the Christians; the same position is taken up in the first edition of this commentary. Since the main tendency of the paragraph, 1Pe 1:10-12 , is to give special prominence to the glorious nature of the believers’ , the latter view is favoured by the connection of thought. But, on the other hand, there is nothing opposed to the assumption, that the apostle here mentions the facts on which the is founded, as the substance of the testimony of the Spirit of God in the prophets. The expression too, which must be interpreted on the analogy of , goes to show that by it are to be understood the sufferings which were ordained or appointed to Christ (Wiesinger).

On the plural , Bengel says: Plurale: gloria resurrectionis, gloria ascensionis, gloria judicii extremi et regni coelestis; thus also Grotius, de Wette, Steiger, Wiesinger, Weiss, Schott. But it might be more correct to explain the plural in this way, that as the one suffering of Christ comprehends in it a plurality of sufferings, so does His a plurality of glories. Hofmann: “by is to be understood the manifold afflictions in which the one suffering of Christ consisted, while the manifold glorifyings which go to make up His glory are included under .” [73] Besides, it must be noted that the suffering of Christ is always designated by the plural (with the exception of in Heb 2:9 , where we have: ), but His glory always by the singular .

As the and , of Christ are the object of , so by , to which the of the prophets was directed, the time is referred to when this salvation would actually be accomplished. For this reason, then, , 1Pe 1:10 , cannot again be repeated in (Wiesinger, Schott), as if the referred directly to the appearance of the ; the apostle’s thought is rather this, that in their search as to the time of the sufferings, etc. of Christ, the prophets had before their eyes, as that with respect to which they sought to obtain knowledge, the of which believers were to be made partakers.

[72] Schott justly remarks that and are not identical with , but that they denote the “action of the Spirit,” by means of which “He communicated to the prophets the prophecies after which they were to inquire.” But he is evidently mistaken when he asserts that this identification takes place in the above interpretation. Nor is Schott warranted in supposing that in . the apostle emphatically shows that the manner of communication “was a revelation in the form of speech , and not an inward vision.”

[73] Hofmann’s opinion, that Peter had chiefly in his mind the passages in Isa 49:6-7 ; Isa 52:15 , arises from the fact that he applies specially to the Gentiles.

REMARK.

Definite corroboration of the ideas here expressed is to be found in the Book of Daniel, chap. Dan 12:4 ; Dan 12:9-10 ; Dan 12:13 . The fundamental presupposition is, that the “ when ” of the fulfilment was unknown to the prophets; according to 1Pe 1:12 , all that was revealed to them was, that it would take place only in the times to come. De Wette asserts too much when he says, that searching as to the time cannot be predicated of the genuine prophets of ancient Judaism, but of Daniel only, who pondered over the seventy years of Jeremiah. But although the words of Daniel may have given occasion for the apostle’s statement, still that statement is not incapable of justification. If the apostles searched as to the time when the promises of Christ would receive accomplishment, why should it not be presupposed that similarly the prophets, too, inquired into that which the testified beforehand to them, more especially as to the of its fulfilment?

Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary

11 Searching what, or what manner of time the Spirit of Christ which was in them did signify, when it testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ, and the glory that should follow.

Ver. 11. Searching what, &c. ] , with greatest sagacity and industry, as hunters seek for game, and as men seek for gold in the very mines of the earth.

The sufferings of Christ, &c. ] Macarius was utterly out in saying that the prophets knew that Christ should be born for man’s redemption, but that they knew nothing of his death and sufferings. Isaiah writes of them more like an evangelist than a prophet, and is therefore called the “evangelical prophet.”

Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)

11 .] searching (the part. takes up again the two verbs, with a view to mark more definitely the object of their search, now about to be described) at (towards, with reference to) what or what sort of ( as identifying, as describing. “ Quod innuit tempus per se , quasi dicas ram suis numeris notatam: quale dicit tempus ex eventibus variis noscendum.” Bengel. And Justiniani: “Non modo quod sed etiam quale pacisne an belli tempore, servitutis an libertatis, quo denique reipublic statu. Et quidem David, ‘Orietur,’ ait, ‘in diebus ejus justitia, et abundantia pacis:’ et in eandem sententiam Esaias, ‘Conflabunt gladios suos in vomeres,’ &c. &c.”) season was declaring (signifying, revealing) the Spirit of Christ which was in them (the Spirit of Christ, i. e. Christ’s Spirit, gen. subj.: the Spirit which Christ has and gives, being He who reveals all things relating to Christ and the purposes of the Father: see Mat 11:27 ; Joh 16:14-15 , which passages, though in their normal sense they apply to N. T. revelations, yet in their declarative and abstract truth regard the Spirit’s office in all ages. Cf. also Act 16:7 . “Prophet ab ipso habentes donum in illum prophetarunt,” Ep. Barnab. c. 5, p. 735), testifying beforehand the sufferings regarding (spoken of with reference to; or, as before, ‘destined for’) Christ (it is disputed, whether be meant of Christ individually, or of Christ mystically, including His Church. The former view is taken by c., Thl., Erasm., Grot., Aret., Piscator, Vorst, Bengel, Steiger, De Wette, al.: the latter by Luther, Calvin, Huther, Wiesinger. Our answer may be thus given. The expression is not indeed strictly parallel with that in Col 1:24 , : see note there: but still the two are so far analogous that they may throw light one on the other. In both, as in ch. 1Pe 2:21 ; 1Pe 3:18 ; 1Pe 4:1 ; 1Pe 4:13 ; 1Pe 5:1 , and in many other places where Christ’s sufferings are spoken of, is used without , not thereby precluding the personal designation of our Lord, but still carrying into prominence the official and mediatorial: and on this latter account, if the context seem to require it, including also the wider mystical sense in which Christ’s sufferings are those of the whole aggregate of His spiritual body. The question for us then is, Does the context here require this latter extended meaning? And to this we must answer decidedly in the negative. The , are the contents of the gospel history, the sufferings and triumphs of Christ. And it was of these as appointed for ( ) Him as means of bringing in the grace which was appointed for ( ) you, that the prophets testified beforehand), and the glories after these ( sufferings ) (on these , see ch. 1Pe 3:18 ; 1Pe 3:22 ; 1Pe 5:1 . “Gloriam resurrectionis: gloriam adscensionis: gloriam judicii novissimi et regni clestis.” Bengel.

If it be asked, what prophets are meant, we may reply, the prophets generally. Of one of them, who did prophesy of the sufferings of Christ, and the glories after them, viz. Daniel, we have it related, that he “understood by books the number of the years” destined for the desolations of Jerusalem: and our Lord declared that many Prophets and kings desired to see the things which his disciples saw, and saw them not):

Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament

1Pe 1:11 . The construction of . . . and of . is doubtful. takes up . . . (10); the run of the sentence seems to naturally connect with . and with . So Vulgate in quod vel quale tempus significare spiritus praenuntians passiones . But if be unfit to be a direct object and ., perhaps, to have one of this kind. must be governed by . It is possible also to dissociate from and to render in reference to whom and what time the Spirit signified ; cf. Eph 5:22 , , Act 2:25 . If be taken with , the two words correspond to the two questions of the disciples, When ? and what shall be the sign ? (Mar 13:4 ). Failing to discover at what time , the prophets asked at what kind of time ; their answer received a certain endorsement in the eschatological discourse of Jesus (Mar 13:5 ff. and parallels). , cf. Heb 9:8 , . The word implies discernment on the part of the student (Heb 12:27 , ). What time did point unto of R.V. is unjustifiable; a simple accusative is required, i.e. , either (1.) . or (2.) . . ( being deleted as dittography of – ) or (3.) . [ ], the full phrase is a natural one for a Christian to employ Christ being here the proper name = Jesus Christ and not the title. in the O.T. was commonly interpreted as referring to Our Lord; and XC. is a frequent v.l. for [144] [145] . Hence Barnabas ( v.q .), . only occurs here. If (the proper sense) determine the meaning of the compound render “ protesting (calling God to witness) beforehand ”. It usage justify confusion with , be witness [ of ] render testifying beforehand or ( publicly .) , the doctrine that the Messiah must suffer and so enter into His glory was stated by the prophets ( e.g. Isa 3 .) but neglected by the Jews of the first century (Joh 12:34 ). Believers were reminded of it by the risen Lord Himself (Luk 24:26 ; Luk 24:46 ) and put it in the forefront of their demonstratio evangelica (Act 3:18 ; Act 17:3 ; Act 26:23 ). The phrase corresponds exactly to the original : standing for the (periphrasis for construct. state). , the plural glories implies some comprehension of the later doctrine, e.g. , John, which recognised that the glory of Jesus was partially manifested during His earthly life; although the definition subsequent reflects the primitive simplicity and if it be pressed the glories must be explained as referring to the resurrection ascension triumph over angels as well as the glorious session (Joh 8:21 f.). , so St. Peter argues that Joel prophesied the last things ( cf. Sir 48:24 ) and that David foresaw and spoke concerning the resurrection (Act 2:17 ; Act 2:31 ; cf. Act 3:24 ). Compare Dan 9:2 ; Dan 12:4 , etc., for examples of partial revelations of this kind proper to apocalyptic writers. Heb. l.c. supr. credits the Patriarchs with the same insight. , negative and positive presentation of the past for emphasis is common in this Epistle. , “they were supplying, conveying the revelations granted to them primary the prophecy and the revealed solution of it alike,” cf. 1Pe 4:10 , . The context shows, if the word does not itself connote it, that herein they were stewards of God’s manifold grace channels of communication. For Acc. with . cf , 2Co 3:3 , , 2Co 8:19 , , from which it may be inferred that . connotes what the context here suggests, cf. , have been at the present dispensation declared ; . is taken from the great proof text relating to the calling of the Gentiles, , Isa 52:15 cited Rom 15:21 . “But St. Peter probably meant more by the word the phrase includes not only the announcement of the historical facts of the Gospel, but, yet more, their implicit teachings as to the counsels of God and the hopes revealed for men” (Hort). . , God spake through the evangelists ( cf. Isa 61:1 , apud Rom 10:15 ) as through the prophets, Mat 1:22 ; Mat 2:15 , etc. Both are simply God’s messengers. For accusative after . cf. use of = gladden with good tidings (Isa 61:1 ). So (Mat 11:5 ; Luk 7:22 ) is substituted for the original (Luk 4:18 = Isa 61:1 ) if the prophecy which Jesus appropriated and which forms the basis of the Christian use of the word. . . . The evangelists preached by the Spirit , as Stephen spoke (Act 6:10 ), . In Sir 48:24 , if the Greek and Hebrew texts are trustworthy, the simple Dative ( i.e. Isaiah) corresponds to : cf. insertion of here in v. l . The visible descent of the Holy Spirit is contrasted with the indwelling Spirit which inspired the prophets. The Holy Spirit was given, when Jesus was glorified, as never before, (Joh 3:34 ). Vulgate renders by ablative absolute. , after expanding the first part of Jesus’ saying (and its context ye see ) St. Peter at last reaches the second in its secondary form. He combines with it as its proper Scripture, the prophecy of Enoch (ix. 1) . St. Paul spiritualises the idea “to me this grace was given to preach to the Gentiles in order that now might be made known to the principalities and the authorities in heavenly places by means of the Church the very-varied wisdom of God” (Eph 3:8 ff.). St. Peter reproduces faithfully the simplicity of the original and represents this longing as still unsatisfied since the Church is not yet perfect or complete. It thus becomes part of the sympathetic groaning and travailing of the whole creation (Rom 8:22 f.). In Rom 8:21 St. Peter states on the same authority that Christ preached to the spirits in prison; adding that when he ascended all angels were subjected to Him. The apparent contradiction is due to the discrepancy between the ideal and its gradual realisation and not to an imperfect coordination of these conceptions of the universal sovereignty of God. See 1Co 15:25 f., Heb 2:7 f., not yet do we see has lost its suggestion of peeping through its use in the LXX for look forth though it is not employed by them in the places where God is said to look down from heaven (Psa 14:2 , etc.). The patristic commentators seem to hold by the Evangelist rather than the Apostle in respect to the saying, as they refer exclusively for illustration to the O.T. figures, Moses (Heb 11:26 ), Isaiah (Joh 12:41 ). Oecumenius notes that Daniel is called by the angel a man of longings (Dan 9:25 ). That the angels of Peter are due to Enoch and secondary seems to be borne out by the Targum of Ecc 1:8 , “In all the words that are prepared (about) to come to pass in the world the ancient prophets wearied themselves and could not find their ends”.

