Matthew 14: 22-33 I propose a biblical analysis with the following steps: a study of each Greek word of the evangelical text, followed by an analysis of the structure of the narrative and its context, to which is added a comparison of parallel or similar passages. At the end of this analysis and as a conclusion, I propose to summarize what the evangelist meant, and I end up with some suggestions on how this Gospel could shed light on our current situation. Summary The story The disciples just had a memorable moment when Jesus fed 5,000 men, not counting women and children. Jesus immediately compelled the disciples to leave by boat for the other side, while he would take care to send the crowd away. After the crowd was sent away, Jesus isolated himself in the mountain to pray. As for the disciples' boat, after a few miles, it had to face the onslaught of the waves because of a headwind. At this point, between 3:00 a.m. and 6:00 a.m., Jesus joins his disciples. But now there are cries of fear among the disciples, for it is as if a spectre had come from the world of the dead. By his words, Jesus identifies himself with "I am", the Old Testament expression for God, and invites them not to be afraid and be confident. But Peter, wanting to be sure the spectre is Jesus, asks for a command to join him on the water, which Jesus does. When Peter starts walking on the water towards Jesus, he begins to sink as soon as he sees the power of the wind. Jesus rescues him by reaching out his hand and grabbing him, blaming him for his lack of faith. Once everyone is in the boat, calm is restored. The disciples then proclaim their faith and recognize the authority of Jesus as the Son of God. The vocabulary In the section of verses 22-27, Matthew essentially takes up the text of Mark's gospel, and thus its vocabulary. However, he makes some alterations.
In the section of vv. 28-31, Matthew moves away from Mark to insert one of his compositions about Peter who wants to follow Jesus on the water, but fails for lack of faith, and must therefore be rescued by Jesus. The peculiarities of his style and vocabulary are clearly shown: the expression "answering and say", the words "Lord" which he often adds to his sources, "command" (keleuō) which he is almost alone in using in the gospels, "the waters" (hydōr), a plural that he alone uses to speak of the sea, "to look at" (blepō) which he uses more than the other evangelists, "to submerge" (katapontizō); ) which appears only in Matthew throughout the New Testament, the expressions "save me" which are found only in Matthew and "stretch out your hand" which he uses more than the others, the word "little faith" (oligopistos), almost exclusively Matthean, the verb "to doubt" (distazō) which appears only in Matthew throughout the Bible, the verb "to prostrate oneself" (proskyneō) of which he is the greatest user, finally the expression "of God the son" which is found only in Matthew. Structure and composition The story of walking on water is inseparable from the story of Jesus feeding the crowd that it is commenting on and extending. Matthew essentially takes up Mark's text, and if Boismard is right, Mark's text is a fusion of two versions of the narrative, one of which is at the source of John's account of the walking on water. So we end up with a text of a certain complexity. And to this Matthew will add an episode of his own around Peter. Thus, the story can be divided into four moments: 1) the execution of the initial plan where the disciples leave in a boat and face the headwind, while Jesus sends the crowd away, 2) the interaction between Jesus walking on the water and the disciples, 3) the interaction between Peter and Jesus, and 4) a conclusion when everyone is gathered. This story belongs to the second part of Matthew's gospel when, faced with the prospect of his approaching death, Jesus focuses his teaching on his disciples. First of all, with the scene of the multiplication of the loaves, he associates his disciples with his compassion to feed the crowds, and at the end of the crossing of the lake, they will witness Jesus' healing mission. The story of the walking on the water will be the key to illuminating this whole ensemble. And this key will be faith in him who, now risen, shares God's privileges of being master of creation, and as God was able to give manna and bring his people across the sea, so will he be able to do the same for his Church. This faith is also expected of its leaders, as Peter was. Intention of the author The Christian community that is probably the first recipient of Matthew's gospel is the Jewish Christians of Antioch. However, this community is experiencing tensions with their brothers for whom they are probably considered heretics and who are preparing to excommunicate them from the synagogue. Tensions also exist within the community between the conservatives who want to continue to apply the Jewish Law and practices in their entirety, and the "liberals" who appeal to the Christian liberty of which St. Paul spoke. Finally, there are tensions among the leaders of the community, some of whom are very much interested in their "rabbi", "father" or "doctor" credentials. This raises the question of the survival of the community. The whole of our story begins with Jesus feeding the crowd narrative which clearly evokes the Eucharistic assembly. After the gathering, after the experience of a memorable moment, it is the dismissal, the return to normal life and to the mission. It is above all the awareness that the physical Jesus who walked the roads of Palestine is no longer with us, for he is with his Father. The waves that hit the boat are all the external and internal problems that the community is experiencing. When Jesus wants to make himself present to the community, it is no longer the Jesus of old that we could see and touch. He belongs to the world of God, whose authority he shares over all creation, including the sea and the waves, which for a Jew represent the forces of evil. In the midst of evil, the unbelieving eye distinguishes only the shadow or the spectre of the world of death, including Jesus who would be there with all the others; for this eye, Jesus has not risen. It is only by his word that Jesus can join the community and say, "I am", a word that reminds us that he now shares God's privileges, including the privilege of overcoming evil in all its forms. So Matthew can say to his community, 'Even though the Twelve were able to see and touch the body of Jesus, all this gave them no advantage in recognising the risen Jesus'. And Matthew also has a message for the leaders of the community: 'Look at Peter who wanted to follow in the footsteps of Jesus, but was not able to because of a lack of faith. If Peter failed, how much more will it be for you. If you don't cultivate a faith to carry the mountains, you will all come out losers against the forces of evil. Matthew wants to end this story with a powerful proclamation of faith from the disciples around Jesus the son of God, i.e. the one who shares God's privilege of overcoming the forces of evil. It is important to him that the disciples proclaim their faith before the Roman pagans at the end of his gospel, at the death of Jesus, and that they serve as a model for the members of the community. With this faith," he says, "you will come out victorious in all the problems that beset you, and this will give true meaning to your Eucharistic gatherings.
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
eutheōs (immediately) |
Eutheōs is an adverb meaning: immediately, right away, straight away, at once. It is very rare outside of the Gospel-Acts: Mt = 13; Mk = 1; Lk = 6; Jn = 3; Acts = 9; 1Jn = 0; 2Jn = 0; 3Jn = 1. As can be seen, it is found mainly in Matthew and Luke. Mark prefers its synonym euthys (Mt = 5; Mk = 41; Lk = 1; Jn = 3; Acts = 1; 1Jn = 0; 2Jn = 0; 3Jn = 0), derived from the adjective euthys (straight, direct) and which means "immediately, right away" when it refers to time, or "directly" when it refers to space, or "directly, simply" when it is about how to act.
Very clearly, Matthew likes the adverb eutheōs and prefers it to euthys.
The five occurrences of euthys in Matthew appear only in passages that he copied from Mark. Then why did he almost always replace euthys by eutheōs, except in those five passages? Only Matthew himself could give us an explanation. Luke also prefers eutheōs to euthys, and the only occurrence of euthys is in a passage from the Document Q. In John it is more ambiguous, but it seems that euthys is more part of his vocabulary than eutheōs, because this The latter seems to come from a tradition he receives about healing the paralytic, walking on the waters and denying Peter, while euthys appears in the speeches of Jesus that he seems to have composed. What role does the adverb "immediately" play, which appears regularly in the Gospels, especially in Matthew?
Here, in v. 22, the adverb "immediately" is one of the first words of our pericope. We must therefore look at what precedes. Now, what precedes is the scene of Jesus feeding the crowds. What does that mean? Matthew notifies us that there is a connection between the scene of Jesus feeding the crowd and the scene of walking on the waters. What is this connection? This is what we need to find out by analyzing the whole story. |
Adverb eutheōs in the Gospels-Acts | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ēnankasen (he compelled) |
Ēnankasen is the verb anankazō in the active indicative aorist 3rd person plural. It means: to compel, to force, to oblige. It is very
rare in the New Testament and in the Gospel-Acts: Mt = 1; Mk = 1; Lk = 1; Jn = 0; Acts = 2; 1Jn = 0; 2Jn = 0; 3Jn = 0.
