Matthew 16:23

Mat_16:21; Mat_16:23

From that time forth began Jesus to show unto His disciples, how that He must go to Jerusalem, and suffer.

Christ foretelling His death

I. Let us observe the state of mind with which Christ looked forward to his approaching sufferings. Jesus was not ignorant of the serious sufferings which were coming upon Him. It is no small part of our happiness that future calamity is partly hidden.

1. A state of unshaken constancy. We must be firm in the way of duty, having counted the cost.

2. The principle by which He was supported-faith. For we look not at the things which are seen, but at the things which are not seen.

II. What was His conduct, in these circumstances, towards his disciples?

1. His conduct towards them showed great compassion for their infirmities.

2. His displeasure on account of the earthly mind which the apostles betrayed.

Learn:

1. How insufficient is our own wisdom or strength to preserve us in the ways of godliness.

2. How secure are they who trust entirely in the power and grace of the Lord Jesus. (J. Jowett.)

A recommendation of readiness for suffering

I. Peters unwillingness to meet Gods will in a course of suffering, evinced by his rebuke of Christ.

1. There was intimacy-Then Peter took him.

2. There was disappointment. Peter was disappointed that his Lord should not have the glory he expected.

3. There was ignorance. Peter ought to have known the Scriptures were full of Christs sufferings.

4. There was presumption.

II. Christs willingness to fulfil all Gods pleasure, evinced in his rebuke of Peter.

1. The indignation of our Lord.

2. He exposed the carnality of his views.

3. Christs love for sinners was persevering. (A. T. Burroughs.)

The suffering Saviour

I. A suffering saviour

1. The suffering was not only great, but peculiar.

2. And all this the text says was necessary. The word must is prefixed to all these clauses. We may interpret the word in three ways.

(1) There is the must of destiny-what is to be shall be, it is vain to fight against it.

(2) There is the must of prediction.

(3) There is the must of propriety and suitableness-moral fitness, for atonement trembles in the balance-Without shedding of blood, etc.

3. It is a very peculiar feature of the Saviours suffering that He had the foreknowledge of it in every detail. In this respect He stands alone among the heroes of faith. They had no foresight of the time, place, or circumstances of their sufferings. Our Lord alone lived His life under the shadow of the cross. The majesty of the character which could endure the weight of so terrible a prospect, remain calm, self-forgetting, etc., and even say in the fore-view of death by crucifixion: I have a baptism, etc.

II. The repugnance of human nature to pain and death. Human nature shrinks for itself from the touch of pain, and doubly for its loved ones. The words do not imply any want of love or reverence-it was their ver), motive. Love and reverence spoke; but ignorance and presumption spoke too. Human nature shrinks with special sensitiveness, till it is taught of God, from the idea of a suffering Saviour. The revelation of atonement by sacrifice was kept veiled from Peter. A veil is upon the heart still of multitudes-they see not why a Father should not forgive without the intervention of a Mediator, etc.

III. The reply of jesus to the rebuke of his servant. This shows the Saviour feeling this repugnance to suffering as a severe temptation, repelling the suggestion of the self-sparing as a cruel aggravation of His great life trial, and making the acceptance of suffering the very point of difference between the carnal mind and the spiritual. We have to accept Christs suffering, and we have to accept our own. (Dean Vaughan.)

St. Peters rebuke of Christ

I. How serious was the Apostles offence. In reference to religion the seeming generosity of an error is no excuse for it.

II. The causes which led to the Apostles error and sin.

1. He had misunderstood some part of what he had heard. St. Peter should have looked at the fact of Christs suffering in the light of His previous communications.

2. There was a second part of what Jesus had said which the apostle ignored altogether. He had said that He would rise from the dead on the third day.

3. The third cause of St. Peters error was his assuming that his own ideas of what was best must needs be true, or at least were actually true. St. Peter was in reality desiring the worst thing possible; our redemption could not have been accomplished without the cross.

III. Similar mistakes occur with ourselves.

1. In reference to the dispensations belonging to our personal history and fortunes. How often a part is misunderstood and left out. In the gloom of trial we overlook the resurrection.

2. In reference to the government of the world rod the course of providence generally.

3. In reference to the claims of Divine revelation generally, and especially the claims of Jesus the Christ as the sum and centre of it. Learn:

1. Be resolute in all humbleness when you think of Gods ways.

2. Loyalty to the personal Christ.

3. Accept Christs word as He gives it. (W. S. Chapman, M. A.)

The temptation arising from human

love:-How are we to explain the severity of our Lords rebuke?

I. When it was this rebuke was given. Our Lord had just entered upon the delicate task of Teacher, the bringing ,,f the minds of His disciples into familiarity with the deeper things in His life and work. In passing from ignorance to knowledge there must he a little contention. This the crucial time-I must speak of My sufferings. He enters upon the process. St. Peter spoils it. His rashness would not let him learn. Christian progress meets hindrances from two sources:

(1) From the wickedness of the wicked;

(2) from the immature goodness of the good.

II. The kingdom of God is very often hindered by that which it has itself produced. In society to-day there is a softness, a consideration for ease of life, which has grown up under Christianity, and which is its product. In old days life was hard, there was endurance and great effort. Passive duties have their opportunity in these days. We talk of Peace on earth. Our idea of peace is quietude. But war is often essential to peace; peace means labour-the sword turned into the ploughshare-that is Gods idea of peace. Religious life may become sentimental. Our Lords rebuke of Peter was severe because Peters plea was affection throwing itself across the path of duty. Have you never felt how terrible it is to have pleading affection try to hinder some great sacrifice? How much harder that form of opposition than any other. Satan now tries to hinder Christ through the blind love of Peter. Is not the Church of Christ often hindered now by pleadings of love, by those who say: This be far from thee. Save thyself. It exhibits a friendly consideration for our happiness; save thy money, health, effects. (R. Thomas.)