[144] Codex Mosquensis (sc. ix.), edited by Matthi in 1782.

[145] Codex Ephraemi (sc. v.), the Paris palimpsest, edited by Tischendorf in 1843.

Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson

Searching. Greek. ereunao. See Joh 5:39.

what = unto (App-104.) what.

Spirit. App-101.

of Genitive of Relation. App-17.

Christ. App-98. These words “of Christ” should come after “signify”.

signify = point. Greek. delco. See 1Co 1:11.

testified beforehand. Greek. promarturomai. Only here.

of = with reference to. App-104.

that should follow = after (App-104.) these things.

Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics

11.] searching (the part. takes up again the two verbs, with a view to mark more definitely the object of their search, now about to be described) at (towards, with reference to) what or what sort of ( as identifying, as describing. Quod innuit tempus per se, quasi dicas ram suis numeris notatam: quale dicit tempus ex eventibus variis noscendum. Bengel. And Justiniani: Non modo quod sed etiam quale pacisne an belli tempore, servitutis an libertatis, quo denique reipublic statu. Et quidem David, Orietur, ait, in diebus ejus justitia, et abundantia pacis: et in eandem sententiam Esaias, Conflabunt gladios suos in vomeres, &c. &c.) season was declaring (signifying, revealing) the Spirit of Christ which was in them (the Spirit of Christ, i. e. Christs Spirit, gen. subj.: the Spirit which Christ has and gives, being He who reveals all things relating to Christ and the purposes of the Father: see Mat 11:27; Joh 16:14-15, which passages, though in their normal sense they apply to N. T. revelations, yet in their declarative and abstract truth regard the Spirits office in all ages. Cf. also Act 16:7. Prophet ab ipso habentes donum in illum prophetarunt, Ep. Barnab. c. 5, p. 735), testifying beforehand the sufferings regarding (spoken of with reference to; or, as before, destined for) Christ (it is disputed, whether be meant of Christ individually, or of Christ mystically, including His Church. The former view is taken by c., Thl., Erasm., Grot., Aret., Piscator, Vorst, Bengel, Steiger, De Wette, al.: the latter by Luther, Calvin, Huther, Wiesinger. Our answer may be thus given. The expression is not indeed strictly parallel with that in Col 1:24, : see note there: but still the two are so far analogous that they may throw light one on the other. In both, as in ch. 1Pe 2:21; 1Pe 3:18; 1Pe 4:1; 1Pe 4:13; 1Pe 5:1, and in many other places where Christs sufferings are spoken of, is used without , not thereby precluding the personal designation of our Lord, but still carrying into prominence the official and mediatorial: and on this latter account, if the context seem to require it, including also the wider mystical sense in which Christs sufferings are those of the whole aggregate of His spiritual body. The question for us then is, Does the context here require this latter extended meaning? And to this we must answer decidedly in the negative. The , are the contents of the gospel history, the sufferings and triumphs of Christ. And it was of these as appointed for () Him as means of bringing in the grace which was appointed for () you, that the prophets testified beforehand), and the glories after these (sufferings) (on these , see ch. 1Pe 3:18; 1Pe 3:22; 1Pe 5:1. Gloriam resurrectionis: gloriam adscensionis: gloriam judicii novissimi et regni clestis. Bengel.

