About 25 miles north of Bethsaida lies the site of ancient Caesarea Philippi at an elevation of some 1,150 feet above sea level. The water flowing from a nearby cavern is one of the main sources of the Jordan River and passes through a beautiful green plain. To the northeast, Mount Hermon rises to an elevation in excess of 9,200 feet above sea level.
Notes:
See http://bibleplaces.com/banias.htm for pictures and comments regarding Caesarea Philippi.
See http://bibleplaces.com/mthermon.htm for pictures and comments about Mount Hermon.
On the way to Caesarea Philippi, Jesus appears to have walked a short distance away from his disciples, seeking privacy for prayer. When they thereafter approached him, he asked them who people thought the Son of Man was. Based on their interaction with others, they responded that some believed him to be John the Baptist raised from the dead, others that he was Elijah, and still others Jeremiah or one of the other ancient prophets who had been resurrected. He then asked, “But who do you say I am?” (Matthew 16:13-15; Mark 8:27-29; Luke 9:18-20; see the Notes section regarding Luke 9:18.)
With full conviction, Peter spoke up, “You are the Christ [the Messiah], the Son of the living God.” Jesus pronounced him happy or fortunate, referring to him as Simon son of Jonah (Simon bar-Jonah). On account of his faith, Peter was fortunate, finding himself in a truly desirable or enviable state. Pointing to the reason for his faith, Jesus continued, “Flesh and blood did not reveal this to you, but my Father in the heavens [did].” The faith in Jesus to which he had come did not have a human source (“flesh and blood”). He had not been won over by means of someone’s impressive argumentation. It was through Jesus that he had seen the works of his Father, and Simon responded in faith to the divine revelation. (Matthew 16:16, 17; Mark 8:29; Luke 9:20)
As Simon had identified Jesus as the “Christ, the Son of the living God,” Jesus identified Simon by the name he had given him, “You are Peter [or Cephas].” (Matthew 16:18; John 1:42) The name “Peter” or “Cephas” means “rock.” Simon, when expressing his unqualified conviction respecting Jesus, revealed that he had been rightly given the name Peter. Although many had abandoned Jesus, Peter had continued to prove himself to be firm as a rock in his faith or trust.
After saying, “You are Peter,” Jesus added, “And upon this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not prevail against it. I will give you the keys of the kingdom of the heavens, and whatever you bind on earth will be bound in the heavens, and whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in the heavens.” (Matthew 16:18, 19)
The “church” is the congregation or the community of believers. According to the book of Acts (2:14-41; 3:11-26, 4:4; 5:14-16, 42; 6:2, 7), Peter’s testimony led thousands to put faith in Jesus. Then, in association with the other apostles, he devoted himself to teaching fellow believers. Therefore, one could conclude that Peter is the rock on which the church is built, for it was his witness to Jesus as the Christ, the Son of the living God, that set the new community of believers on a solid foundation.
The testimony of the Scriptures as a whole, however, indicates that Jesus is the primary foundation on which the community of believers is built. (1 Corinthians 3:10, 11; Ephesians 2:19-22; 1 Peter 2:4-8) Therefore, Jesus’ words may be understood as meaning, “And on this rock [the one whom you acknowledged to be the Christ, the Son of the living God], I will build my church.” In that case, the language would somewhat parallel an earlier statement of Jesus, “Pull down this temple, and in three days I will raise it.” The unbelieving Jews misinterpreted these words to mean that Jesus was referring to the literal sanctuary, whereas he meant “the temple of his body.” (John 2:19-21) Accordingly, just as Jesus could refer to himself when saying “this temple,” he could also have done so when using the expression “this rock.”
At death, believers come to be in Hades or the realm of the dead. From a human standpoint, they then find themselves in a place comparable to one that is locked by gates and from which they cannot escape. Because their resurrection is certain, however, the “gates of Hades” cannot prevail against them (as members of the community of believers) or keep them permanently sealed off from life.