The temptations of love to be rejected

If the Pilgrim Fathers had yielded to home sickness and not let that vessel return empty, though she lay so long in the offing, tempting their return, there might have been an America, but it would not have been this America. If Livingstone had listened to the voices of those who thought him mad, Africa to-day would have been still a terra incognita. If prudence had prevailed over zeal seventy years ago, there would have been no foreign missions afoot to-day. But all these men who went to do the pioneer work had mothers and sisters and brothers tugging at their heart-strings, and tempting them not to go. And it is ever so. It is not always as in the case of the Rev. Dr. Norman MLeod, whom I once heard relate how his son had just gone into the ministry, and had accepted a very poor church in the highlands of Scotland, refusing several splendid offers which would have made him wealthy. But, said Dr. MLeod, I thank God for the lad; I would rather see him where he is with his £150 a year, than in the palace with £10,000 a year. It is very hard to say it; but, oh, it is necessary-be on your guard against the temptations of your friends, of your relatives, of your lovers, whose affection is precious to you. Remember that Satan now is wiser than of yore, and tempts by making rich-not making poor. Remember, specially, our Redeemers own words, He that sayeth his life shall lose it, and he that loseth his life for My sake, the same shall save it. (R. Thomas.)

Different Effects of Afflictions

Afflictions are unavoidable. To be a man, as a man to live upon earth, to stand in connection with other men, and yet to be out of reach of afflictions, that is absolutely impossible. How differently did our Lord think of them from his weak, still worldly-minded disciple, Peter!

1. The dissipated and thoughtless man looks upon the afflictions that befall him and others as the effects of chance, as inevitable misfortunes.

2. The proud man entertains such an opinion of himself, that he thinks no afflictions ought to befall him.

3. The superstitious man looks on all afflictions as punishments of sin.

4. The moralist regards them as necessary results of the original constitution of things.

5. The Christian sees them as the visitations of a wise and benign providence. (Zollikofer.)

Peter took Him.

Peters heart indeed was agitated. Strange surgings swelled within him at the mention of the gloomy ideas which had been mooted. The spray of these surgings lashed upon the picture which his imagination had been busily drawing. That picture was still fresh and madid. It was overlaid with brilliant colouring, which exhibited to the good mans fancy a bewitching minglement of glories, material and spiritual. As the broken surgings dashed upon it, there was anguish in the painters spirit. There was anger too. He was displeased. He was chagrined. He said impetuously, and unreflectingly, within himself: What! This will never do. It must not be! (J. Morrison, D. D.)

Began to rebuke Him

He began impulsively, vehemently, inconsiderately, as was too often his wont. He began, but the gracious Lord rose up in majesty and interrupted him, not allowing him to proceed far in the improper freedom he was using, and the improper feeling he was nursing. (J. Morrison, D. D.)

Satan

Christ looked for the moment through Peter, and saw behind him His old enemy, cunningly making use of the prejudices and impulsive honesty of the undeveloped apostle. It was the old temptation back again, that was now presented through Peter-the temptation to avoid suffering, persecution, bitter hate, scorn and murder; and instead, to erect a secular throne that would in pomp surmount all other thrones upon the earth. The Saviours spirit was roused when He met His old foe in such circumstances, looking from behind the battlements of the loving but disconcerted heart of the chief of the apostles. Hence He spoke decidedly and strongly. (J. Morrison, D. D.)

Satan:

Good men often do the devils work, though they know it not. (R. Baxter.)

I. Peters conduct. Characterized by.

1. Arrogant presumption.

2. Ignorance of the end of Christs sufferings.

3. Mistimed sympathy.

II. Christs rebuke. Prompt, severe, instructive. (W. H. Booth.)

The salt our of earthliness

1. Some make reason the standard.

2. The life and conversation of too many nominal disciples, as well as their errors in belief, show their savour of earthliness. (J. Gaston.)

Noble purposes to be encouraged

When your boy says to you suddenly some day, Father, I think I shall be a missionary and go abroad, and preach to the heathen, dont you put your hand upon the lads ambition, and put it down; dont throw any impediment in his way. Hear him on another occasion, encourage him to think still further of the scheme; and though the announcement of the lads idea tear your very heart-strings, because you have said, This son shall comfort me in my old age and feebleness, yet give him time to think about it, and show him the whole case as far as it reveals itself to your own mind, and rather stimulate than discourage him when his mind is set in a philanthropic and noble direction. And so when your husband proposes to give some large sum to this good institution or that, dont tell him that the half of it will do, because he will probably believe you,-it is so easy to go down, and so difficult to get up. (J. Parker, D. D.)

The failure of high spiritual mood

What a different figure is Peter now from that which he presented a few verses before. Jesus said to him, we read in the seventeenth verse, Blessed art thou, Simon Bar-jona. At that moment Simon was lifted above the sons of men. He was the mountain peak that caught the first glance of the morning. And there he stood, king of men, first of disciples, most honoured of the sons of earth; for through him the Father had revealed the Son. What a figure does he present in the twenty-third verse! Get thee behind Me, Satan. The same man, but not the same character. The mountain is crushed, the great mountain become a plain, become a valley; the chief of the sons of men called a devil and ordered off behind. These are the experiences of some of us. We are to-day the most blessed among men, we seem to see almost into heaven. To-morrow we shall go and say some blundering thing, and we shall be found among the lowest and the vulgarest of our kind. One hour we shall speak music, and another hour our voice shall be hoarse, because we are saying offensive things against God and against man. Do not let us condemn one another because of these changes in our experience. The longer I live the more I feel this, how difficult it is to keep up a continuity of the highest spiritual life. (J. Parker, D. D.)