This is not a word that belongs to the Matthean vocabulary, since the latter borrows it from Mark when he copies this scene of the walking on the waters. Likewise, Mark only uses it for this scene. It is Luke who uses it the most, first with the parable from the source Q where a man, seeing that there were still free seats at his banquet because of numerous refusals, forced onlookers to attend (Lk 14:23); but Luke also puts this verb twice in the mouth of Paul in his Acts of the Apostles (26: 11; 28: 19). Finally, let us note the four occurrences in the Pauline epistles (2 Cor 12: 11; Gal 2: 3.14; 6: 12). What is important to note is that these occurrences of "to compel" are never about physical violence, but rather about a pressing call or moral or religious obligation, or situations that require certain decisions to be made. Why did Jesus "compel" his disciples to leave the place? As Matthew takes up again a scene from Mark, it is on the side of the latter that we must look for a answer. In fact, the disciples have just experienced a memorable moment with Jesus feeding the crowds. Now, for Mark, this moment can be deceptive, because one cannot understand this messiah who feeds the world if we do not understand the cross that awaits him. So Jesus finds a way of "wrenching" them out of their illusion in order to live out the difficult crossing of the rough sea, the only way to enter into the mystery of his life and ours. |
Verb anankazō in the New Testament | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
mathētas (disciples) |
Matthētas is the masculine noun matthētēs in the accusative plural form. It means: to be a disciple or a pupil or a learner; it refers to someone who
is listening to a master. As one can imagine, the word is very frequent in the Gospel-Acts: Mt = 72; Mk = 46; Lk = 37; Jn = 78; Acts = 28; 1Jn = 0; 2Jn =
0; 3Jn = 0. It can refer to the disciples of Jesus, John or even those of the Pharisees (Mk 2:18).
The question was asked: is the word "disciple" comes from the first Christian community to designate members of the community, or does it really reflect how people called all those who were attached to Jesus when he preached? After his analysis, J.P. Meier concludes that this term really belongs to Jesus era, since the first Christians rather got rid of this term to define themselves. Moreover, among those who have considered Jesus as a master, three different groups of people can be distinguished
It should be noted that although several women are mentioned, none of them are given the title of disciple, no doubt because of the culture of back then. Matthew likes the word disciple: not only does he use it very often (he is 2nd, behind John), but out of the 72 occurrences, 42 (about 60%). are unique to him. But what must be emphasized is that Matthew is the only one to associate them with the Twelve: he is the only one to speak of the Twelve. disciples, first to frame the missionary discourse (10: 1 and 11: 1), then to share the fate that awaits him as he going up to Jerusalem (20: 17). And when Judas has betrayed Jesus and commits suicide, Matthew will speak about the eleven disciples (28: 16), an expression that he is the only one to use. Now, Mark, who is the source of Matthew and Luke, speaks only of the "Twelve" or the "Eleven". What does that mean? Matthew seems to restrict the title of disciple to the specific group of the Twelve who accompanies him on the road and whom he sends on mission. And when one looks at the whole of his gospel, it is clear that the disciples of Jesus occupy a special place and that they are called to play a unique role Disciples are separate people to whom Jesus reserves for a special teaching and who have a greater knowledge of the christian mystery.
The disciples have a unique relationship with Jesus and constitute his family.
Disciples are called to be the salt of the earth and the light of the world
What is quite peculiar to Matthew, the disciples play the role of intermediary or mediator between Jesus and the crowd.
One must not be surprised by the unique place Matthew gives to the disciples. We are probably in the middle of Antioch around the year 80 or 85 when the Church begins to structure itself on the model of the Old Testament and where this classification between clerics and laity takes shape. Yet despite this unique role that Matthew gives to the disciples, he is not shy to point out their weakness, their limitations and sometimes their narrow-mindedness. For example, they are afraid when Jesus walks on water (14: 26), or when they hear a voice from heaven (17: 6). When Jesus presents his vision of marriage where a man cannot repudiate his wife for any reason, their remark would be considered macho today (19:10 "The disciples say to him: 'If this is the condition of 'man to woman, it is not expedient to get married.'"). When Jesus told them that it is difficult for a rich person to enter the kingdom of heaven, Matthew writes: "The disciples were dumbfounded: 'Who then can be saved?'" (19: 25). When a woman spills an alabaster bottle containing a very precious perfume on Jesus, he passes the buck to the disciples for saying: "What good is this waste?"(26: 8). When Peter bravely claims that he is ready to die for Jesus and Mark writes that "all" said the same, Matthew insists on clarifying: "All the disciples said the same" (26:35). Here, in v. 22, what role does Matthew have the disciples play? The rest of the story will show us that we are in front of an epiphany of Jesus to his disciples, i.e. a revelation of his identity; in fact, the story will end with a confession of faith by the disciples with these words: "Truly, you are God's son". Thus, for Matthew, the disciples have a special knowledge of the Christian mystery. |
Noun mathētēs in Matthew | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
embēnai (embark) |
Embēnai is the verb embainō to the active infinitive aorist tense. It is formed of the preposition en (in), which becomes em by being followed by the consonant 'b', and the verb bainō (to go), and thus means: to go in, to go into, to board. In the New Testament, it appears only in the four gospels: Mt = 5; Mk = 5; Lk = 3; Jn = 3; Acts = 0; 1Jn = 0; 2Jn = 0; 3Jn = 0. Let us note that the context is always that of getting into a boat (ploion), or a small boat (ploiarion), so that when the word "boat" is not explicitly mentioned, the verb embainō must be translated by "to embark".
In the Septuagint, it is also a question of getting into a boat, except in the case of the prophet Nahum (3: 14) where one gets into the clay. |
Verb embainō in the Bible | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ploion (boat) |
Ploion is a neutral word in the accusative singular and means: boat, ship. In the New Testament, it appears only in the Gospels: Mt = 13; Mk = 17; Lk = 8; Jn = 7; Acts = 19; 1Jn = 0; 2Jn = 0; 3Jn = 0. It is also necessary to mention its diminutive in the form of ploiarion (small boat) which is found only in Mark and John throughout the Bible: Mt = 0; Mk = 1; Lk = 0; Jn = 4; Acts = 0; 1Jn = 0; 2Jn = 0; 3Jn = 0.
Since a number of Jesus' disciples were fishermen, it is not surprising that the boat takes centre stage in a number of stories. Moreover, part of Jesus' ministry was in Galilee around the lake of the same name, so many of the trips were made by boat. In Matthew, the boat is mentioned in a number of circumstances:
All these circumstances belong to scenes from Mark that Matthew simply repeated. However, he simplified some of the scenes, reducing the number of Jesus' movements, and occasionally he modified one scene or another to insert his theology as we will see later. In all these mentions of ploion, two scenes dominate: the storm being stilled and the walking on the waters where the word appears a total of 8 times (60% of Matthew's occurrences). Because of the context, it is quite clear that Matthew makes the boat play a symbolic role: it is the symbol of the way to follow Christ, a way that is always difficult and eventful, full of adversities; the boat is also the symbol of the Christian community, the Church. |
Noun ploion dans le Nouveau Testament | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
proagein (to go before) |
Proagein is the verb proagō in the present infinitive. It is made up of the preposition pro (before, forward) and the verb agō (lead, take with one, fetch), and therefore means: lead ahead, precede. It appears only a few times in the Gospels-Acts (Mt = 6; Mk = 5; Lk = 1; Jn = 0; Acts = 4; 1Jn = 0; 2Jn = 1; 3Jn = 0) and even more rarely in the rest of the New Testament (1 Timothy and Hebrews).
The action of preceding or bringing is situated in two major contexts, the one related to space and the one related to time. Context related to space In this context, proagō is mostly translated as "to go before". The context can be one where people are ahead of others in a march, i.e., walking ahead. For example:
The context can also be that of a leader marching in front of his troops. For example:
There is the rare context where it is an object that precedes.
But there is also the context where it is not a matter of one group or one person going ahead of the others, but rather of bringing someone forward or bringing them before someone else, such as a judge; it is a kind of appearance. Examples can be found in the Acts of the Apostles.
This context includes the symbolic universe, i.e. going ahead and deviating from the norm.