The “keys of the kingdom of the heavens” would be “keys” that unlocked the opportunity to become part of the heavenly kingdom, the realm where God is Sovereign and reigns by means of his appointed king, Jesus Christ. (Compare Isaiah 22:22, where Eliakim is spoken of as receiving the “key of the house of David”; see the Notes section for additional comments.) Entrusted with the testimony about the Son of God, Peter came into possession of the “keys of the kingdom” and on the day of Pentecost (after Christ’s resurrection) used them as he bore witness to Jews and proselytes. (Acts 2:14-40) Later, he was divinely commissioned to use them again in being first to testify about Jesus to Gentiles. (Acts 10:9-43)
The context does not specifically identify the nature of the binding and loosing. One might conclude on the basis of Peter’s having the keys that this would involve opening or closing the opportunity to enter the realm where God reigns through Christ and that the spirit-directed action of Peter would be confirmed in heaven.
In the case of Ananias and Sapphira, for example, Peter’s judgment of them (based on what God’s spirit enabled him to discern about their lying) was confirmed in heaven. The use of his “binding” authority led to their death and kept them out of the kingdom of the heavens. Moreover, it served to frighten many who were not genuine in their faith from associating with the community of believers. (Acts 5:1-11, 13) So, while the testimony about Christ, accompanied by validating miracles, unlocked the opportunity for entrance into the kingdom of the heavens, the disciplinary measures served to lock out persons who would have corrupted the community of believers.
In Matthew 18:15-19, the context regarding binding and loosing relates to sin committed within the community of believers. The “loosing” refers to forgiving an individual’s sin, whereas the “binding” denotes letting the record of sin stand against the person. Anyone who was “loosed” remained in the community of believers, but those who were “bound” ceased to be a part thereof and so had no share in the kingdom or the realm where God reigns by means of his Son.
Notes:
Only Luke 9:18 mentions that Jesus was alone while praying. Most manuscripts of Luke use a form of the word syneimi, meaning “be with” when commenting about the disciples. This suggests that, although Jesus was alone, the disciples were with or near him. Some manuscripts, however, have a form of synantáo, meaning “meet,” “come upon,” or “happen,” indicating that the disciples approached him after he had finished praying.
In the case of Eliakim, his being entrusted with the “key of the house of David” seems to indicate that he had oversight of the king’s chambers. He must have possessed the authority to determine who might or might not be accepted into royal service or who might be granted or denied access to the palace complex. Similarly, in Peter’s case, the “keys” Christ gave him related to his being entrusted with full knowledge of the requirements for entering the kingdom of the heavens.
The community of believers, though solidly built on Christ, benefited from the authority with which Peter had been entrusted. In its infancy, the congregation needed to be protected from corrupt elements that could have impeded its being firmly established within and beyond the borders of Israel and that could have brought about its ruin. Once the kind of authority Peter exercised under the guidance of holy spirit (as did the other apostles, including Paul) no longer existed, sham believers, although continuing to increase in numbers, could not destroy the true congregation. Throughout the centuries, persons with genuine faith in Christ have continued to point others to the apostolic testimony (first conveyed through Peter) that has been preserved in the Scriptures.
The Greek passive participles for “bound” and “loosed” are in the perfect tense. Therefore, some have concluded that Peter would be carrying out what had already been determined in heaven. In his expanded translation, Kenneth S. Wuest conveyed this significance with his rendering, “shall have been already bound in heaven” and “shall have already been loosed in heaven.”
Under the guidance of God’s spirit, the “binding” and “loosing” always would have harmonized with God’s will. This “binding” and “loosing” would not have meant that acts stemming merely from the exercise of human authority would afterward have been divinely confirmed or sanctioned.
