Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Matthew 26:68
saying, Prophesy unto us, thou Christ, Who is he that smote thee?
68. Prophesy unto us ] Observe the coarse popular idea of prophecy breaking out, according to which prophecy is a meaningless exhibition of miraculous power. A similar vein of thought shews itself in the second temptation (ch. Mat 4:6).
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
Saying, Prophesy unto us … – Mark informs us that before they said this they had blindfolded him. Having prevented his seeing, they ridiculed his pretensions of being the Messiah. If he Was the Christ, they supposed he could tell who smote him As he bore it patiently and did not answer, they doubtless supposed that they had discovered another reason to think he was an impostor. The word prophesy does not mean only to foretell future events, although that is the proper meaning of the word, but also to declare anything that is unknown, or anything which cannot be known by natural knowledge or without revelation. Luke adds, And many other things blasphemously spoke they against him. There is something very remarkable in this expression. They had charged Him with blasphemy in claiming to be the Son of God. This charge they were not able to prove; but the evangelist fixes the charge of blasphemy on them, because he really was the Son of God, and they denied it.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Verse 68. Prophesy unto us, thou Christ] Their conduct toward him now was expressly prophesied of, by a man whose Divine mission they did not pretend to deny; see Isa 50:6. It appears that, before they buffeted him, they bound up his eyes, See Mr 14:65.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
Saying, prophesy unto us, thou Christ,…. Not that they owned him to be the Messiah; but because he asserted himself to be the Messiah, and his followers believed in him as such, they call him so; and in an ironical and sarcastic way, call upon him to divine, and tell them who the persons were, that used him in this manner; suggesting, that if he was the Christ, or Messiah, he would know all things, and what were done to him:
who is he that smote thee? for they had covered his face, or blindfolded him, as the other Evangelists say, Mr 14:65, and then bid him tell them who smote him last. Christ did not think fit to give them an answer to this question, but he will let them know hereafter, who the particular person, or persons were, that smote him; and when it will appear to all the churches, and to all the world, that he is the Lord God omniscient. Some learned men have observed a, that there was a play formerly used, called by the ancients, , at which, one person having his face covered, the rest smote him; or one put his hands over his eyes, and another smote, and asked him who it was that smote? and such an exercise is yet in being among us, which is commonly called Blindman’s Buff; and such pastime as this the Jews had with Christ; in this ludicrous way did they use him, and made him their sport and diversion, as the Philistines did Samson; but it will cost them dear another day.
a Braunii Select. Sacr. l. 5. Exerc. 2. sect. 38. p. 622, 623. & Capelt. in loc. e Polluce, l. 9. c. 7.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
Thou Christ (). With definite sneer at his claims under oath in 26:63. With uncontrolled glee and abandon like a lot of hoodlums these doctors of divinity insulted Jesus. They actually spat in his face, buffeted him on the neck (, from the fist), and struck him in the face with the palms of their hands (, from , a rod), all personal indignities after the legal injustice already done. They thus gave vent to their spite and hatred.
Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament
(68) Prophesy unto us, thou Christ.The words derived their point from the fact recorded by St. Mark (Mar. 14:65), that the officers had blindfolded their prisoner. Was He able, through His supernatural power, to identify those who smote Him?
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
68. Prophesy unto us He who claims to be chief of prophets should now give us a specimen of his prophetic powers. Matthew omits to tell us that he was blindfolded, so that they were here putting his prophetic powers to a mock test. Compare these insults before the Jews, which alluded to his claims of Messiahship, with the insults by the Romans, which alluded to his political claims. See note on Mat 27:26-30.
Thursday, Midnight.