Context related to time In this context, proagō establishes an order in time, where people arrive before others at a place, i.e. they go faster. For example:
This precedence in time may concern intangible realities such as prophecies or prescriptions or past actions. For example:
This analysis leads us to ask the question: what is the meaning of Mk 16:7 ("But go and tell his disciples and Peter that he goes before you into Galilee: there you will see him, just as he has told you?"). Is it a context of space (Jesus walks before his disciples in Galilee, as a leader before his troops), or a context of time (Jesus will be in Galilee before the arrival of the disciples)? Let us first consider the option of a time context: what message would Mark try to communicate if he claimed that Jesus would be faster than the disciples and therefore be in Galilee before them? Related to this question is this other one: Why do we have to go to Galilee? Can't Jesus be present in Jerusalem? In short, it is difficult to find in this option a message that would be good news. On the other hand, the option of a context of space seems to open up a more interesting perspective: for the term "Galilee" means "circle" in Hebrew and was often called the "circle of nations" (see Isaiah 8:23, taken up by Mt 4:15). In this case, the fact that Jesus "precedes" his disciples in Galilee would mean that Jesus would walk before his disciples in Galilee, i.e. he would exercise his leadership over his disciples among the nations of the world, and that is how his disciples would experience that he is alive. Let us not forget two things from the gospel according to Mark:
This option is confirmed by the only passage in Mark where Jesus is the subject of the verb proagō, and therefore is presented as the leader who guides his disciples: They were on their way, going up to Jerusalem; and Jesus went before (proagō) them, and they were amazed, and those who followed were afraid. Taking the Twelve with him again, he began to tell them what was going to happen to him" (Mk 10:32). Here, in v. 22, the verb "to go before" is situated in a context related to time: Jesus asks his disciples to be before him in the place where they are to go. On this point Matthew is simply repeating Mark's account. One can imagine that Mark's part of the story is staged: the disciples must first face the difficulties of life "before" they can experience the presence of Jesus; in time, one must precede the other. This is what Mark writes for his persecuted community in Rome and what Matthew writes for his Jewish community in Antioch. |
Verb proagō in the New Testament | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
peran (the other side) |
Peran is an adverb meaning: on the other side, beyond. Throughout the New Testament it appears only in the four gospels: Mt = 7; Mk = 7; Lk = 1; Jn = 8; Acts = 0; 1Jn = 0; 2Jn = 0; 3Jn = 0. And it is only used in two specific situations:
The adverb peran is not a Matthean word, i.e. its presence is explained by the fact that Matthew copies Mark. The only exception is 4: 15 ("Land of Zebulun and land of Naphtali, Road of the Sea, Land beyond (peran) the Jordan, Galilee of the nations!") where it is a quotation from Isaiah 8:23, according to the Septuagint. |
Adverb peran in the New Testament | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
apolysē (he would dismiss) |
Polysē is the verb apolyō in the aoristic subjunctive tense, third person singular. It is formed of the preposition apo (from, far from) and the verb lyō (to bind), and therefore literally means: to untie or remove the bond. It exists almost only in the Gospel-Acts throughout the New Testament (the only exception is Hebrews 13:23): Mt = 19; Mk = 12; Lk = 14; Jn = 5; Acts = 15. Its meaning is determined by its context. And when we look at the texts as a whole, the contexts can be grouped into four main categories:
As we can see, the idea is always the same: a link exists, and that link is broken. From all the Gospel-Act texts, we can establish the following table.
A first comment is in order. In spite of the number of occurrences of the verb apolyō in the Gospels, the latter appears mainly during three events:
The second remark concerns Matthew himself, where we note the greatest number of occurrences. For this number is misleading because there are in fact only seven occurrences of his own. And of these seven, three are simply an extension of the discussion on divorce (5:31; 19:7-8), one is an extension of the scene of Jesus feeding the crowds (14:53). This leaves us with three occurrences that are truly unique to Matthew:
This means that it is not a truly familiar word in Matthew's literary arsenal; it seems to play a purely utilitarian role. What about here at v. 22? First of all, apolyō comes from the text of Mark 6:45 which Matthew simply copies. It is about sending away a crowd, breaking the bonds of the group that had formed around Jesus to listen to him and be nourished by him, so that people would disperse. Now, in Mark, taken over by Matthew, it is always Jesus who is responsible for sending people away: it is he whom people come to listen to, and he alone has the authority to send them away. Matthew will add other occurrences of the verb apolyō with the meaning of "to send away" (for example 15: 23 with the Canaanite woman's account), and it is always Jesus alone who can be responsible for this action. |
Verb apolyō in the New Testament | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ochlous (crowds) |
Ochlous is the plural masculine accusative of ochlos, which means: the crowd, the ordinary people, the rabble. If there is a constant in all the gospels, it is the presence of a crowd around Jesus and John the Baptist. For John the Baptist, this fact is also reported by the Jewish historian Flavius Josephus (see e.g. Jewish Antiquities, 18, 5, #116-118: "People gathered around him, for they were very exalted when they heard him speak. Herod feared that such persuasiveness would provoke a revolt, as the crowd seemed ready to follow the man's advice in every way"). Unfortunately, on Jesus, the Jewish historian remains silent. But Mark and John, two independent traditions, agree that Jesus gathered crowds who wanted to listen to him and see the signs he was doing. The use of the word ochlos appears only in the Gospel-Acts throughout the New Testament, with the exception of four occurrences in Revelation: Mt = 50; Mk = 38; Lk = 41; Jn = 20; Acts = 22.
In Matthew, of the 50 occurrences, 27 are unique to him. That is to say that he wants them to play an important role. Let us make a few remarks on this subject.
Here, in v. 22, the word "crowd" is in the plural, as is usual in Matthew, and since in the Markan source he uses the word is in the singular, we can affirm that he takes the trouble to transform a singular into a plural: these crowds are the many who had followed him and whom he had pity on, whose cripples he healed (14:14) and whom he subsequently fed. For Matthew, Jesus feels compassion for these colourful masses that he now takes the trouble to send home. |
Noun ochlos in the New Testament | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
v. 23 And when the people were sent away, he went up the mountain to be apart to pray; and when evening came, he was there alone.
Literally: And having dismissed the crowds, he went up (anebē) into the mountain (oros) by himself (katʼ idian) to pray (proseuxasthai); and when the late hour (opsias) was come (genomenēs), he was there (ekei) alone (monos). |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
anebē (went up) | Anebē is the verb anabainō to the indicative aorist tense, 3rd person singular. It is formed from the preposition ana,
which describes a movement from bottom to top and the verb bainō, which designates walking and going somewhere, and means: to go up, to raise. It is a verb regularly found in the Gospel-Acts, and particularly in the Gospel of John: Mt = 9; Mk = 9; Lk = 9; Jn = 16; Acts = 19; 1Jn = 0; 2Jn = 0; 3Jn = 0.
The verb appears in different contexts. First there is the context of going up to Jerusalem and its temple, and also to Bethlehem: Mt = 2; Mk = 3; Lk = 5; Jn = 9; Acts = 9. Let us remember that both Jerusalem and Bethlehem are located at an altitude of about 775 meters. Two examples.
The mountain context naturally calls the verb anabainō which our Bibles often translate as "to climb": Mt = 3; Mk = 1; Lk = 1; Jn = 0; Acts = 0. As we can see, it is in Matthew that it is most present, probably evoking mount Sinai.
But more often than not, the context is that of the Jordan River from which one goes up, of a house terrace that one must reach, of a boat or a chariot in which one embarks, of a tree that one climbs, of fish that one brings up from the water: Mt = 3; Mk = 2; Lk = 2; Jn = 2; Acts = 6.
Let us note the particular context in Mark where the plants are rising, i.e. growing: Mt = 1; Mk = 3; Lk = 0; Jn = 0; Acts = 0.
There is the rarer context which is theological, and ascending to God or to heaven refers to a unique relationship with God: Mt = 0; Mk = 0; Lk = 0; Jn = 5; Acts = 2. Here, the Gospel according to John largely dominates.
Finally, let us mention the psychological context found only in Luke where anabainō is used to describe what happens in the human heart: Mt = 0; Mk = 0; Lk = 1; Jn = 0; Acts = 2.
