Journeying on northward, Jesus came into the neighborhood of ♦Caesarea
Philippi, and while he was there in some solitary place, praying alone
with his select disciples, at the conclusion of his prayer, he asked
them, “Who do men say that I, the son of man, am?” And they answered
him, “Some say that thou art John the Baptist:” Herod, in particular,
we know, had this notion; “some, that thou art Elijah, and others
that thou art Jeremiah, or one of the prophets, that is risen again.”
So peculiar was his doctrine, and so far removed was he, both in
impressive eloquence and in original views, from the degeneracy and
servility of that age, that the universal sentiment was, that one of
the bold, pure “spirits of the fervent days of old,” had come back
to call Judah from foreign servitude, to the long remembered glories
of the reigns of David and Solomon. But his chosen ones, who had by
repeated instruction, as well as long acquaintance, better learned
their Master, though still far from appreciating his true character
and designs, had yet a higher and juster idea of him, than the
unenlightened multitudes who had been amazed by his deeds. To draw
from them the distinct acknowledgment of their belief in him, Jesus at
last plainly asked his disciples, “But who do ye say that I am?” Simon
Peter, in his usual character as spokesman, replied for the whole band,
“Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.” Jesus, recognizing in
this prompt answer, the fiery and devoted spirit that would follow the
great work of redemption through life, and at last to death, replied to
the zealous speaker in terms of marked and exalted honor, prophesying
at the same time the high part which he would act in spreading and
strengthening the kingdom of his Master: “Blessed art thou, Simon, son
of Jonah, for flesh and blood have not revealed this unto thee, but my
Father who is in heaven. And I say also unto thee, that thou art a ROCK,
and on this _rock_ I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall
not prevail against it. And I will give thee the keys of the kingdom
of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in
heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth, shall be loosed in
heaven.” In such high terms was the chief apostle distinguished, and
thus did his Master peculiarly commission him above the rest, for the
high office, to which all the energies of his remaining life were to be
devoted.
♦ “Cesarea” replaced with “Caesarea”
_Who do men say that I am._――The common English translation,
here makes a gross grammatical blunder, putting the relative
in the objective case,――“_Whom_ do men say,” &c. (Matthew xvi.
13‒15.) It is evident that on inverting the order, putting the
relative last instead of first, it will be in the nominative,
――“Men say that I am who?” making, in short, a nominative after
the verb, though it here comes before it by the inversion which
the relative requires. Here again the blunder may be traced to
a heedless copying of the Vulgate. In Latin, as in Greek, the
relative is given in the accusative, and very properly, because
it is followed by the infinitive. “Quem dicunt homines esse
Filium hominis?” which literally is, “Whom do men say the son of
man to be?”――a very correct form of expression; but the blunder
of our translators was, in preserving the accusative, while they
changed the verb, from the infinitive to the finite form; for
“_whom_” cannot be governed by “_say_.” Hammond has passed over
the blunder; but Campbell, Thomson, and Webster, have corrected
it.
_Son of Man._――This expression has acquired a peculiarly exalted
sense in our minds, in consequence of its repeated application
to Jesus Christ, and its limitation to him, in the New Testament.
But in those days it had no meaning by which it could be
considered expressive of any peculiar characteristic of the
Savior, being a mere general emphatic expression for the common
word “man,” used in solemn address or poetical expressions. Both
in the Old and New Testament it is many times applied to men
in general, and to particular individuals, in such a way as
to show that it was only an elegant periphrasis for the common
term, without implying any peculiar importance in the person
thus designated, or referring to any peculiar circumstance as
justifying this appellative in that case. Any concordance will
show how commonly the word occurred in this connection. The
diligent Butterworth enumerates eighty-nine times in which this
word is applied to Ezekiel, in whose book of prophecy it occurs
oftener than in any other book in the Bible. It is also applied
to Daniel, in the address of the angel to him, as to Ezekiel;
and in consideration of the vastly more frequent occurrence
of the expression in the writers after the captivity, and its
exclusive use by them as a formula of solemn address, it has
been commonly considered as having been brought into this usage
among the Hebrews, from the dialects of Chaldea and Syria,
where it was much more common. In Syriac, more particularly, the
simple expression, “man,” is entirely banished from use by this
solemn periphrasis,