The Biblical Illustrator, edited by Joseph S. Exell (c. 1880s–1900s) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Mat 16:23. But he turned and said unto Peter — Mark reads, When he had turned about and looked on his disciples, (who by the air of their countenances, probably, seemed to approve what they had heard Peter say to him,) he rebuked Peter, saying, Get thee behind me, Satan — That is, out of my sight. “He looked at him,” says Baxter, “with displeasure, and said, I say to thee as I did to the devil when he tempted me, Get thee behind me, for thou doest the work of Satan, the adversary, in tempting me, for self-preservation, to violate my Father’s command, and my undertaking, and to forsake the work of man’s redemption and salvation. As thy counsel savoureth not the things that be of God, (namely, his will, work, and glory,) but the things that be of men, (or the love of the body and this present life,) so it signifies what is in thy heart; take heed lest this carnality prevail.” Our Lord is not recorded to have given so sharp a reproof to any other of his apostles, on any occasion. He saw it was needful for the pride of Peter’s heart, puffed up with the commendation lately given him. Perhaps the term Satan may not barely mean, Thou art my enemy, while thou fanciest thyself most my friend; but also, Thou art acting the very part of Satan, both by endeavouring to hinder the redemption of mankind, and by giving me the most deadly advice that can ever spring from the pit of hell. Thou savourest not — Dost not relish or desire. We may learn from hence, 1st, that whosoever says to us in such a case, Favour thyself is acting the part of the devil: 2d, that the proper answer to such an adviser is, Get thee behind me: 3d, that otherwise he will be an offence to us, an occasion of our stumbling, if not falling: 4th, that this advice always proceeds from the not relishing the things of God, but the things of men. Yea, so far is this advice, Favour thyself, from being fit for a Christian either to give or take, that if any man will come after Christ, his very first step is, To deny or renounce himself: in the room of his own will, to substitute the will of God, as his one principle of action. We see in this example of Peter, how soon a person favoured with the peculiar approbation of the Lord Jesus may, through pride and self-confidence, fall under his heavy displeasure, and incur a severe rebuke from him. “Our Lord, immediately after pronouncing Peter blessed, on account of his faith and the noble confession which he made of it, and after conferring on him the high dignity before mentioned, did openly, in the hearing of all the disciples, call him Satan, or adversary, and declare that he had then no relish for the divine appointments, but was influenced merely by human views and expectations of worldly interest. If the papists rightly attended to this passage of the history, they would see their fancies about the primacy of Peter, which they build upon it, in a better light than they now seem to do.”

Joseph Benson's Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1811–1818) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

16:23 As when Satan tempted Jesus to assume royal privileges without first enduring the cross (see 4:8-10), so now Jesus perceived Peter’s suggestion as incited by satanic forces. • dangerous trap: Literally stumbling block.

Tyndale Open Study Notes — © Tyndale Open Resources, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

Mat 16:23. Ὕπαγε, depart) It is not your place to take hold of and rebuke Me. By how much the more He had declared Peter blessed, by so much the more does He now reprove him who was previously prepared by faith to digest the reproof, in order that He may both correct him and preserve the other disciples; see Mat 16:24.—ὀπίσω Μου, behind Me[761]) out of My sight. He had commanded Satan to do the same; see ch. Mat 4:10.—Σατανᾶ, Satan) an appellative. Cf. Joh 6:70, where our Lord says, concerning Judas Iscariot, καὶ ἐξ ὑμῶν εἷς διάβολός ἐστιν, and one of you is a devil.—But cf. Gnomon on Rev 12:9.—Peter thought himself very kind when he said ἵλεως, κ.τ.λ., but yet he is called Satan for so doing. Cf. 2Sa 19:22, where שטן signifies one who puts himself in the way as a hinderance.[762]—σκάνδαλόν Μου, My stumbling-block[763]) i.e. thou dost not only stumble or take offence at My words, but, if it were possible, thou wouldst furnish Me with a hurtful stumbling-block by thy words. This is said with the utmost force, and declares the reason of our Lord’s swift severity towards Peter.[764] If anything could have been able to touch the soul of Jesus, the words of the disciple would have been more dangerous than the assaults of the tempter, mentioned in the fourth chapter of this Gospel. Cf. Gnomon on Heb 4:15.—Rock and stumbling-block (LAPIS offensionis, lit. stumbling STONE) are put antithetically. Our Lord sends away behind Him the stumbling-block placed before His feet.—τὰ τοῦ Θεοῦ, the things of God) sc. the precious word of the Cross. The perception of Jesus is always divine.[765]—τῶν ἀνθρώπων of men) the same as flesh and blood in Mat 16:17.

[761] It becomes thee not to be My adviser, but My follower [ὀπίσω Μου].—V. g.

[762] Where David so calls the sons of Zeruiah.—(I. B.)

[763] E. V. “An offence unto Me.”—(I. B.)

[764] In this way the Saviour repelled, at the very moment of their approach, all things whatever might have been a stumbling-block or offence, just as fire repels water which approaches very close to it, but which cannot possibly mix with it.—V. g.

[765] The Cross is a stumbling-block to the world: the things which are opposed to the Cross were a stumbling-block (offence) to Christ. This feeling and perception concerning the ‘suffering’ of Christ, and of those who belong to Christ, and concerning the ‘glory’ which follows thereupon [1Pe 1:11], Peter cherished at a subsequent time, as his own first Epistle abundantly testifies.—V. g.

Bengel's Gnomon of the New Testament — English translation (T&T Clark, Edinburgh, 1860) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Mat_16:23. Στραφείς] He turned away, by way of indicating His horror.

ὕπαγε ὀπίσω μου] See note on Mat_4:10.