Here in v. 23 the context is that of a mountain being climbed. In Matthew, the same context appears in the scene of the Sermon on the Mount (5:1) and the scene introducing the second narrative of Jesus feeding the crowds (15:29). These are important moments, key moments. |
Verb anabainō in the Testament | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
oros (mountain ) |
Orous is the noun oros with the genitive neutral singular. In the Gospels and Acts, it means mountain or mount. As Judea and Galilee are mountainous regions, it is easy to imagine that the term is used regularly, especially in Matthew: Mt = 16; Mk = 11; Lk = 12; Jn = 5; Acts = 3; 1Jn = 0; 2Jn = 0; 3Jn = 0.
Already Mark had accustomed us to the important role that the mountain plays in Jesus' ministry.
But Matthew will go even further. When we limit ourselves to the passages that are his own or where he is the only one to refer to the mountain, we note this:
Why such insistence on the mountain?
There is no copy of Document Q, it is more a working hypothesis to explain the passages common to Matthew and Luke. It is therefore difficult to reconstruct this hypothetical source. But in general, many biblical scholars think that Luke respected this Document Q better, i.e. he reworked it less than Matthew. For example, Luke's text of the Beatitudes ("Blessed are you poor") would be more respectful of the original than Matthew's, who "spiritualized" it a bit ("Blessed are you poor in spirit"); Luke's "Our Father" is much shorter and simpler, while Matthew adds some of his themes ("Thy will be done"). The story of the lost/wandering sheep seems to be no exception. Luke would better reflect the ancient Palestinian context of deserts, i.e., isolated places without much vegetation where a sheep could get lost. For his part, what does Matthew seem to be doing? In his own way, he is "Christianizing" this story, for it is no longer about a lost sheep, but about a sheep that "goes astray", i.e. a sheep that has been led astray by ideologies that have corrupted or distorted its original faith. And the setting is that of the mountain, the very setting of Matthew's living environment. Here, in v. 23, Matthew only repeats the term mountain which is already found in Mark (Mk 6:46). But the accent he gives it is different. While in Mark this moment of prayer on the mountain appears as a usual item of a day of Jesus, Matthew emphasizes the transcendence of Jesus by mentioning his isolation and loneliness of Jesus, preparing for the moment of revelation that is about to come. More than among other evangelists, the mountain is a "divine" environment. |
Noun oros in the Gospels-Acts | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
katʼ idian (by himself) |
Katʼ idian is an expression formed from the preposition kata (by, according to) and the possessive adjective idios (proper, particular, personal), and therefore literally means: by oneself, and is usually translated as: apart, privately, in particular, or even: separately. The idea is to target someone in order to isolate him or her so as to have him or her for oneself. This is a rather rare expression in the Gospel-Acts: Mt = 6; Mk = 7; Lk = 2; Jn = 0; Acts = 1; 1Jn = 0; 2Jn = 0; 3Jn = 0. Elsewhere in the New Testament it appears only once in the Epistle to the Galatians (2:2) when Paul reveals that he encountered "apart" the pillars of the Church in Jerusalem, and in the Septuagint, only in 2 Maccabees (4:5) is it found, where it speaks of the "special" interest of a whole people.
In the Gospels the expression is used in five different contexts.
This whole framework helps us locate Matthew. If he joins Mark in presenting Jesus teaching 'separately' to the disciples, or the disciples questioning 'separately' Jesus, he is unique in using katʼ idian to introduce us to a Jesus who isolates himself. The expression serves to express the unique situation and identity of Jesus, which he emphasizes more than the other Synoptics. This is the case here in v. 23. More specifically, even though the basis of this scene is borrowed from Mark, it is Matthew who adds to it: katʼ idian. |
Expression katʼ idian in the Bible | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
proseuxasthai (to pray) |
Proseuxasthai is the verb proseuchomai in the middle voice of the infinitive aorist tense. It means: to pray, and appears regularly in the Gospel-Acts: Mt = 15; Mk = 10; Lk = 19; Jn = 0; Acts = 16; 1Jn = 0; 2Jn = 0; 3Jn = 0. It is especially Luke who insists on this theme both in his gospel and in Acts. On the other hand, it is totally absent from the Johannine tradition. Why is this? One might think that, from John's perspective, Jesus is in constant communion with his Father, so that his whole life is prayer, and this is not an activity that is added to his day.
One cannot mention the verb proseuchomai without also including the noun proseuchē: prayer. It is less frequent than the verb: Mt = 1; Mk = 2; Lk = 3; Jn = 0; Acts = 9; 1Jn = 0; 2Jn = 0; 3Jn = 0. But the same observations apply: it is Luke who insists on this theme, whereas it is totally absent from the Johannine tradition. Who prays in the Gospels? Most clearly and most often, it is Jesus. The prayer of the disciple and of the Christian is also mentioned, but most of the time it is in the form of an exhortation to pray on behalf of Jesus, with a verb with the imperative. Occasionally the prayer of the Jews is mentioned, but it is almost only in Luke. Looking through the Gospels, what can be said about the attitude and content of prayer and its role? The attitude in prayer
The content of the prayer
Why pray?
Thus, each evangelist brings his own perspective on prayer, even though they all agree that Jesus prayed and asked his disciples to pray. Matthew, for his part, takes up a good part of Mark's texts on prayer (Mt 14:23; 24:20; 26:36,39,41,42), as well as those of Document Q (Mt 5:44; 6:9). But certain texts are particular to him, such as his practical advice on the right attitude in prayer (Mt 6:5-7), the unique mention that Jesus laid hands on children while praying (Mt 9:13), an echo perhaps of a practice of the early Church, and especially his insistence on the purpose of prayer to lead the person to do God's will (Mt 6:10; 26:42). Here, in v. 23, Matthew simply repeats a scene from Mark where Jesus withdraws to pray, as he used to do, especially after the memorable event of feeding a crowd and just before revealing himself in a special way to his disciples; it is like a moment when he wants to "synchronize" with God, to make sure that he does his will. |
Verb proseuchomai in the Gospel-Acts | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
opsias (late hour) | Opsias is the adjective opsios in the feminine dative singular and means: late. Most of the time, this adjective is used as a noun, i.e. implying the late hour, so it is usually translated as: evening. It is uncommon in the Bible; apart from the Gospels, it is found only in the Septuagint of Judith: Mt = 7; Mk = 6; Lk = 0; Jn = 2; Acts = 0; 1Jn = 0; 2Jn = 0; 3Jn = 0. And out of the total of 16 occurrences in the Bible, 14 times opsios is followed by the verb ginomai (to come, to arrive), in the expression: when evening comes. It is therefore a common expression.
Why is it important to mention the evening? When we know that a gospel is not a journalistic report, but a catechesis, all the details of a story are not trivial. Let us look at the different contexts in which the word "evening" appears.
Here, in v. 23, Matthew takes up a phrase of Mark's which already sets the scene for the evening. Now this mention of evening prepares the reader for a difficult moment in the darkness of the night. The darkness can be understood on two levels:
Let us never forget that a gospel was written several decades after the mission of Jesus and is addressed to a community so that it can identify with what is being told. |
Adjective opsios in the Bible | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
genomenēs (was come) |
Genomenēs is the verb ginomai in the middle voice aorist participle tense, feminine genitive singular form. The verb belongs with opsios to a construction called "absolute genitive"; it is a subordinate proposition with a subject (opsios) and a predicate, usually a participle (genomenēs), to the genitive. It expresses a circumstance surrounding the fact contemplated in the main proposition. It is the equivalent of the Latin "absolute ablative". It is found here and there in the Gospel-Acts: Mt = 10; Mk = 10; Lk = 3; Jn = 2; Acts = 14; 1Jn = 0; 2Jn = 0; 3Jn = 0. Here are some examples (see the complete list):
Let's go back to the verb ginomai itself. It is the 4th most frequently used verb in the Gospel-Acts after legō (to say), eimi (to be) and erchomai (to go), but before poieō (to do), horaō (see), echō (to have), akouō (to hear), didōmi (to give) and apokrinomai (to answer): Mt = 75; Mk = 55; Lk = 131; Jn = 51; Acts = 125; 1Jn = 1; 2Jn = 1; 3Jn = 1. It means: to become, to happen, to occur, to arrive and expresses the idea that a reality comes into existence, occurs, for example, an event. Overwhelmingly, Luke is the one who uses this verb the most, often introducing his sentences with egeneto, without subject, which can be translated by: it came to pass, the "it" being here in an impersonal form. Here again, Luke is the one who uses egeneto the most in this form: Mt = 6; Mk = 3; Lk = 40; Jn = 1; Acts = 23; 1Jn = 0; 2Jn = 0; 3Jn = 0 (see all cases). What about Matthew? Even though he is far behind Luke in the use of ginomai, he still uses it regularly. For example, the form egeneto (it comes to pass) appears 6 times in his gospel, but each time this form is specific to him: it comes either from a particular source, or from an insertion to the Marcan source or to the Document Q. In the same way, we find in him 10 occurrences of the absolute genitive, four of which are proper to him. Finally, of the 75 occurrences of ginomai in general, 42 (60%) are specific to him. What does this mean? If Matthew is not the greatest user of the word, we can say nevertheless that it is part of his regular vocabulary that he likes to use. What role does this verb play in his gospel?