Jesus firmly charged the disciples not to tell others that he was the “Christ of God.” He then spoke openly about what lay ahead of him in Jerusalem. He would be subjected to much suffering. The elders of the nation, chief priests, and scribes would reject him. He would be killed but would rise from the dead on the third day. (Matthew 16:20, 21; Mark 8:30-32; Luke 9:20-22)
The disciples could not imagine that this could possibly take place. Peter took Jesus aside, intending to correct his thinking. “Gracious to you, Lord [May God be favorably disposed to you; may God mercifully spare you; or, God forbid],” said Peter. “Never will this happen to you.” (Matthew 16:22; Mark 8:32)
His well-meaning rebuke conflicted with God’s will respecting his Son, and Jesus responded with a strong rejection. He turned and, with his eyes focused on the disciples, rebuked Peter. “Get behind me, Satan! You are an obstacle to me, for you are not thinking the things of God, but those of men.” (Matthew 16:23; Mark 8:33) Unwittingly, Peter had made himself like Satan, a resister or opposer. His messianic expectations were much like that of other fellow Israelites, and so he could not envision a rejected and suffering Messiah. Not as yet having come to fully grasp the things of God, he acted like an obstacle that stood in Jesus’ way. The Son of God determined to let nothing sway him from doing his Father’s will, which included laying down his life.
According to Mark 8:34, the disciples were not the only ones who had been following Jesus, and he called both the disciples and many others to him to speak to them about the requirements of discipleship.
To follow Jesus meant to disown or deny oneself, accepting him as Lord or Owner and living in harmony with his example and teaching. That could include suffering for his sake. Jesus said that the individual would have to “lift up his beam [staurós daily, Luke 9:23] and follow me.” (Matthew 16:24; Mark 8:34)
Those who heard his words knew that crucifixion was a dreadful punishment. The condemned man would be forced to carry the beam (to which he would later be nailed or tied) to the place of execution, where he would be subjected to mockery and die an agonizing death. Accordingly, to lift up the beam meant to start a course that would lead to reproach and suffering as a follower of Christ.
To save one’s soul would signify to preserve one’s life in a manner that would dishonor Christ and, therefore, would lead to the loss of life as one whom he approved. It would denote the forfeiture of the real life that is associated with the enjoyment of an enduring relationship with the Son of God and his Father. (Matthew 16:25; Mark 8:35; Luke 9:24)
Whoever lost his soul or life for the sake of Christ and the “glad tidings” (the message that focused on the Son of God) would find it, as the individual would have secured his hold on eternal life, maintaining a never-ending relationship with God and his Son. His resurrection would be a certainty. (Matthew 16:25; Mark 8:35; Luke 9:24)
Emphasizing how great the loss would be if one lost his soul, Jesus continued, “What benefit would it be for a man to gain the whole world but to forfeit his soul? Or what will a man give in exchange for his soul?” Nothing in the mundane system would be worth the forfeiture of the soul or the real life. All the valuables of the world would be insufficient to redeem it. There is no price that could be offered in exchange for one’s soul. (Matthew 16:26; Mark 8:36, 37; Luke 9:25)
For Jesus’ hearers, this was a matter for sober consideration. He, the “Son of Man,” would “come in the glory of his Father.” Accompanied by angels, he would act in judicial capacity, recompensing each person according to his conduct. He would then be ashamed of the people of that generation who had been ashamed of him and his words or teaching, having revealed themselves to be adulterous (unfaithful to God) and sinful by persisting in unbelief despite the evidence that he was indeed the Son of God. (Matthew 16:27; Mark 8:38; Luke 9:26)
On becoming a man, Jesus had given up the glory or splendor associated with his existence in the very form of his Father. (Philippians 2:6, 7; Hebrews 1:3) Upon his return, however, he would again be in possession of that splendor or the glory that his Father has. As the exalted Lord and Judge by his Father’s appointment, he would recompense his faithful disciples and pass condemnatory judgment on those who sought to preserve their soul by denying him.