σατανᾶ] Satan! A term of reproach, springing out of the intense displeasure with which He now saw Peter striving, like Satan, against that purpose of God of which he was so profoundly conscious. Not moral vexation (Keim), but moral displeasure. Comp. Joh_6:70. Seeing that Peters feelings have changed, it was proper that the testimony of Jesus regarding him should undergo a corresponding change (Augustine), although without prejudice to the high position just promised to him by Jesus; for this distinction neither excludes the idea of there being still a strong carnal element in Peters character, nor does it imply that he was beyond the need of correction; consequently, the evasive interpretation of Catholic expositors who, in this instance, take σατανᾶ as an appellative (adversarius; so Maldonatus, Jansen, Arnoldi), is utterly groundless.

σκάνδ. μου εἶ] ἐμπόδιόν μου νῦν ὑπάρχεις, ἀντικείμενος τῷ ἐμῷ θελήματι, Euth. Zigabenus.

φρονεῖς] thou, hast in thy mind; indicating the direction of his aims, the bent of the practical reason. Comp. note on Rom_8:5.

τὰ τοῦ θεοῦ] matters of divine interest; because God is to be understood as having ordained the sufferings of Jesus for the purpose of carrying out the plan of redemption.

τὰ τῶν ἀνθρώπων] who are concerned about having as their Messiah a mere earthly hero and prince.

Meyer — Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament — English translation by Peter Christie, edited by Frederick Crombie (T&T Clark, 1880) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Mat 16:23 . ὕπαγε ὀ . μ . Σ .: tremendous crushing reply of the Master, showing how much He felt the temptation; calm on the surface, deep down in the soul a very real struggle. Some of the Fathers (Origen, Jerome) strive to soften the severity of the utterance by taking Satanas as an appellative = ἀντικείμενος , adversarius, contrarius , and pointing out that in the Temptation in the wilderness Jesus says to Satan simply ὔπαγε = depart, but to Peter ὔπ . ὀπίσω μου = take thy place behind me and be follower, not leader. But these refinements only weaken the effect of a word which shows that Jesus recognises here His old enemy in a new and even more dangerous form. For none are more formidable instruments of temptation than well-meaning friends, who care more for our comfort than for our character. σκάνδαλον : not “offensive to me,” but “a temptation to me to offend,” to do wrong; a virtual apology for using the strong word Σατανᾶ . οὐ φρονεῖς τὰ , etc., indicates the point of temptation = non stas a Dei partibus (Wolf), or φρονεῖν , etc. = studere rebus , etc. (Kypke), to be on God’s side, or to study the Divine interest instead of the human. The important question is: What precisely are the two interests? They must be so conceived as not entirely to cancel the eulogium on Peter’s faith, which was declared to be not of man but of God. Meyer’s comment on τὰ τ . ἀ . concerned about having for Messiah a mere earthly hero and prince (so Weiss also) is too wide. We must restrict the phrase to the instinct of self-preservation = save your life at all hazards. From Christ’s point of view that was the import of Peter’s suggestion; preference of natural life to duty = God’s interest. Peter himself did not see that these were the alternatives; he thought the two opposite interests compatible, and both attainable.

The Expositor's Greek Testament, edited by W. Robertson Nicoll (1897–1910) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

By this word we are taught that Peter sinned, through a false persuasion of himself.

Against a preposterous zeal.

The Hebrews call him Satan, that is to say, an adversary, whom the Grecians call diabolos, that is to say, slanderer, or tempter: but it is spoken of them, that either of malice, as Judas, John 6:70, or of lightness and pride resist the will of God.

Geneva Bible (1599) marginal notes — public domain. Text via Bolls.life.

But he turned, and said--in the hearing of the rest; for Mark (Mar 8:33) expressly says, "When He had turned about and looked on His disciples, He rebuked Peter"; perceiving that he had but boldly uttered what others felt, and that the check was needed by them also.

Get thee behind me, Satan--the same words as He had addressed to the Tempter (Luk 4:8); for He felt in it a satanic lure, a whisper from hell, to move Him from His purpose to suffer. So He shook off the Serpent, then coiling around Him, and "felt no harm" (Act 28:5). How quickly has the "rock" turned to a devil! The fruit of divine teaching the Lord delighted to honor in Peter; but the mouthpiece of hell, which he had in a moment of forgetfulness become, the Lord shook off with horror.

thou art an offence--a stumbling-block.

unto me--"Thou playest the Tempter, casting a stumbling-block in My way to the Cross. Could it succeed, where wert thou? and how should the Serpent's head be bruised?"

for thou savourest not--thou thinkest not.

the things that be of God, but those that be of men--"Thou art carried away by human views of the way of setting up Messiah's kingdom, quite contrary to those of God." This was kindly said, not to take off the sharp edge of the rebuke, but to explain and justify it, as it was evident Peter knew not what was in the bosom of his rash speech.

Jamieson, Fausset & Brown — Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (1871) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

Verse 23. Get thee behind me, Satan] υπαγεοπισω μου σατανα. Get behind me, thou adversary. This is the proper translation of the Hebrew word Satan, from which the Greek word is taken. Our blessed Lord certainly never designed that men should believe he called Peter, DEVIL, because he, through erring affection, had wished him to avoid that death which he predicted to himself. This translation, which is literal, takes away that harshness which before appeared in our Lord's words.

Thou art an offence unto me] σκανδαλον μου ει Thou art a stumbling-block in my way, to impede me in the accomplishment of the great design.

Thou savourest not] That is, dost not relish, ου φρονεις, or, thou dost not understand or discern the things of God - thou art wholly taken up with the vain thought that my kingdom is of this world. He who opposes the doctrine of the atonement is an adversary and offence to Christ, though he be as sincere in his profession as Peter himself was. Let us beware of false friendships. Carnal relatives, when listened to, may prove the ruin of those whom, through their mistaken tenderness, they wish to save. When a man is intent on saving his own soul, his adversaries are often those of his own household.

Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible (1810–1826) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

(23) He turned, and said to Peter.—St. Mark adds, significantly, “when He had turned about and looked on His disciples.” They, we may believe, stood behind, watching the effect of the remonstrance which Peter had uttered as their spokesman, and therefore, the Lord reading their thoughts, the rebuke, though addressed to him, was spoken so that they too might hear.

Get thee behind me, Satan.—The sharpness of the words indicates a strong and intense emotion. The chief of the Apostles was addressed in the self-same terms as those which had been spoken to the Tempter (see Note on Mat_4:10). It was, indeed, nothing less than a renewal of the same temptation. In this suggestion, that He might gain the crown without the cross, and attain a kingdom of this world as the princes of the world obtain their kingdoms, the Christ saw the recurrence of the temptation which had offered Him the glory of those kingdoms on condition of His drawing back from the path which the Father had appointed for Him, with the associations that had gathered round its original.

Thou art an offence unto me.—The Greek word is, of course, to be taken as meaning a stumbling block, an impediment. So taken, it presents a suggestive contrast to the previous promise. Peter is still a stone, but it is as “a stone of stumbling and a rock of offence” (Isa_8:14; 1Pe_2:8). He is hindering, not forwarding his Master’s work. For one who loved his Lord as Peter did—his very love in this instance prompting the rash words—this was at once the sharpest and yet the tenderest, and therefore the most effective, rebuke that could have been uttered.

Thou savourest not the things that be of God.—The verb, though found in all English versions from Wiclif downwards, and suggested by the sapis of the Vulgate, was never a very happy one, and is now so archaic as to be misleading. It may help us to understand it, to remember that our savour and the French savoir are both forms derived from the Latin sapere, and that the translators were so far justified in using it to describe a mental state, or rather act. Elsewhere the word is rendered “mind,” or “set affection on,” as, e.g., “mind the things of the flesh,” or “of the spirit” (Rom_8:5), and “set your affection on things above” (Col_3:2); and this is obviously a more satisfactory rendering. Peter’s sin lay in the fact that his mind was set on the things of earth, its outward pomp and pageantry, measuring the future by a human not a divine standard.

It is hardly a needless divergence from the work of mere interpretation to suggest that the weakness of Peter has been again and again reproduced in the history of Christendom at large, most conspicuously in the history of the Church which rests its claims on the greatness of the Apostle’s name. The annals of the Papacy, from the colossal sovereignty, which formed the ideal of Hildebrand, down to the last struggle for temporal power, is but the record of the zeal not according to knowledge of those who “savoured not the things that be of God, but those that be of man.” So far as this was so, they were working, though they knew it not, for evil and not for good, even as the chief of the Apostles when he thus became of one mind with the spirit of the world, which is also the spirit of the Tempter, placed himself for the moment on a level with the disciple whom our Lord had hinted at as a “devil,” because the seeds of treachery and greed of gain were already working in his soul (Joh_6:70).

A Bible Commentary for English Readers, edited by Charles John Ellicott (1878–1897) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

23. Get thee behind me, Satan] Peter takes the place of the tempter, and argues for the false kingdom instead of for the true. If the words of the tempter are in Peter’s mouth he is addressed as the tempter; when he speaks the words of truth he is the foundation-stone of the Church.

an offence unto me] Literally, my stumblingblock; by suggesting visions of earthly pride.

thou savourest not the things that be of God] The Greek word, literally, to think, is often used of political partisanship, “to take a side,” “thou art not on God’s side but on man’s.” The English “savourest” is connected with Lat. sapere through the French savoir.

The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges (gen. ed. J. J. S. Perowne; Cambridge University Press, 1878–1918) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Then said Jesus unto his disciples,.... Knowing that they had all imbibed the same notion of a temporal kingdom, and were in expectation of worldly riches, honour, and pleasure; he took this opportunity of preaching the doctrine of the cross to them, and of letting them know, that they must prepare for persecutions, sufferings, and death; which they must expect to endure, as well as he, if they would be his disciples:

if any man will come after me: that is, be a disciple and follower of him, it being usual for the master to go before, and the disciple to follow after him: now let it be who it will, rich or poor, learned or unlearned, young or old, male or female, that have any inclination and desire, or have took up a resolution in the strength of grace, to be a disciple of Christ,

let him deny himself: let him deny sinful self, ungodliness, and worldly lusts; and part with them, and his former sinful companions, which were as a part of himself: let him deny righteous self, and renounce all his own works of righteousness, in the business of justification and salvation; let him deny himself the pleasures and profits of this world, when in competition with Christ; let him drop and banish all his notions and expectations of an earthly kingdom, and worldly grandeur, and think of nothing but reproach, persecution, and death, for the sake of his Lord and Master: and

take up his cross; cheerfully receive, and patiently bear, every affliction and evil, however shameful and painful it may be, which is appointed for him, and he is called unto; which is his peculiar cross, as every Christian has his own; to which he should quietly submit, and carry, with an entire resignation to the will of God, in imitation of his Lord:

and follow me; in the exercise of grace, as humility, zeal, patience, and self-denial; and in the discharge of every duty, moral, or evangelical; and through sufferings and death, to his kingdom and glory. The allusion is, to Christ's bearing his own cross, and Simeon's carrying it after him, which afterwards came to pass.

John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible (1746–1763) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

23 But he turned, and said unto Peter, Get thee behind me, Satan: thou art an offence unto me: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but those that be of men.