We can now produce this little chart:
Here in v. 23, with an expression in the absolute genitive, Matthew intends to give us the circumstances of the event he is about to describe: it takes place at night. |
Verb ginomai in the Gospels-Acts
Verb ginomai in the genitive absolute form in the Gospel-Acts | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
monos (alone) | Monos is the adjectivve monos in the nominative singular masculine, and is in agreement with the name Jesus, which is implied in the subject of the verb "he was" (ēn). It appears a few times in the Gospel Acts: Mt = 6; Mk = 3; Lk = 9; Jn = 10; Acts = 0; 1Jn = 0; 2Jn = 1; 3Jn = 0. It means: alone, unique.
Who is alone? It can be a person, or a thing.
Let's take an interest in Matthew. There are only six occurrences of monos in his Gospel, but twice he adds (underlined) this adjective to the text he receives from Mark. Here is the literal translation.
Thus, Matthew deliberately added monos to the Markan source. In 12:4, he probably wanted to emphasize the fact that only priests at that time could consume the bread put on tables as an offering, highlighting David's audacity and the gravity of his gesture. In 14:23 Matthew associates the late hour with Jesus being alone (for Mark the late hour is associated with the scene of the boat in the middle of the sea). Why is this? Based on Matthew's theology, we can guess that he wants to emphasize the transcendence of Jesus, the one that can be associated with the experience of the "night of unknowing" that the mystics speak of. Jesus is alone, because he is unique; it is the night, because his identity partially escapes us. |
Adjective monos in the Gospel-Acts | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ekei (there) | Ekei is an adverb of place which means: there. It appears regularly in the Gospel-Acts: Mt = 28; Mk = 11; Lk = 16; Jn = 22; Acts = 6; 1Jn = 0; 2Jn = 0; 3Jn = 0, especially in Matthew and Luke. It can be said that it is part of the Matthean vocabulary. First of all, he is the one who uses it the most, then, of the 28 occurrences in his gospel, 22 (80%) are unique to him, and finally, he even allows himself to add it to the text he receives from his Markan source. Let's give two examples (the addition of ekei is underlined).
Why add "there"? We know how much Matthew loves precision and wants to dot the i's to avoid any ambiguity. It is probably a way for him to be very clear about the geographical locations of his characters. Here, in v. 23, Matthew wants to emphasize that Jesus is always in the same place as his place of prayer, and therefore always in God's world. |
Adverb ekei in the Gospel-Acts | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
v. 24 The boat was already several hundreds of yards from the shore when it came up against the waves which were moving with a headwind
Literally: Then the boat, being already (ēdē) several (pollous) stadia (stadious) distant from (apeichen) the land (gēs), being tortured (basanizomenon) by the waves (kymatōn), because the wind (anemos) was adverse (enantios) it. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ēdē (already) | ēdē is an adverb of time which means: already. It appears from time to time in the Gospels, especially in John: Mt = 7; Mk = 8; Lk = 10; Jn = 16; Acts = 3; 1Jn = 2; 2Jn = 0; 3Jn = 0. This is not a frequent word in Matthew, but nevertheless he sometimes adds it to the source he receives from Mark, as in 17:12 (|| Mk 9:13) and as he does here in v. 24: once again we find his concern for precision.
Depending on the context, Matthew uses it to insist on two things:
Thus, Matthew's insistence in v. 24 is on a quantity, the distance of the boat from the earth. Why such an insistence? One has the impression that Matthew intends to show the gap between the community of disciples in the boat and Jesus himself. This gap is very representative of what the disciples experienced after Jesus' death, with his absence, even though they also experienced that he is alive. |
Adverb ēdē in the Gospels-Acts | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
pollous (several) |
Pollous is the adjective polys in the plural masculine accusative and matches the noun stadious (stadium). It means: many, numerous, several, and it is very frequent among all evangelists: Mt = 51; Mk = 59; Lk = 51; Jn = 36; Acts = 46; 1Jn = 0; 2Jn = 2; 3Jn = 1.
The contexts in which it appears can be grouped into three categories.
This adjective appears frequently in Matthew: it is noted not only in the sources he uses, but also in the occurrences that are unique to him (23 occurrences out of a total of 51). He sometimes allows himself to add it to his sources. Let's offer two comparisons, one from Document Q, assuming that Luke reflects it best, as is his habit, and the other from Mark.
As can be seen in these two examples, Matthew added polys (underlined) to his source. Why? In the first example Matthew emphasizes the contrast between God's care for nature and that for man; the Jewish evangelist likes things clear and distinguished, and here polys allows him to affirm that there is no comparison between God's care for nature and that for man. In the second example, the addition of " many " seems to respond to two needs. On the one hand, it is intended to correct Mark's illogical assertion that Jesus did not perform any miracles, while at the same time mentioning that he healed a few sick people; by using the expression "not many" Matthew can integrate both the fact that Jesus did heal some people and the obstacle represented by the lack of faith. On the other hand, it is unthinkable for Matthew that Jesus could not perform a miracle at all, given his perception of Jesus' transcendence and his emphasis on his power. In short, the adjective polys is a word well integrated in his gospel. Here, in v. 24, polys allows him to accentuate the distance between the shore where Jesus is and the boat: he speaks of several or many stadia. It is a quantity that can be counted or tallied. Of course, he does not specify this quantity. He simply wants us to know that it is large. Why does he want us to know it's large? As we have already mentioned, this great distance symbolizes the gap between a transcendent Jesus, whom he looks at with Easter eyes, and the community of disciples in the boat. This distance also symbolizes the absence experienced after the death of Jesus, and therefore the feeling of vulnerability and fragility in the absence of the master. |
Adjective polys in the Gospel-Acts | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
stadious (stadia) |
Stadious is the plural male accusative of stadion (stadium). It is very uncommon throughout the Bible, especially among evangelists: Mt = 1; Mk = 0; Lk = 1; Jn = 2; Acts = 0; 1Jn = 0; 2Jn = 0; 3Jn = 0. It is a Greek measure of length which varied according to the length of the cubit and the foot as the unit of measurement. The Olympic Stadium in Greece was 632 feet long, the Alexandria Stadium 606 feet long, the Delphi Stadium 583 feet long. In ancient Greek texts, the Alexandria stadium, which was rounded to 607 feet, was used as the main unit of measurement. This measure was equivalent to the stadium's racetrack. The word, of course, also refers to the place where the races were held, the stadium. In the latter case, the word is in neutral. And by extension, the word sometimes refers to the place where one could walk in a garden (see Susanna 1: 37).
