The earliest passage in the life of Peter, of which any record can
be found, is given in the first chapter of John’s Gospel. In this, it
appears that Peter and Andrew were at Bethabara, a place on the eastern
bank of the Jordan, more than twenty miles south of their home at
Bethsaida, and that they had probably left their business for a time,
and gone thither, for the sake of hearing and seeing John the Baptist,
who was then preaching at that place, and baptizing the penitent in
the Jordan. This great forerunner of the Messiah, had already, by his
strange habits of life, by his fiery eloquence, by his violent and
fearless zeal in denouncing the spirit of the times, attracted the
attention of the people, of all classes, in various and distant parts
of Palestine; and not merely of the vulgar and unenlightened portion of
society, who are so much more susceptible to false impressions in such
cases, but even of the well taught followers of the two great learned
sects of the Jewish faith, whose members flocked to hear his bold and
bitter condemnation of their precepts and practices. So widely had
his fame spread, and so important were the results of his doctrine
considered, that a deputation of priests and Levites was sent to
him, from Jerusalem, (probably from the Sanhedrim, or grand civil and
religious council,) to inquire into his character and pretensions. No
doubt a particular interest was felt in this inquiry, from the fact
that there was a general expectation abroad at that time, that the
long-desired restorer of Israel was soon to appear; or, as expressed by
Luke, there were many “who waited for the consolation of Israel,” and
“who in Jerusalem looked for redemption.” Luke also expressly tells us,
that the expectations of the multitude were strongly excited, and that
all men mused in their hearts whether he were the Christ or not. In
the midst of this general notion, so flattering, and so tempting to an
ambitious man, John vindicates his honesty and sincerity, by distinctly
declaring to the multitude, as well as to the deputation, that he was
_not_ the Christ, and claimed for himself only the comparatively humble
name and honors of the preparer of the way for the true king of Israel.
This distinct disavowal, accompanied by the solemn declaration, that
the true Messiah stood at that moment among them, though unknown in his
real character, must have aggravated public curiosity to the highest
pitch, and caused the people to await, with the most intense anxiety,
the nomination of this mysterious king, which John was expected to make.
Need we wonder, then, at the alacrity and determination with which
the two disciples of John, who heard this announcement, followed the
footsteps of Jesus, with the object of finding the dwelling place of
the Messiah, or at the deep reverence with which they accosted him,
giving him at once the highest term of honor which a Jew could confer
on the wise and good,――“RABBI,” or master? Nor is it surprising that
Andrew, after the first day’s conversation with Jesus, should instantly
seek out his beloved and zealous brother, and tell him the joyful and
exciting news, that they had found the Messiah. The mention of this
fact was enough for Simon, and he suffered himself to be brought at
once to Jesus. The salutation with which the Redeemer greeted the
man who was to be the leader of his consecrated host, was strikingly
prophetical and full of meaning. His first words were the annunciation
of his individual and family name, (no miracle, but an allusion to the
hidden meaning of his name,) and the application of a new one, by which
he was afterwards to be distinguished from the many who bore his common
name. All these names have a deeply curious and interesting meaning.
Translating them all from their original Aramaic forms, the salutation
will be, “Thou art a _hearer_, the _son of divine grace_――thou shalt
be called a _rock_.” The first of these names (_hearer_) was a common
title in use among the Jews, to distinguish those who had just offered
themselves to the learned, as desiring wisdom in the law; and the
second was applied to those who, having past the first probationary
stage of instruction, were ranked as the approved and improving
disciples of the law, under the hopeful title of the “sons of divine
grace.” The third, which became afterwards the distinctive individual
name of this apostle, was given, no doubt, in reference to the
peculiar excellences of his natural genius, which seems to be thereby
characterized as firm, unimpressible by difficulty, and affording fit
materials for the foundation of a mighty and lasting superstructure.