Ver. 23. Get thee behind me, Satan] Come behind as a disciple, go not before me as a teacher; understand thy distance, and hold thee to thy duty, by moving in thine own sphere; that thou be not thus odiously eccentric, another Satan, who sets thee to work thus to tempt me, as he once did Eve to seduce Adam: here Maldonatus is hard put to it to save Peter blameless, and saith that "Get thee behind me" is a Hebrew phrase, and imports no more than "Follow me." But when he comes to consider that Christ calls him Satan, and that it would not be seemly that Christ should bid Satan follow him, he is forced to confess that it is the speech of one that bids another be packing out of his presence with indignation, like that of Christ to the tempter, Mat 4:1-11 "Get thee hence, Satan." Prosit tibi sternutatio tun. (Maldonatus.) When the executioner wished Polycarp to be merciful to himself, he bade him hold his peace; he was his tormentor, not his counsellor.

Thou art an offence unto me] Thou doest thy good will to hinder me in the course of my calling, as Mediator, wherein, say some, he sinned more grievously than afterwards he did in denying his Master, and was therefore so sharply rebuked. So when Socrates was solicited by Criton to break out of prison, and save his life by flight; Friend Criton, said he, thine earnestness herein were much worth, if it were consistent with uprightness; but being not so, the greater it is, the more troublesome. {a} I know not (said that Scotish martyr) by what reason they so called them my friends, which so greatly laboured to convert (pervert) me. Neither will I more esteem them than the Midianites, which in times past called the children of Israel to do sacrifice to their idols.

But the things that be of men] Formerly it was of Satan, now of men. How easy is it to find a devil in our best friends sometimes, as Rebezies the French martyr did in his parents! Satan seduces such as may do much with us, and works in them effectually for our harm, as a smith doth in his forge, Eph 2:2; "They were tempted," and thereby "tormented," saith the apostle of those worthies (επειρασθησαν), Heb 11:37. Satan speaks to us sometimes by our friends, as through trunks and canes.

{a} η προθυμια σου πολλου αξια ει μετα τινος ορθοτητος ειη, ει δε μη, οσψ μειζων, τοσουτψ χαλεπωτερα.

John Trapp, A Commentary or Exposition upon All the Books of the Old and New Testament (1647–1656) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Go after me, Satan.[4] The words may signify, begone from me; but out of respect due to the expositions of the ancient fathers, who would have these words to signify come after me, or follow me, I have put, with the Rheims translation, go after me. Satan is the same as an adversary: (Witham) and is here applied to Peter, however, unknowingly or innocently, raised an opposition against the will of God, against the glory of Jesus, against the redemption of mankind, and against the destruction of the devil’s kingdom. He did not understand that there was nothing more glorious than to make of one’s life a sacrifice to God. (Bible de Vence) --- Thou dost not, i.e. thy judgment in this particular is not conformable with that of God. Hence our separated brethren conclude that Christ did not, in calling him the rock in the preceding verses, appoint him the solid and permanent foundation of his Church. This conclusion, however, is not true, because, as St. Augustine and theologians affirm Peter could fall into error in points regarding morals and facts, though not in defining or deciding on points of faith. Moreover, St. Peter was not, as St. Jerome says, appointed the pillar of the Church till after Christ’s resurrection. (Tirinus) --- And it was not till the night before Christ suffered that he said to Peter: Behold, Satan hath desired to have thee; but I have prayed for thee, that "thy faith fail not," and thou being once converted confirm thy brethren. (Luke xxii. 31.) (Haydock)

===============================

[BIBLIOGRAPHY]

Vade post me, Greek: upage opiso mou.

====================

George Leo Haydock (1774–1849), Haydock's Catholic Family Bible and Commentary, 1859 edition — public domain. Excludes Psalms (Douay-Rheims chapter numbering differs from Protestant) and Deuterocanonical books (Catholic canon only).

Peter, thou thinkest that by this discourse thou showest some kindness unto me, like a friend, but thou art in this an adversary to me; for so the word Satan doth signify, and is therefore ordinarily applied to the devil, who is the grand adversary of mankind.

Get thee behind me, I abominate such advice. I told thee I must suffer. It was the determinate counsel of God; it is my Father’s will. He is mine enemy that dissuades me from a free and cheerful obedience to it. I will hear no more such discourse.

For thou savourest not the things that be of God, but those that be of men. The word is φρονεις, and, it may be, were better translated, Thou thinkest not of, or thou understandest not, the things that be of God, that is, the counsels of God in this matter, as to the redemption of mankind: thou considerest me only as thy Master and thy Friend, and wouldst have no harm come to me; thou dost not mind or think of me as the Saviour of the world, or the Redeemer of mankind, which cannot be redeemed otherwise than by my death. Though by thy intemperate affection to me thou wouldst hinder the redemption of mankind, this is not in this thing to mind, think on, or savour the things of God, but to suffer thyself to be seduced by thy carnal affection. It is a mistaken kindness to our friends, to persuade them, for our personal advantage, to do what they cannot do in consistency with their obedience to the will of God.

Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible (1683–1685) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

23. Get thee behind me, Satan — Our Lord seems to call Peter Satan. Not quite so. But he recognizes a Satan speaking in the words that Peter utters. His own human nature would say, like Peter, “Far be the terrible suffering from thee.” The same Satan had once tempted him in his own person to fall down and worship him, in order to gain the whole world; and that same Satan seems now to speak in Peter’s voice. As he repelled Satan then, so he repels the same devil now that seconds Peter’s words. An offence — A snare. See note on Mat_18:7. Those that be of men — Is there not something prophetic in these words? The Church of Rome has claimed that her supremacy was predicted in the rock and the keys. But is it not the ambitious Peter who would have the kingdom without the cross, and who spake the things of man and not of God, which is the type of ambitious Rome?