In the Gospels, the stadium is used to designate only one unit of measurement: Emmaus would be 60 stadia (7 miles) from Jerusalem (Lk 24: 13), Bethany would be 15 stadia (1.7 miles) away (see map of Palestine). However, here in v. 24, Matthew remains vague in speaking of "several" stadia. Mark, for his part, does not speak of distance, but simply writes: "The boat was in the middle of the sea" (Mk 6:47); note that this "sea" is Lake Galilee, which is 13 miles long, 7.5 miles wide, and 138 to 157 feet deep. On the other hand, the evangelist John has a parallel account (6:16-21) to Mark's, in which he writes: "They had rowed about 25 or 30 stadia" (6:19), so John speaks of 3 to 3.5 miles. There is a certain consensus among biblical scholars that John did not know the other gospels, and therefore Mark, whom Matthew follows, had a similar but different source to John. If Matthew copies Mark's account with modifications, how can we explain the word "stadia" which does not appear in Mark's account, but in John's account? There are three possible answers:
It is impossible to choose an answer with any degree of certainty. In any case, it can nevertheless be said that Matthew intends to assert that a great distance separates Jesus from the community of disciples, and the expression "several stadia" serves his purpose well. |
Noun stadion in the Bible | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
gēs (land) |
Gēs is the singular feminine genitive name of gē, a genitive controlled by the preposition apo (from). This word is frequent throughout the Bible, especially in the Gospel-Acts: Mt = 43; Mk = 19; Lk = 25; Jn = 13; Acts = 33. It means: earth. But in English, earth refers to different realities, such as the humus where vegetables are grown, or the planet on which we live. It is the same in the Greek language of the Gospels-Acts. Let us mention five different meanings.
When we compare these various meanings, we arrive at this picture:
A number of things can be noted.
Of the 43 occurrences of the word, 30 are unique to him. And his own occurrences appear not only in his own sources, but also in the sources he shares with other evangelists, especially Document Q; we can guess that he is the one who added the word. For example:
Here, in v. 24, the word "land" refers to the dry land as opposed to water, and the expression "being far from land" is specific to Matthew, even though the whole story is borrowed from Mark. In this context, the dry land is a symbol of what is reassuring as opposed to the sea or the lake where the disciples' boat will experience turbulence. |
Noun gē in the Gospels-Acts | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
apeichen (being distant from) |
Apeichen is the imperfect, 3rd person singular, of the verb apechō. It is uncommon throughout the New Testament, especially among evangelists: Mt = 5; Mk = 2; Lk = 4; Jn = 0; Acts = 2; 1Jn = 0; 2Jn = 0; 3Jn = 0. It is a compound word, formed from the preposition apo (from, far from) and the verb echō (to have). It can have various meanings.
In Matthew, the verb has two meanings: to hold / receive (3 times) and to be away from (2 times). Of the five occurrences, four are his own. Here, in v. 24, apeichō has of course the meaning of "to be far from". Whether the word comes from Matthew's pen or Luke's (see Boismard), it denotes the emphasis placed on the distance between the boat, i.e. the community of disciples, and Jesus. |
Verb apechō in the New Testament | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
basanizomenon (being tortured) |
Basanizomenon is the verb basanizō in the present passive participle, accusative neutral singular, agreeing with ploion (boat) which is in the accusative neutral singular. It is uncommon in the New Testament, especially among evangelists: Mt = 3; Mk = 2; Lk = 1; Jn = 0; Acts = 0; 1Jn = 0; 2Jn = 0; 3Jn = 0. In the rest of the Bible, it appears especially in the recent Septuagint texts. It means: to torment, to torture.
The verb basanizō is associated with suffering.
In the books of the Maccabees, the verb explicitly means: to torture. How to interpret the sentence: "the boat ... being tormented (basanizō) by the waves"? Let us first note that Matthew borrows here basanizō from Mark 6: 48 who writes: "(the disciples) tormented while rowing". Let us recall that Mark writes to the Roman community which is undergoing a serious persecution: Christians suffer, are sent into the arena with the beasts, are burned to become living torches; they are the disciples who suffer while rowing. Now, Matthew does not speak of tormented disciples, but of a tormented boat. He knows that a thing cannot suffer. But it is clear that he identifies the boat with the ecclesial community; it is the ecclesial community that suffers. In what sense? The situation is different from that of Mark. The Matthean community receives the attacks of their Jewish brothers, it also receives the attacks of the debates about Jewish tradition, about what must be kept, what can be eliminated. The verb basanizō expresses the suffering linked to this situation. |
Verb basanizō in the Bible | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
kymatōn (waves) | Kymatōn is the plural neutral genetivie of kyma. It literally means what is swollen, and therefore the swollen sea, i.e. the wave. It is very rare throughout the New Testament and among evangelists: Mt = 0; Mk = 3; Lk = 1; Jn = 0; Acts = 0; 1Jn = 0; 2Jn = 0; 3Jn = 0.
In the Gospels, the word appears first in Mark 4:37 in the account of the stilling storm, taken up again by Matthew 8:24. Then, in our account of the walking on the waters, which is a bit of a clone of the stilling storm, Matthew allows himself to add it to the account he gets from Mark. And that is all. To understand our story, it is important to ask the question: what do the waves represent in the Jewish world? As surprising as it may seem, the Jews are not a seafaring people, even though the country overlooks the Mediterranean; we are far from the culture of a people like the Phoenicians, further north. Generally speaking, the sea is frightening. It is linked to the chaotic abyss of the origins (Gen 1:2.9), the place where the demonic powers live and act (Isa 27:1). And so the waves share the properties of the sea.
Here, at v. 24, the boat is suffering because of the waves, therefore because of enemy forces. As we have said, it is the ecclesial community that suffers. And these waves probably represent their Jewish brethren who see Christians as heretics who have departed from the authentic tradition. As Paul did before his conversion, Christians will be dragged before the courts and ostracized. |
Noun kyma in the Bible | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
enantios (adverse) | Enantios is the adjective enantios in the masculine singular nominative form and is consistent with the noun anemos (wind). It is rare among evangelists and throughout the New Testament: Mt = 1; Mk = 2; Lk = 3; Jn = 0; Acts = 5; 1Jn = 0; 2Jn = 0; 3Jn = 0. It means first of all: in front of, but to face someone also means to be opposed to him. Thus, occurrences of enantios can be grouped into two major semantic families.
Enantios can mean "in front of," like when you stand or act in front of someone. For example:
Enantios can also refer to a reality that faces us, i.e. opposes us, and is therefore usually translated as: opposite, adverse. For example:
Here, in v. 24, enantios refers to the headwinds, as in Acts 27:4. But as we see elsewhere in the New Testament, enantios refers to enemies: Paul showed himself to be the enemy of the Christians (Acts 26:9); he did not want to be the enemy of his people (Acts 28:17); Paul mentions that in Thessalonica the Christians saw their countrymen opposing them and persecuted them (1 Thess 2:15); the epistle to Titus refers to the adversaries of the Christians (Titus 2:8). Thus, when Matthew speaks of headwinds, we must see them as more than a physical phenomenon: we must include all the forces opposed to the Christian community that constantly strike it. |
Adjective enantios in the New Testament | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
anemos (wind) |
Anemos is the noun anemos in the masculine singular nominative, it is the subject of the verb "to be" in the expression: the wind was adverse. It means wind. Even if it appears a certain number of times, it is nevertheless infrequent: Mt = 9; Mk = 7; Lk = 4; Jn = 1; Acts = 4; 1Jn = 0; 2Jn = 0; 3Jn = 0. Indeed, in the Gospels, it is first found in Mark, but the latter uses it above all for only two scenes, the stilling storm and its variant, walking on the water. Otherwise, the word makes only one appearance in the apocalyptic discourse. The same is true of Matthew, who copies Mark's scene of the stilling storm and the walking on the waters, as well as the apocalyptic discourse. Another occurrence comes from Document Q on John the Baptist (Mt 11:7). The only originality of Matthew is to mention the wind in this sequence from Document Q to illustrate the importance of putting into practice the word heard: while Luke speaks of floods and torrents, Matthew adds the force of the wind (Mt 7:25-27 | Lk 6:48-49). There is nothing original in Luke's account of the stilling storm from Mark and Document Q about John the Baptist. As for John, his only mention is related to the account of the walking on the waters. Thus, had it not been for the accounts of the stilling storm and the walking on the waters, the word "wind" would have been very rare among the evangelists.
What does the wind symbolize in the New Testament? We could group the occurrences of the word under four symbols.
Here, at v. 24, Matthew uses the expression "headwind" which he found in Mark's account. This allows him to express the hostile powers that are pouring down on the boat of the community of disciples. It is not a simple inconvenience, but real forces that can destroy this community. |
Noun anemos in the New Testament | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
v. 25 It was between three and six o'clock in the morning, when Jesus came to them walking on the water.