If it be asked, what prophets are meant, we may reply, the prophets generally. Of one of them, who did prophesy of the sufferings of Christ, and the glories after them, viz. Daniel, we have it related, that he understood by books the number of the years destined for the desolations of Jerusalem: and our Lord declared that many Prophets and kings desired to see the things which his disciples saw, and saw them not):

Fuente: The Greek Testament

1Pe 1:11. , to what, or what manner of) The disjunctive particle expresses the great eagerness of the prophets: (to know) whether those things were about to happen in their time or afterwards: 1Pe 1:12. What () denotes the time absolutely, so to speak, an era marked out by its own numbers: what manner of () speaks of the time to be known from various events. Dan 9:2.- , the Spirit of Christ) testifying of Christ; Rev 19:10. The Spirit of God, Gen 1:2, is called the Spirit of Messias in the work entitled Baal Hatturim.–, the sufferings) Hence comes salvation.- ) the sufferings about to happen to Christ.- ) after these sufferings.-, glories) In the plural. The glory of His resurrection; the glory of His ascension; the glory of the last judgment and of the kingdom of heaven.

Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament

the Spirit: 1Pe 3:18, 1Pe 3:19, Rom 8:9, Gal 4:6, 2Pe 1:21, Rev 19:10

the sufferings: Psa 22:1-21, Psa 69:1-21, Psa 88:1-18, Isa 52:13, Isa 52:14, Isa 53:1-10, Dan 9:24-26, Zec 13:7, Luk 24:25-27, Luk 24:44

the glory: Gen 3:15, Gen 49:10, Psa 22:22-31, Psa 69:30-36, Psa 110:1-6, Isa 9:6, Isa 9:7, Isa 49:6, Isa 53:11, Isa 53:12, Dan 2:34, Dan 2:35, Dan 2:44, Dan 7:13, Dan 7:14, Zec 8:18-21, Zec 14:9, Joh 12:41, Act 26:22, Act 26:23

Reciprocal: Neh 9:30 – by thy spirit Psa 40:7 – in the Psa 110:7 – therefore Isa 55:5 – he Dan 8:15 – sought Dan 12:8 – but Zec 7:12 – sent Mat 13:35 – I will utter Mat 26:24 – Son of man goeth Mar 10:37 – in Mar 12:36 – by Luk 9:22 – General Luk 9:31 – spake Luk 10:24 – many Luk 22:22 – truly Luk 23:42 – thy Luk 24:26 – General Joh 1:16 – of his Joh 4:38 – other Joh 5:39 – they which Joh 15:15 – all Act 1:16 – which the Act 2:31 – seeing Act 3:18 – those Act 7:52 – which showed Act 8:35 – preached Act 10:17 – while Act 10:43 – him Act 24:14 – believing Act 26:6 – the promise Rom 1:4 – according Rom 8:24 – but hope 1Co 2:7 – even 1Co 15:3 – according 1Co 15:4 – according Gal 3:17 – the covenant Gal 3:23 – the faith Phi 1:19 – the Spirit Phi 4:5 – your Col 3:16 – the word 1Ti 1:11 – glorious Heb 2:6 – in Heb 9:9 – the time Heb 10:15 – General Heb 11:26 – the reproach Heb 12:2 – for 1Pe 1:10 – and 1Pe 1:21 – gave Rev 3:1 – he that Rev 22:6 – the holy

Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge

1Pe 1:11. This repeats the thoughts of the preceding verse, with the addition of predictions concerning the personal sufferings of Christ which were necessary for the salvation of man. (See Psalms 22 and Isaiah 53.)

Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary

1Pe 1:11. Searching what, or what manner of time, or better, searching with reference to what (season), or what kind of season. This participial clause, introduced by the simple form of the in-tenser compound verb earnestly searched, takes up the prophetic study and specifies the particular point to which it was directed. It was the question of the era at which this grace was to come. Both pronouns refer to the word season. They are not to be dealt with separately, as if the what meant which person, and the what manner of pointed to the time (so Peile, Mason, etc.). In that case the man in whom their expected Messiah was to appear would, as well as the date of his coming, be what they wish to ascertain. But the object of the prophetic reflection is here defined simply as the time itself, or the kind of timea phrase meaning not (as Steinmeyer) the time or rather the kind of time, but, in a descending climax, the time, or, failing that, the kind of time. By diligent reflection these prophets sought to discover the precise period (whether soon or late), or, if that were denied them, at least the signs of the timesthe kind of era (whether, e.g., one of peace or one of war) at which the revelation given them of the destined admission of the Gentile world into Israels grace was to be made good.

the spirit of Christ fit them. This denotes the source of the communications which formed the subject of the study. So far, therefore, it also explains the impulse under which they both studied and declared them. They rose on the minds of the prophets in virtue of a power which, though in them, was not that of their own intelligence. The men were conscious that those future things of grace which they saw inwardly came to them not as the forecastings of their own sagacity, but as the communications of a revealing Agent. Hence they both searched them for themselves, and prophesied of them to others. The revealing Power in them is designated the Spirit of Christ, not in the sense of the Spirit that speaks of Christ (Augustine, Bengel, etc.), but in the sense of the Spirit that belongs to Christ, or possibly the Spirit that is identical with Christ. The designation is to be taken in the breadth which naturally belongs to it (cf. Rom 8:9, etc.). It is not to be reduced, contrary to the analogy of the Epistles, to anything so subjective as the Messiah-Spirit, or the Messianic Spirit (Mason), nor, on the other hand, is it used here with a view to the procession of the Third Person of the Trinity (Cook). Its point is caught rather in the well-known sentence of the Epistle of Barnabas (chap. 5)the prophets having the gift from (Christ) Himself prophesied in reference to Him. Peter does not draw any distinction here between the Spirit of Christ as a purely official title, and the Spirit of Jesus, or the Spirit of Jesus Christ as the personal title, so that the designation should mean nothing more than that the Spirit of the Messiah (unidentified with the Christ of history) was in the prophets. He indicates rather that the Revealing Agent who gave the prophets their insight into a grace to come was Christ Himselfthe very Christ now known to the Church as the subject of O. T. prophecy and the finisher of salvation. This is in accordance with analogous modes of statement in Peter (1Pe 3:20) and Paul (1Co 10:4; 1Co 10:9), as well as with the doctrine of the Reformed Church that the same Being has been, in all ages, the Revealer of God and the Minister of light and grace to the Churchthe Word of God, the Logos, pre-incarnate, incarnate, or risen. It is admitted, therefore, by cautious exegetes like Huther, that the great majority of interpreters are right in recognising here a witness to the pre-existence of Christ, and to His pre-incarnate activity in the Church. Other expositions which deal with the term Spirit of Christ, as if it were identical simply with Spirit of God, come short of Peters intention here. More is expressed than the general identity of the work of grace in the O. T. with that in the N. T., or the identity of the Spirit of God in the former with the Spirit of Christ in the latter (de Wette), or the idea that the Spirit, who worked in the prophets, was the same Spirit of God that Jesus received at His baptism, and since then has possessed (Schmid, Weiss, etc.).