Daniel D. Whedon (gen. ed.), Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1874–1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

He turned. Peter and the rest were following Christ, as he walked onward. Now Jesus stops, turns, and faces them. Get thee behind me, Satan. Jesus uses nearly the same words in rebuking Peter that he had used to the devil in his temptation; (Mat_4:10) and justly, because the apostle was acting the adversary"s part, by opposing the Divine economy, and endeavouring to persuade Jesus that the way he proposed was wholly unnecessary. The lively stone has became a very Satan in opposing the Divine will; hence the sharpness of the rebuke administered to him. An offence unto me (skandalon emou); my stumbling block.

Petros, the stone, to maintain the metaphor, is now "a stone of stumbling, and a rock of offence". (1Pe_2:8) He stood in the Saviour"s way, and impeded his onward progress in the course ordained. He who would turn him aside from Calvary is the enemy of man"s salvation, which was to be won there. Thou savourest (froneiv) not; mindest not; (as Rom_8:5) thy taste is not for the Divine plans, but for human considerations; thou art not promoting the great purpose of God, but worldliness and self-pleasing. "Peter," says St. Chrysostom, "examining the matter by human and earthly reasoning, accounted it disgraceful to him Christ and an unmeet thing. Touching him therefore sharply, he saith, "My Passion is not an unmeet thing, but thou givest this sentence with a carnal mind; whereas if thou hadst hearkened to my sayings in a godly manner, disengaging thyself from thy carnal understanding, thou wouldst know that this of all things most becometh me. For thou indeed supposest that to suffer is unworthy of me; but I say unto thee, that for me not to suffer is of the devil"s mind;" by the contrary statements repressing his alarm" (Oxford transl.).

He hinders Christ who would hold him back from his sufferings.

This brings before us another relation in which our Lord"s sufferings stand. We have seen their relation as a testing of that higher truth to which St. Peter had given expression. Now we see how they bore on that particular mission which Jesus came to carry out. His sufferings were essential to that mission. He saved the world by his sufferings.

I OUR LORD"S PURPOSE TO ENDURE SUFFERINGS. It should be clearly seen that our Lord knew beforehand all that was to happen to him; and he might have avoided all the pain and distress. Instead, he voluntarily determined to go steadily along the path, bearing and enduring all, because that was the Father"s will for him. Explain in this way: Our Lord had to present to God the living sacrifice of a perfectly obedient Son. But he could not be a perfectly obedient Son if his obedience had not been adequately tested. The series of sufferings through which our Lord passed are the various testings of his Sonship. And because Christ was resolved to make the great redeeming sacrifice, he resolved to bear and endure every way in which the Father might be pleased to test his Sonship. A violent and shameful death was the final test.

II OUR LORD"S OFFENCE AT THOSE WHO WOULD HINDER HIM FROM ENDURING HIS SUFFERINGS. They did the work of the flesh, which shrinks from suffering; they did not help the sanctified will to gain free expression. St. Peter became a tempter, a worker of evil; one who did the work of an adversary, of man"s great adversary. Our Lord here uses the word "Satan" as a figure, without reference to the personal devil. Any adversary, any one who works against our best interests, is a Satan. To withdraw Christ from his sufferings was to withdraw Christ from his mission; since he could only be made "perfect," as a Bringer on of souls, by the experience and testing of suffering. Olshausen thinks that St. Peter forgot himself, and presumed upon the praise which Christ had given him for his noble confession. But it is better, in each case, to treat St. Peter as a mere representative, a mere spokesman, and to see how very imperfect an apprehension of Christ"s deeper truth his words involve. R.T.

The Pulpit Commentary (1880–1919), ed. H.D.M. Spence-Jones & Joseph S. Exell — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Get thee behind me - Out of my sight. It is not improbable, Peter might step before him, to stop him. Satan - Our Lord is not recorded to have given so sharp a reproof to any other of his apostles on any occasion. He saw it was needful for the pride of Peter's heart, puffed up with the commendation lately given him. Perhaps the term Satan may not barely mean, Thou art my enemy, while thou fanciest thyself most my friend; but also, Thou art acting the very part of Satan, both by endeavouring to hinder the redemption of mankind, and by giving me the most deadly advice that can ever spring from the pit of hell. Thou savourest not - Dost not relish or desire. We may learn from hence,

1. That whosoever says to us in such a case, favour thyself, is acting the part of the devil:

2. That the proper answer to such an adviser is, Get thee behind me:

3. That otherwise he will be an offense to us, an occasion of our stumbling, if not falling:

4. That this advice always proceeds from the not relishing the things of God, but the things of men. Yea, so far is this advice, favour thyself, from being fit for a Christian either to give or take, that if any man will come after Christ, his very first step is to deny, or renounce himself: in the room of his own will, to substitute the will of God, as his one principle of action.

John Wesley, Explanatory Notes Upon the Whole Bible (1754–1765) — public domain. Text via the GEBible commentary corpus.

Christ looked upon Peter with anger and displeasure, Christ heard Satan speaking in Peter. It was Peter’s tongue, but Satan tuned it; therefore Christ calls Peter by Satan’s name. They that will do the devil’s work shall have the devil’s name too. He that would hinder the redemption of mankind, is Satan, an adversary to mankind.

From our Saviour’s smart reproof given to Peter, Learn, that no love or respect to men’s persons or piety must draw us to flatter them in their sins, or cause us to speak lightly of their sins.

From our Saviour’s resolution not to favour himself, notwithstanding Peter’s advice, Learn, That so intent was the heart of Christ upon the great work of man’s redemption, that he could not bear the least word that should obstruct it, or divert him from it.

William Burkitt's Expository Notes on the New Testament (1700–1703) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

23. Get thee behind me, Satan. Christ saw in the words of Peter a suggestion not so much of his as of Satan's. It was a temptation to shrink from the work for which he came. It was the same temptation that called out from him the same rebuke once before (Matt. 4:10).