Literally: Then, in the fourth (tetartē) watch (phylakē) of the night (nyktos), he came out (ēlthen) to them walking (peripatōn)on the sea (thalassan). |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
tetartē (fourth) |
Tetartē is the adective tetartos in the feminine dative singular, and is in agreement with the feminine noun phylakē (guard). It means: fourth, and is extremely rare in the New Testament, especially among evangelists: Mt = 1; Mk = 1; Lk = 0; Jn = 0; Acts = 1; 1Jn = 0; 2Jn = 0; 3Jn = 0. In fact, in the Gospels, the word belongs to Mark 6:48 who introduces it into the account of the walking on the waters which Matthew simply copies. Otherwise, we find it in Acts 10:30, where we speak of a delay of four days, and seven times in Revelation to designate the fourth living creature, the fourth angel, the fourth precious stone, and the fourth part of the earth.
Here, in v. 25, the word refers to the fourth watch of the night. Remember that the night in the Roman world was divided into four parts of three hours each: the first part runs from 6:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m. and is called evening; the second part runs from 9:00 p.m. to midnight and is called midnight; the third part runs from 12:00 a.m. to 3:00 a.m. and is called the crowing of the cock; and the fourth part runs from 3:00 a.m. to 6:00 a.m. and is called morning. If we remember v. 22, Matthew tells us that Jesus forces his disciples into the boat without giving us a precise time. In v. 23, he writes that after the crowd was dismissed, Jesus went into the mountain to pray and when evening (6:00 pm to 9:00 pm) came, he was still there alone. Now, here in v. 25, Matthew tells us that it is between 3 and 6 o'clock. Thus, if we follow the indications of the account, the disciples got into the boat at the latest around 5:00 pm, before the beginning of the evening. This means that they were in the boat for a minimum of 7 hours, whereas according to the geographical indications given earlier, the journey started from the site of Jesus feeding the crowds, probably a few miles east of Capernaum, and went to Gennesaret (see Mt 14:34), on the left bank of the lake, a journey of barely a few miles (see the map of Palestine). If we limit ourselves to a purely geographical and physical perspective, we come up against an implausible account (a solution will be proposed when analyzing parallels). But the evangelist's perspective is not that of a report. We have already spoken earlier of the symbolism of the evening, which evokes the night and the trials of life. We have also talked about the symbolism of distance and the absence of Jesus. With the fourth watch, or vigil, it is the end of the night, so that this period was called the morning. For the believer, what does the morning evoke? Isn't this period linked to the resurrection of Jesus, the moment when the empty tomb will be discovered? |
Adjective tetartos in the New Testament | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
phylakē (watch) |
Phylakē is the noun phylakē with the singular feminine dative. The dative is controlled by the fact that the word plays the role of circumstantial complement: it gives an indication of the time when the event takes place. It means first of all "prison", but also the fact of guarding someone or something, from which guards. It appears a number of times in the New Testament, especially in Luke and Matthew: Mt = 10; Mk = 3; Lk = 8; Jn = 1; Acts = 17; 1Jn = 0; 2Jn = 0; 3Jn = 0.
The number of occurrences of phylakē in the New Testament is mainly due to the fact that Christians were regularly thrown into prison. The Acts of the Apostles mentions that the apostles were imprisoned by the Sadducees (5:19), men and women disciples of Jesus were imprisoned by Saul (8:3), Peter was imprisoned by Herod (12:4), Paul and Silas were imprisoned by the strategists of Philippi (16:23). According to Luke 21: 12 Jesus had already warned his disciples that this would happen. The Gospels tell us that John the Baptist was put in prison (Mk 6:17; Mt 14:3; Jn 3:24). What about Matthew? Out of the 10 occurrences of phylakē, five are specific to him and appear only in two parabolic accounts, first the ruthless debtor who has the one who owed him a hundred pieces of silver thrown into prison (18: 30), and especially the scene of the Last Judgment (25: 31-46) where having visited someone in prison becomes one of the criteria of salvation. Thus, in these passages specific to Matthew, phylakē means only "prison". Now, here in v. 25, phylakē means guard, referring to the periods of night watch. One must imagine that soldiers had to take turns every three hours in the Roman world to stand guard. This served to structure this period of the day. Only two occurrences with this meaning can be found in Matthew's writings, the first borrowed from Mark, the second from Document Q.
With this meaning, then, it is not a word that belongs to the Matthean vocabulary; the evangelist simply takes up what tradition gives him. One cannot speak of the noun phylakē without mentioning the verb phylassō, less frequent (Mt = 1; Mk = 1; Lk = 6; Jn = 3; Acts = 8; 1Jn = 1; 2Jn = 0; 3Jn = 0), and which means: to keep. When the object is a reality that is dear to us, it expresses the idea of watching over and protecting it; conversely, it can be a matter of monitoring an entity and restricting its movements. When the object is a rule, it expresses the idea of observing it. The only occurrence in Matthew (19:20: the young man who kept the commandments) is a repetition of Mark 10:20. |
Noun phylakē in the New Testament | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
nyktos (night) | Nyktos is the name nyx in the singular feminine genitive form, being complement of the name phylakē, in the expression: night watch. It means of course "night" and recurs regularly in the Gospels: Mt = 9; Mk = 4; Lk = 7; Jn = 6; Acts = 16; 1Jn = 0; 2Jn = 0; 3Jn = 0.
Earlier we covered the symbolic meaning of "evening", and the symbol of night is similar. First of all, night covers a larger period than evening which, by definition, covers the watch period from 6:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m., while night covers the period from 6:00 p.m. to 6:00 a.m. Thus, in the New Testament we often find the couple "day and night" (20 occurrences) to refer to the full 24-hour day. For example: "and would sleep and rise night (nyx) and day, and the seed would sprout and grow, he does not know how", Mk 4: 27. Let us consider the various events that take place at night and their symbolic significance.
In Matthew, even though there are only nine occurrences, the word nyx appears important, because seven of the nine occurrences are specific to him. This seems a way for him to create links with Scripture, for example: by specifying that Jesus fasted 40 days and 40 nights (4:2), an echo of Israel's 40 years in the desert (see Acts 7:42), or again, by specifying that Jonah spent three days and three nights in the belly of the sea monster, an echo of Jesus' death and resurrection (12:40). When he takes up Mark's account in which Jesus announces to his disciples that they are going to flee and says, "All of you will be offended" (Mk 14:27), he adds the words, "for my sake this night"; this enhances the precision of Jesus' prediction, and therefore its transcendence. In short, nyx belongs to Matthew's vocabulary. That being said, here in v. 25 Matthew only uses the word "night" that he finds in Mark's text, a word that he cannot separate from the name that it completes: watch. But at the same time, he retains all the symbolic meaning that Mark had: night is the symbol of the situation where Jesus is no longer with us, where we encounter opposing forces, where everything is painful, where the boat is seriously threatened. |
Noun nyx in the New Testament | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ēlthen (he came out) | Ēlthen is the verb erchomai in the indicative aorist tense, 3rd person singular. After legō (to say) and eimi (to be), erchomai (to go, to come) is the most frequent verb in the Gospel-Acts : Mt = 113; Mk = 86; Lk = 99; Jn = 155; Acts = 50.
In Matthew, it appears almost every ninth verse. This frequency is partly explained by the fact that it is a verb of everyday life and that he copied this verb which appears in his sources. But there is more, since of the 113 occurrences, 51 are specific to him. And, on several occasions, he modifies his source to add erchomai. Here are two examples where we have underlined the addition of this verb in Matthew.