Among those who heard his words, some would not “taste” or experience death before they had seen the “Son of Man coming in his kingdom,” the “kingdom of God coming in power,” or (according to one fifth-century manuscript reading of Luke 9:27) the “Son of Man coming in his glory.” (Matthew 16:28; Mark 9:1; see the Notes section regarding Luke 9:27)
Jesus’ words have been variously interpreted, with some concluding that the destruction of Jerusalem by the Roman armies in 70 CE proved to be the manifestation of the judgment of the glorified Christ. It should be noted, however, that believers then living did not experience relief from all distress but continued to suffer for the sake of Christ. The horrible suffering the Jews in besieged Jerusalem experienced did not prove to be a recompense according to individual behavior. The horrors of famine and war indiscriminately affected everyone, with no distinction being made between the vilest of men and those who had tried to live uprightly based on their knowledge of God’s law and who had come to Jerusalem to observe the Passover.
Based on the narrative that follows, it appears preferable to view the fulfillment to have been the transfiguration that Peter, James, and John witnessed. Linking Jesus’ words to the transfiguration would also fit the comment in 2 Peter 1:16-18 (NRSV). “We did not follow cleverly devised myths when we made known to you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but we had been eyewitnesses of his majesty. For he received honor and glory from God the Father when that voice was conveyed to him by the Majestic Glory, saying, ‘This is my Son, my Beloved, with whom I am well pleased.’ We ourselves heard this voice come from heaven, while we were with him on the holy mountain” Then, specifically indicating that the transfiguration constituted a confirmation or preliminary fulfillment of Jesus’ coming in glory, 2 Peter 1:19 (NRSV) says, “So we have the prophetic message more fully confirmed.” In his translation, J. B. Phillips paraphrased Peter’s words, “The word of prophecy was fulfilled in our hearing!”
About a week after having spoken the previously recorded words, Jesus took Peter, James, and John to a high mountain. (Regarding the difference in the number of days, see the Notes section.) As there is no mention of travel away from the vicinity of Caesarea Philippi, this mountain likely was one of the lower elevations of Mount Hermon and not its snowcapped top. At the location where they halted their ascent, Jesus prayed, and Peter, James and John rested and fell asleep. On waking up during the night, they saw Jesus transfigured before them. His face shown more brightly than the sun, and his garments appeared whiter than any laundryman could have made them. In the darkness, the brilliance of Jesus’ face and the dazzling whiteness of his garments must have been exceptionally impressive. With Jesus, Moses and Elijah appeared and spoke about the “exodus” he would experience at Jerusalem. (Matthew 17:1-3; Mark 9:2-4; Luke 9:28-32)
The “exodus” probably referred to Jesus’ death at Jerusalem, which led to his subsequent departure from the earth after his resurrection. Moses, through whom the law was given to Israel, could fittingly represent the law, and Elijah could represent the prophets. Both the law and the prophets pointed forward to the coming of the Messiah and provided the needed information to identify him.
When Moses and Elijah were about to part from Jesus, Peter spoke up, “Lord [Rabbi, Mark 9:5; Master, Luke 9:33], it is good for us to be here.” He then suggested erecting “three tents,” one for Jesus, one for Moses, and one for Elijah. Considering the location, these “tents” could only have been shelters made from branches and foliage, possibly resembling the kind of booths made for the festival of tabernacles. (Matthew 17:4; Luke 9:33)
According to the account, Peter, in his overwhelmed state of awe, did not know what to say. Possibly the idea of “tents” suggested itself to him because he wanted the experience to continue. (Mark 9:6; Luke 9:33)
The sight made Peter, James, and John fearful. It must have resulted in a sense of great wonderment and awe. While Peter was still speaking, a luminous cloud appeared above them and began to descend. As the disciples entered the cloud, fear gripped them. From the cloud, they heard the words, “This is my Son, the beloved [the chosen one, Luke 9:35), with whom I am pleased. Listen to him.” (Matthew 17:5; Mark 9:7; Luke 9:34, 35; see the Notes section regarding Luke 9:35.)