B. W. Johnson's The People's New Testament with Notes (1889–1891) — public domain. Electronic text from the Christian Classics Ethereal Library (CCEL) ThML edition.

23. ὕπαγε ὀπίσω μου, σατανᾶ. Peter takes the place of the tempter, and argues for the false kingdom instead of for the true (see notes ch. Mat 4:8-10).

σκάνδαλον ἐμοῦ, i.e. a snare to allure me, as tempting me to forsake the divine plan of self-denial and sacrifice.

οὐ φρονεῖς τὰ τοῦ θεοῦ ἀλλὰ τὰ τῶν ἀνθρώπων. ‘Thou mindest not the things of God but the things of men,’ i.e. thine are not God’s thoughts but man’s thoughts. Cp. τὰ τῆς σαρκὸς φρονοῦσιν (have a carnal mind), Rom 8:5; τὰ ἄνω φρονεῖτε, Col 3:2. In the classics φρονεῖν is used of political partisanship: φρονεῖν τὰ Φιλίππου, or τὰ τοῦ δήμου (Dem.), ‘to be on the side of Philip or on the side of the people.’ μήτʼ ἐμοὶ παρέστιος | γένοιτο μήτʼ ἴσον φρονῶν (i.e. of the same party in the state) ὅς τάδʼ ἔρδοι, Soph. Ant. 374. Thus the expression in the text = ‘thou art not on God’s side but on man’s, and therefore a Satanas or διάβολος, an adversary of God thwarting his plan of humility’.

With the exception of the parallel passage in Mark, and Act 28:22, φρονεῖν is confined in N.T. to St Paul’s epistles where it is frequent, especially in Romans and Philippians.

Cambridge Greek Testament for Schools and Colleges (Cambridge University Press, 1896; 21 vols, various authors incl. Carr, Maclear, Plummer, Farrar, Lumby, Moule, M. R. James, Simcox) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

23.] As it was Peter’s spiritual discernment, given from above, which made him a foundation-stone of the Church, so is it his carnality, proceeding from want of unity with the divine will, which makes him an adversary now. Compare ch. 4:10, also Eph 6:12.

σκάνδαλον εἶ ἐμοῦ] Thou art my stumbling-block (not merely a stumbling-block to me; the definite article is omitted before a noun thrust forward for emphasis, but in English it must be supplied), my πέτρα σκανδάλου (in Peter’s own remarkable words, 1Pe 2:7, 1Pe 2:8,—joined too with the very expression, ὃν ἀπεδοκίμασαν οἱ οἰκοδομοῦντες, which, as above noticed, occurs in this passage in Mark and Luke). Wordsw.’s note here, “our blessed Lord keeps up the metaphor of πέτρος, or a stone: thou who wert just now, by thy faith in confessing Me, a lively stone, art now by thy carnal weakness a stumbling stone to Christ,” seems to shew that his strong repudiation of any allusion to πέτρος in the πέτρα of ver. 18 has not carried full conviction to its writer. Before this rebuke St. Mark inserts καὶ ἰδὼν τοὺς μαθητὰς αὐτοῦ, that the reproof might be before them all.

Henry Alford, The Greek Testament (1849–1861) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

23. And He turned, and said to Peter, Go behind Me, Satan: thou art a stumbling-block to Me: because thou thinkest not the things of God, but the things of men.] So Mk., without σκάδαλον εἴ ἐμοῦ, which is inserted by the editor to explain the use of the harsh Σατανᾶ with reference to the Apostle. Mk. also has ἐπιστραφείς for στραφείς (for στρέφω, which Mk. never uses, cf. 9:22), and adds καὶ ἰδὼν τοὺς μαθητὰς αὐτοῦ, which seems to emphasise the publicity of the rebuke. The editor omitted it for this reason, or because he missed the point of it here. ὀπίσω, see on 3:11.—οὐ φρονεῖς τὰ τοῦ θεοῦ, κ.τ.λ.] seems to mean: “Your ideas of the Messiah and His destiny are superficial. You can imagine a career of splendour for Him, but fail to understand that suffering and death are a part of the career planned out for Him by God.”

σκάδαλον εἶ ἐμοῦ] So א* B. 13; εἶ μοῦ, אc C; εἶ ἐμοί, D latt; μοῦ εἶ, E F al Abbott, Johannine Grammar, 2566 c, suggests that the original may have been εἰμί σοι = “I am a stumbling-block [it seems], to Thee!” But Σατανᾶ suggests that the following σκάνδαλον is used of S. Peter, not of the Lord. In trying to set aside thoughts of the coming Passion, Peter was at once Christ’s adversary and His stumbling-block. And this interpretation alone explains the following ὅτι.

International Critical Commentary — older volumes (1896–1929), various authors — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Turned [στραφεις] . Not toward Peter, but away from him.

Get thee behind me. See Mt 4:10.

Offense [σκανδαλον] . Rev., better, stumbling - block. See on 5 29. Not, thou art offensive, but thou art in my way. Dr. Morison, "Thou art not, as before, a noble block, lying in its right position as a massive foundation - stone. On the contrary, thou art like a stone quite out of its proper place, and lying right across the road in which I must go - lying as a stone of stumbling."

Savorest not [ου φρονεις] . Rev., better, mindest not. Thy thoughts and intents are not of God, but of men. Savorest follows the Vulgate sapis, from sapere, which means 1st, to have a taste or flavor of : 2nd, to have sense or discernment. Hence used here as the rendering of fronein, to be minded. Thus Wyc., 1Co 13:11, "When I was a child I savored [εφρονουν] as a child." The idea is, strictly, to partake of the quality or nature of.

Marvin R. Vincent, Word Studies in the New Testament (1887–1900) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.