was declaring. The action of the Spirit in the prophets is described first by a verb which, though used often in a less definite sense, has here probably the force which it has in 1Co 3:13 (of the day that shall declare every mans work), and in 2Pe 1:14 (of Christ showing Peter that he must shortly put off this tabernacle). This operation of the Spirit is further explained by the phrase

when it testified beforehand, or rather attesting beforehand. The verb is one of extremest rarity, scarcely known indeed elsewhere, whether in the N. T., in Ecclesiastical Greek, or in the Classics. It appears to have a definite and solemn force, explaining the inward declaration of the Spirit of Christ in the prophets to have taken a form which their consciousness could neither mistake nor withstand, the decided form of an attestation of certain facts of the future. It says nothing beyond this, however, and does not necessarily imply (as is supposed by Schott, etc.) that, in Peters view, speech and not inward vision was the medium by which the Spirits communications were conveyed to the prophets minds. The future things thus attested are described as the sufferings unto Christ (i.e destined, or in store, for Christ), and the glories after these. But whose sufferings and glories? Some take them to be those of believers, and translate the clause, the sufferings (borne by Christians) in reference to Christ. Calvin (as also Luther so far, Wiesinger, and originally Huther) hold them to be those of the Church as the mystical Christ, or rather those of Christ and the Church as mystically one. An analogy is then sought in Pauls statement about filling up that which is behind of the afflictions of Christ (Col 1:24). The use of the official mediatorial name, Christ, both there and here (instead of the personal Jesus Christ), is also supposed to intimate that the Subject in view is not the Christ of history, but the Mediator in His official capacity, so that the phrase suggests the mystical application to Christs spiritual body. Others (e.g. Plumptre) point to the different form of expression used by Peter when he speaks of Christs individual sufferings (1Pe 4:13; 1Pe 5:1), and regard the present sentence as the converse of Pauls, as the sufferings of Christ abound in us, etc. (2Co 1:5), what believers endure for Christs sake being viewed here as shared by Christ Himself. So Plumptre would translate it, the sufferings passing on to, or flowing over to, Christ. All this, however, brings in ideas foreign to the context, which speaks of those things as already reported to the readers, obviously as the burden of the preaching which made them Christians. It is not necessitated by the use of the distinctive name Christ. It does not suit the statement that the thing which the prophets searched into was the time of these sufferings. For the Church was always more or less a suffering Church, though the sufferings of Messiah were both future to the prophets and a perplexity to Israel. It is also inconsistent with the analogy of the cognate phrase in 1Pe 1:10, the grace unto you. Hence most interpreters are right in understanding the sufferings to be those of Christ Himself. The glories, therefore, will also be those which were destined by God to come to Christ, in the train and as the reward of those sufferings. The reward of Christ is regularly expressed by the singular, glory. The unusual plural, glories, is chosen here, either in reference to the several steps of His glorification, in His resurrection, ascension, session at Gods right hand, and Second Advent (so Weiss, Schott, etc.), or simply as a balance to the other half of the clause, the standing phrase for what Christ had to endure being the plural form, sufferings. The communications, therefore, unmistakeably attested by the Spirit of Christ to the minds of the prophets, concerned a Messiah who was destined to obtain glory only through suffering. A suffering Messiah was in any case a conception alien to the Israelite mind. A Messiah who, by His suffering, was to bring grace to the world outside Israel was still more so, and what the prophets strove to apprehend by diligent reflection on the revelations made to them was not the fact itself (which was too clearly borne in by the Spirit upon their consciousness to admit of doubt), but the period at which it should come to pass. The communications particularly in view, therefore, are probably those made to prophets like Isaiah, who, in his great Passional (Isa 52:13 to Isa 53:12), speaks of the sprinkling of the nations.

Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament

Verse 11

Searching what or what manner of time, &c.; that is, what time, or what manner of time. The distinction, however, which was intended to be marked by these two forms of expression, is not understood. It has been supposed that Peter alludes here to Daniel 9:22,24, where the prophet is represented as earnestly desirous of understanding when and in what manner the promised redemption was to come.–The Spirit of Christ; the spirit of prophecy respecting Christ.

Fuente: Abbott’s Illustrated New Testament