The disciples fell to their knees and prostrated themselves, with their faces touching the ground. They were very fearful or filled with extraordinary awe. Jesus approached them and touched them, reassuring them with the words, “Get up and fear not.” When they looked around, they only saw Jesus. (Matthew 17:6-8; Mark 9:8)
During the descent from the mountain with Peter, James and John, Jesus instructed them to say nothing to anyone about the vision they had seen until he would rise from the dead. They heeded his directive, but among themselves talked about what this rising from the dead could mean. The three disciples had not as yet grasped the clear message that Jesus would be put to death but would thereafter rise on the third day. (Matthew 17:9; Mark 9:9, 10; Luke 9:36)
Having seen Elijah, the disciples asked why the scribes said that he must come first (that is, before the Messiah). In reply, Jesus acknowledged the reality of Elijah’s coming and his restoration of all things (as had been written regarding him [in Malachi 4:5, 6]). Pointing out that Elijah had already come but had not been recognized, Jesus added that the people did to him all they wanted and paralleled his own future suffering with what had befallen the foretold Elijah. Peter, James, and John correctly concluded that Jesus had spoken to them about John the Baptist. (Matthew 17:10-13; Mark 9:11-13)
John’s message of repentance served to “restore all things,” leading responsive ones to mend relationships with fellow Israelites, family members, and, most importantly, with God. (Compare Malachi 4:6; Luke 1:76-79.) The majority, however, did not respond with genuine faith to the message John proclaimed, began to find fault with him, and misrepresented him. (Matthew 11:16-18) Herod Antipas had John arrested and, later, ordered to have him executed in keeping with his oath-bound promise to the daughter of Herodias. (Matthew 14:3-11)
Notes:
Most manuscripts of Luke 9:27 read, “see the kingdom of God,” which is an abbreviated version of Mark 9:1.
Both Matthew 17:1 and Mark 9:2 indicate that the transfiguration took place “six days” after Jesus’ previously recorded words, but Luke 9:28 says that it was “about eight days” later. Possibly, the period of “about eight days” includes the day on which Jesus spoke and the day of the transfiguration, whereas “six days” only refers to the time intervening between the two occurrences.
The oldest extant manuscripts of Luke 9:35 say “chosen one,” but later manuscripts read “beloved.”
Likely, when it became day, Jesus and his disciples descended from the location where he had been transfigured. Arriving where his other disciples were, he saw a large crowd around them. Certain scribes were disputing with his disciples. Possibly these scribes tried to discredit Jesus on the basis of the inability of his disciples to cure a boy in his name. Jesus’ unexpected arrival appears to have startled the crowd. Seeing Jesus, the people began to run toward him to greet him. In response to his inquiry about their disputing, a man in the crowd spoke up, “Teacher, I brought my son to you; he has a spirit of muteness.” After telling about the boy’s afflictions, the man added, “I brought him to your disciples, but they were unable to cure him.” (Matthew 17:16; Mark 9:14-18; Luke 9:37-40)
Possibly, after first speaking out from the midst of the crowd, the man knelt before Jesus, pleading, “Lord, pity my son, for he is an epileptic [literally, “moonstruck].” (Matthew 17:14, 15; Luke 9:38; see the Notes section for additional comments.)