The name Simon, שמונ was a common abridgment of Simeon, שמעונ
which means a hearer, and was a term applied technically as here
mentioned. (For proofs and illustrations, see Poole’s Synopsis
and Lightfoot.) The technical meaning of the name Jonah, given
in the text, is that given by Grotius and Drusius, but Lightfoot
rejects this interpretation, because the name Jonah is not
fairly derived from יוחנא (which is the name corresponding to
John,) but is the same with that of the old prophet so named,
and he is probably right in therefore rejecting this whimsical
etymology and definition.
With this important event of the introduction of Simon to Jesus, and
the application of his new and characteristic name, the life of Peter,
as a follower of Christ, may be fairly said to have begun; and from
this arises a simple division of the subject, into the two great
natural portions of his life; _first_, in his state of pupilage and
instruction under the prayerful, personal care of his devoted Master,
during his earthly stay; and _second_, of his labors in the cause of
his murdered and risen Lord, as his preacher and successor. These two
portions of his life may be properly denominated his _discipleship_ and
his _apostleship_; or perhaps still better, Peter the _learner_, and
Peter the _teacher_.
Illustration: THE FORDS OF THE JORDAN.
I. PETER’S DISCIPLESHIP;
OR,
PETER THE LEARNER AND FOLLOWER.
AFTER his first interview with Christ, Peter seems to have returned to
his usual business, toiling for his support, without any idea whatever
of the manner in which his destiny was connected with the wonderful
being to whom he had been thus introduced. We may justly suppose,
indeed, that being convinced by the testimony of John, his first
religious teacher and his baptizer, and by personal conversation with
Jesus, of his being the Messiah, that he afterwards often came to him,
(as his home was near the Savior’s,) and heard him, and saw some of the
miracles done by him. “We may take it for granted,” as Lardner does,
“that they were present at the miracle at Cana of Galilee, it being
expressly said that Jesus and his _disciples_ were invited to the
marriage solemnity in that place, as described in the second chapter of
John’s gospel. It is also said in the same chapter, ‘this beginning of
miracles did Jesus in Cana of Galilee, and manifested forth his glory;
and his disciples believed on him;’ that is, were confirmed in the
persuasion that he was the Messiah.” And among the _disciples_ of Jesus,
Simon and his brother were evidently numbered, from the time when they
received their first introduction to him, and were admitted to the
honors of an intimate acquaintance. The formal manner in which Jesus
saluted Simon, seems to imply his adoption, or nomination at least,
as a disciple, by referring to the remarkable coincidence of meaning
between his name and the character of a hopeful learner in the school
of divine knowledge. Still the two brothers had plainly received no
appointment which produced any essential change in their general habits
and plans of life, for they still followed their previous calling,
quietly and unpretendingly, without seeming to suppose, that the new
honors attained by them had in any way exempted them from the necessity
of earning their daily bread by the sweat of their brow. To this they
devoted themselves, laboring along the same sea of Galilee, whose
waters and shores were the witnesses of so many remarkable scenes of
the life of Christ. Yet their business was not of such a character
as to prevent their enjoying occasional interviews with their divine
master, whose residence by the lake, and walks along its shores, must
have afforded frequent opportunities for cultivating or renewing an
acquaintance with those engaged on its waters. There is nothing in the
gospel story inconsistent with the belief, that Jesus met his disciples,
who were thus occupied, on more occasions than one; and had it been the
Bible plan to record all the most interesting details of his earthly
life, many instructive accounts might, no doubt, have been given of the
interviews enjoyed by him and his destined messengers of grace to the
world. But the multiplication of such narratives, however interesting
the idea of them may now seem, would have added no essential doctrine
to our knowledge, even if they had been so multiplied as that, in the
paradoxical language of John, the whole world could not contain them;
and the necessary result of such an increased number of records, would
have been a diminished valuation of each. As it is, the scripture
historical canon secures our high regard and diligent attention, and
its careful examination, by the very circumstance of its brevity, and
the wide chasms of the narrative;――like the mysterious volumes of the
Cumaean Sybil, the value of the few is no less than that of the many,
the price of each increasing in proportion as the number of the whole
diminishes. Thus in regard to this interesting interval of Peter’s life,
we are left to the indulgence of reasonable conjecture, such as has
been here mentioned.