133. PETER’S DENIAL AND REPENTANCE, Mat 26:69-75 .
Matthew now suspends the narrative in regard to Jesus, and, out of the precise chronological order, gives the sequel in regard to Peter. When the multitude led Jesus to Caiaphas he followed afar off. And when, according to John, they stopped by the way at the house of Annas, while the Sanhedrim were assembling to Caiaphas, he went to the door and was admitted by the porter, through the interference of John, who was known to the high priest. While our Saviour was within the apartment of Annas undergoing examination, (not while he was before Caiaphas,) the events of the three denials are taking place without.
To understand the transaction we must figure to ourselves the ancient mode of building. The Eastern houses are not like ours, built many stories high. They extend in lengthened oblong rooms on the ground; and these oblongs are so built as to enclose a square yard or court in the centre.
The entrance through the street door into the porch leads either through into the court, or into the side rooms. It was in such a court that the fire was made when Peter uttered his first denial; while our Lord may be supposed to be in the reception and business room opposite, that is farthest from and parallel to the street, which must be reached from the porch by crossing the court.
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
Mat 26:68 . ] Differently in Mar 14:65 . But so far as the ., , . . . is concerned, Luk 22:64 agrees with Matthew, although the favourite mode of accounting for this would seem to be that of tracing it to the obscuring influence of a later tradition; in no case, however, is this theory to be applied to the exposition of Matthew, for it would involve a point of essential consequence. According to Matthew, the sport lay in the demand that Jesus as Messiah, and consequently as a prophet (Mat 21:11 ), should tell who it was that had struck Him, though He had no natural means of knowing. This conduct, of course, proceeds on the assumption that the Messiah possessed that higher knowledge which is derived from divine revelation; hence also the scoffing way in which they address Him by the title of . Fritzsche thinks that the prominent idea here is that of fore telling, as being calculated, when thus conjoined with the preterite , to form an acerba irrisio . But that would be more likely to result in an absurda irrisio, unmarked by the slightest touch of humour.
Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary
68 Saying, Prophesy unto us, thou Christ, Who is he that smote thee?
Ver. 68. Saying, Prophesy unto us, thou Christ ] This is daily done to Christ by the children of darkness, which sin securely, and say, Who seeth us? they put it to the trial, as Ananias and Sapphira did, whether they shall be detected.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
Prophesy = Divine. Refers to the past, not to the future.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
Mat 26:68. , saying) most insolently.-, …, who, etc.?) You will hereafter each of you see Whom you have smitten.
Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament
Prophesy: Mat 27:39-44, Gen 37:19, Gen 37:20, Jdg 16:25, Mar 14:65, Luk 22:63-65
thou: Mat 27:28, Mat 27:29, Mar 15:18, Mar 15:19, Joh 19:2, Joh 19:3, Joh 19:14, Joh 19:15, 1Pe 2:4-8
Reciprocal: 1Ki 22:24 – Which way 2Ki 1:9 – Thou man 2Ch 18:23 – Which way Job 30:11 – let loose Psa 69:7 – shame Jer 37:15 – the princes Mat 20:19 – to mock Joh 18:22 – struck Heb 12:2 – despising
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
6:68
Prophesy is from PRO-PHETEUO which Thayer defines at this place, “To utter forth, declare, a thing which can only be known by divine revelation.” In a crowded condition no one person would be distinctly visible so that the belittling act of slapping with the hand could be done without its being seen as to who really did it. (See Mar 5:27-31.) This act was an unmanly challenging of Christ’s knowledge.
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
Mat 26:68. Prophesy unto us, thou Christ. His face was covered, and after each blow, He was asked who gave it. The lower officials probably continued this scoffing amusement for some time. The Roman soldiers were apt in the same kind of mockery (chap. Mat 27:28-31). First, condemned as a blasphemer, He was treated as an outlaw. Luke (Luk 22:65) adds: Many other things blasphemously spake they against Him. The term Christ is used in mockery of His claims, and His silence would be construed into an evidence that He was an impostor. Brutal views of the Messiah were involved in this brutal play. There is a mocking of Him, which cannot strike His human body, though directed against His Person, His office, His mystical body.