The boy was his only son. He would scream, fall to the ground, and be violently convulsed. Foam would flow from his mouth, and he would grind his teeth and lose his strength. The falls and convulsions would leave him bruised. His seizures, when occurring near an open fire or a body of water, endangered his life, causing him to fall into the fire or the water. Besides suffering from severe epileptic seizures, the boy was deaf and mute. (Matthew 17:15; Mark 9:17, 18, 25; Luke 9:38, 39)
Jesus’ response, which was directed to the people (including the scribes), suggests that the inability of his disciples to bring about a cure appears to have been taken as a validation for their unbelief. He addressed them as a faithless or unbelieving and crooked (not upright) generation, asking how much longer he would have to remain with them and to put up with them. Jesus then requested that the boy be brought to him. (Matthew 17:17; Mark 9:19; Luke 9:41)
As the father had been speaking to Jesus, some from among the people must have brought his son. Then, in front of Jesus, the boy experienced a severe seizure. He fell to the ground, continued to roll around, and foamed at the mouth. (Mark 9:20; Luke 9:42)
In answer to Jesus’ question about how long this had been happening to the boy, the father replied, “From childhood,” adding that he had been repeatedly thrown into fire or water. The father pleaded, “If you can do anything, pity us and help us.” (Mark 9:21, 22)
The father’s expression “if you can” revealed a measure of doubt. Therefore, Jesus, in his reply, stressed the need for faith, saying, “If you can? All things are possible to one who believes.” (Mark 9:23)
Aware of a weakness in his faith and sincerely desiring more faith, coupled with the desperation of wanting his son to be freed from his terrible suffering, the man replied, “I believe; help me with my unbelief.” (Mark 9:24)
Observing people gathering in greater numbers, Jesus acted quickly, doubtless to avoid even more attention. He commanded the “demon” or the agent responsible for the boy’s suffering to leave and never to afflict him again. Then followed screams from the boy and violent seizures. When the convulsions stopped, he lay motionless, causing observers to conclude that he was dead. Jesus took hold of his hand, raised him, and the boy stood up. Thereafter Jesus presented the healed son to his father. (Matthew 17:18; Mark 9:25-27; Luke 9:42) The impressive manifestation of God’s power overwhelmingly amazed all the observers. (Luke 9:43)
Later, his disciples asked Jesus privately why they had been unable to drive out the demon. He told them that it was on account of their little faith and that only prayer would have accomplished the cure. This suggests that when the disciples did not see immediate results from their efforts to free the boy from his affliction, they gave way to doubt and did not persevere in prayer. They failed to continue to look to their heavenly Father to effect the cure by means of his spirit and so failed to maintain a strong faith. (Matthew 17:19, 20; Mark 9:28, 29; see the Notes section for comments on Mark 9:29.)
Jesus then said to them that even a little faith, the size of a mustard seed (the smallest seed of the plants the Israelites commonly cultivated), could have moved a mountain or what appeared to be an insurmountable obstacle. With faith, his disciples would find that nothing would be impossible for them to carry out their commission. (Matthew 17:20; see the Notes section for comments on Matthew 17:20, 21.)
Notes:
According to Matthew 17:14, the father of the epileptic boy approached Jesus and knelt before him. This is not mentioned in the accounts of Mark and Luke, which refer to the man as speaking after Jesus asked the crowd about the disputing. Unless Matthew 17:14 relates to the same interchange with Jesus, the man first spoke out from the crowd and then approached Jesus.
Jesus comment about nothing being impossible for the disciples (Matthew 17:20) should be understood in a relative sense. They had been commissioned to proclaim the message about God’s kingdom and empowered to perform miracles. Consequently, when it came to accomplishing all that their commission required of them, nothing would prevent them from doing so if they maintained their faith.
Matthew 17:21, which refers to prayer and fasting, is missing from the original text of fourth-century Codex Sinaiticus, fourth-century Codex Vaticanus, and other ancient manuscripts. Therefore, it is also missing from the main text of many modern translations.
In Mark 9:29, many manuscripts add “and fasting” after “through prayer.” Modern textual scholarship, however, favors the shorter reading of fourth-century Codex Vaticanus, and this is reflected in the omission of “and fasting” in many translations.
The father attributed his son’s suffering to demon possession, and this is also how the disciples and the people regarded the boy’s affliction. Whether this was the actual cause of the epilepsy, the deafness, and muteness cannot be determined. Jesus never spoke about the physical causes of the various ailments and diseases he cured. His expressions accommodated the existing understanding of his contemporaries. There would have been no value in his providing explanations that they could not have comprehended. Therefore, the narratives accurately reflect the prevailing views and do not necessarily identify the actual causes for various ailments and diseases.