The next direct account given in the Bible, of any event immediately
concerning him, is found in all the first three gospels. It is thought
by some, that his father Jonah was now dead; for there is no mention
of him, as of Zebedee, when his two sons were called. This however
is only a mere conjecture, and has no more certainty than that he had
found it convenient to make his home elsewhere, or was now so old as
to be prevented from sharing in this laborious and perilous occupation,
or that he had always obtained his livelihood in some other way;
though the last supposition is much less accordant with the well-known
hereditary succession of trades, which was sanctioned by almost
universal custom throughout their nation. However, it appears that
if still alive, their connection with him was not such as to hinder
them a moment in renouncing at once all their former engagements
and responsibilities, at the summons of Christ. Jesus was at this
time residing at Capernaum, which is said by Matthew to be by the
_sea-coast_, better translated “shore of the lake;” for it is not on
the coast of the Mediterranean, as our modern use of these terms would
lead us to suppose, but on the shore of the small inland lake Tiberias,
or _sea_ of Galilee, as it was called by the Jews, who, with their
limited notions of geography, did not draw the nice distinctions
between large and small bodies of water, which the more extended
knowledge of some other nations of antiquity taught them to make.
Capernaum was but a few miles from Bethsaida, on the other side of the
lake, and its nearness would often bring Jesus in his walks, by the
places where these fishermen were occupied, in whichever of the two
places they at that time resided. On one of these walks he seems to
have given the final summons, which called the first four of the twelve
from their humble labors to the high commission of converting the world.
_Capernaum._――Though no one has ever supposed that there were
two places bearing this name, yet about its locality, as about
many other points of sacred topography, we find that “doctors
disagree,” though in this case without any good reason; for the
scriptural accounts, though so seldom minute on the situations
of places, here give us all the particulars of its position,
as fully as is desirable or possible. Matthew, (iv. 13,) tells
us, that Capernaum was upon “the shore of the lake, on the
boundaries of Zebulon and Naphtali.” A reference to the history
of the division of territory among these tribes, (Joshua xix.)
shows that their possessions did not reach the other side of the
water, but were bounded on the east by Jordan and the lake, as
is fully represented in all the maps of Palestine. Thus, it is
made manifest, that Capernaum must have stood on the western
shore of the lake, where the lands of Zebulon and Naphtali
bordered on each other. Though this boundary line cannot be very
accurately determined, we can still obtain such an approximation,
as will enable us to fix the position of Capernaum on the
northern end of the western side of the lake, where most of the
maps agree in placing it; yet some have very strangely put it on
the eastern side. The maps in the French bible, before quoted,
have set it down at the mouth of the Jordan, in the exact place
where Josephus has so particularly described Bethsaida as placed.
Lightfoot has placed it on the west, but near the southern end;
and all the common maps differ considerably as to its precise
situation, of which indeed we can only give a vague conjecture,
except that it must have been near the northern end. Conder
(Modern Traveler, Palestine,) gives the following account of
modern researches after its site, among the ruins of various
cities near the lake.
“With regard to Chorazin, Pococke says, that he could find
nothing like the name, except at a village called _Gerasi_,
which is among the hills west of the village called _Telhoue_,
in the plain of Gennesaret. Dr. Richardson, in passing through
this plain, inquired of the natives whether they knew such
a place as Capernaum? They immediately rejoined, ‘Cavernahum
wa Chorasi, they are quite near, but in ruins.’ This evidence
sufficiently fixes the proximity of Chorazin to Capernaum, in
opposition to the opinion that it was on the east side of the
lake; and it is probable that the Gerasi of Pococke is the same
place, the orthography only being varied, as Dr. Richardson’s
Chorasi.”