Let us also mention that in the passages where erchomai is proper to him, very often it appears in the form of a participle (22 times): for example, "having arrived", the person or a thing did this or that action (2: 9 "having arrived, the star stood above the place where the child was"). This is also reflected when he modifies a source. For example, when he copies Mark 2:15, which says, "And it came to pass that he was at table in his house, and many publicans and sinners were at table with Jesus and his disciples," he changes the sentence to: "And it came to pass, as he was at table in the house, and behold, many publicans and sinners having come (erchomai), they were at table with Jesus and his disciples" (9:10). This is a reflection of the Matthean style. Here, in v. 25, Matthew is content to use the verb erchomai from Mark 6:48, and more precisely the whole expression: erchomai pros autous (to go to them), except that he changes the present tense to an aorist. Mark is a good storyteller and likes verbs in the present tense, while Matthew likes the precision of the historical past tense. |
Verb erchomai in Matthieu | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
peripatōn (walking) |
Peripatōn is the verb peripateō in the active present participle tense and in the masculine singular nominative form; it agrees with the implied subject "he" of the previous verb erchomai (to come), which is in fact Jesus. It means: to walk, and appears here and there among the evangelists, without being very frequent, except in John: Mt = 7; Mk = 9; Lk = 5; Jn = 17; Acts = 8; 1Jn = 5; 2Jn = 3; 3Jn = 2.
When we go through the whole New Testament and in particular the Gospels, we see that the verb peripateō must be understood in four different ways.
Matthew has retained from peripateō only the sense of moving forward and moving physically. He does not seem to be a great user of it, even if among the nine occurrences in his Gospel, three are his own, in particular in 4: 18 in the scene of the calling of the first disciples which he takes from Mark, where he modifies the text of Mk 1, 16 ("And passing by the Sea of Galilee") to add peripateō: "Now, walking by the Sea of Galilee". Otherwise, he simply takes the text from Mark or Document Q. Here, at v. 25, peripateō is the verb Matthew finds in Mark. But it must be assumed that he takes up the meaning he finds there. But what is that meaning? It is important to know that Mark, in turn, is taking up an old tradition. Indeed, the story appears not only in Mark's pen, but also in John's, even though Mark and John are both independent of each other. And since their respective narratives, despite the large number of common elements, contain different notes, this means that their narratives each come from an old tradition. On the other hand, both traditions present us with a Jesus who physically walks on water. What is the meaning of this gesture? We must assume that the author(s) at the source of these traditions was a sensible and balanced being. He knew that no one can walk on water. While Jesus was described as a good Jew who walked the roads of Galilee as a normal being, why suddenly present him as a supernatural being defying the laws of physics? The answer is probably to be found in the Old Testament, the great book that was used by the first Christians to understand the event of Jesus, especially in passages like this one: He (God) alone has stretched out Heaven, he walks (peripateō) on the sea (epi thalassan) as on firm ground (Job 9: 8 LXX). We find in the book of Job the same expression: walking on the sea, and the same verb tense: the present participle. Thus, the author of our story attributes to Jesus what the book of Job attributes to God: the fact of mastering the sea for God is the sign that he created this universe, and now Jesus is associated with this mastery of the sea and the creation of the universe. Let us not forget: the Gospels and their sources were written after Easter, in an effort to transmit a Christian catechesis on Jesus, when the main witnesses had just died. The memorable event has just been recounted where Jesus fed a crowd of 5,000 people. Who was Jesus? The scene that follows, walking on the sea, seems like a colourful homily that gives us an answer. |
Verb peripateō in the New Testament | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
thalassan (sea) |
Thalassan is the noun thalassa in the singular feminine accusative form and means: sea. It appears regularly in the Gospels, except in Luke: Mt = 16; Mk = 19; Lk = 3; Jn = 9; Acts = 10; 1Jn = 0; 2Jn = 0; 3Jn = 0.
The word thalassa can refer to four different realities.
When we analyzed the word "wave" (kyma), we mentioned that the Jews were not a seafaring people and that, in general, the sea is scary. It is linked to the chaotic abyss of origins (Gen 1:2.9), the place where demonic powers live and act (Is 27:1). A number of references in the New Testament point in this direction:
In Matthew's gospel we find the word thalassa quite regularly. But most of the time he is content to use Mark's text. In the five occurrences that are proper, almost all of them come from a source of his own or from a reference to the Old Testament: for example, the parable of the net that is thrown into the sea and brings in all sorts of things (13:47), or the account where Jesus asks Peter to go to the sea and throw the hook to find in the mouth of the fish the money needed to pay the tax. Here, in v. 25, Matthew simply uses the word thalassa, which he finds in Mark. However, he introduces an important modification. While Mark writes: "walking on the sea (epi tēs thalassēs)", Matthew writes: "walking on the sea (epi tēn thalassan); in the first case thalassa is in the genitive, i.e. a noun complement, in the second case it is in the accusative, i.e. a direct object complement, subject to the action of the verb. Why would Matthew modify what he receives from Mark? There are two plausible answers.
In the Jewish world, the sea is a feared, frightening force. For Matthew, the fact that Jesus walks on the sea expresses the fact that he masters the forces of evil that attack the boat of the community of disciples. |
Noun thalassa in the New Testament | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
v. 26 When the disciples saw him walking on the water, they went into a panic, thinking they saw a shadow of the dead world, and they began to cry out for fear.
Literally: Then, the disciples having seen (idontes) him walking on the sea, they were troubled (etarachthēsan), saying, "It is an apparition (phantasma)," and out of fear (phobou) they cried (ekraxan). |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
idontes (having seen) | Idontes is the verb horaō in the aoristic participle tense, nominative plural masculine form and agrees with the subject: disciples. The aorist, a typically Greek tense that is often translated into English by a past tense (having seen), but which simply means in Greek that the action is completed: it is after seeing Jesus walking on the water that the disciples were overwhelmed. But it could just as well be translated by a present in a sequence of events, each element of the sequence presupposing that the previous one is completed: seeing Jesus walking on the sea, the disciples were overwhelmed.
The verb "to see" is extremely frequent among evangelists, especially Matthew and Luke: Mt = 138; Mk = 66; Lk = 138; Jn = 86; Acts = 89; 1Jn = 9; 2Jn = 0; 3Jn = 2. But in our analysis, we will discard the cases where horaō is used to say "behold", i.e. idou and ide, an expression often used by Matthew and Luke. This now gives us the following numbers for horaō: Mt = 72; Mk = 50; Lk = 81; Jn = 63; Acts = 66; 1Jn = 9; 2Jn = 0; 3Jn = 2. Like the word "to see" in English, horaō can have various meanings.
What then is the meaning of horaō at v. 26? On the first level, it sounds like a simple eye contact from a man walking. But the rest of the story shows us that it's not that simple:
Thus, the scene ends on the register of faith. All these elements resemble the last scene in Matthew's gospel, the meeting of the risen Jesus by the disciples in Galilee: "When they saw (horaō) him, they worshiped him; but some doubted." (Mt 28: 17). All these clues lead us to establish that the verb "to see" cannot have the same meaning as when it is used to indicate, for example, that Jesus sees crowds. Rather, the setting is the post-Easter setting, the one experienced by the Matthean community, with its difficulty in "seeing" Jesus, i.e. believing in his presence and support. |
Verb horaō in Gospel-Acts (without "behold", i.e. idou, ide) | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
etarachthēsan (they were troubled) | Etarachthēsan is the verb tarassō in the indicative passive aoristic tense, 3rd person plural. It means: to disturb, to stir, to upset, to trouble, and it is very rare in the whole New Testament, and among the evangelists, only John uses it a certain number of times: Mt = 2; Mk = 1; Lk = 2; Jn = 6; Acts = 3; 1Jn = 0; 2Jn = 0; 3Jn = 0.
The verb "to trouble" basically means: to break the state of tranquility of a reality. This can apply to objects like water ("when the water is troubled", John 5:7), as well as to people ("King Herod was troubled", Matthew 2:3). When applied to a person or a group, the word is meant to describe the loss of inner peace or quietness, and often has a negative connotation.
There is the particular case of the Gospel according to John where it is Jesus who is troubled: Jesus is troubled when he sees people mourning the death of Lazarus (11: 33), he is troubled before the approach of the hour of his death (12: 27), he is troubled before the betrayal of Judas (13: 21). What meaning should we give to this trouble? Each time Jesus faces a trial: the trial of the people who mourn Lazarus because they do not believe in the resurrection, the trial of the betrayal of one of his disciples, the trial of his own death. This is the evangelist's way of emphasizing that Jesus is aware of what awaits him, and at the same time faces it voluntarily and with confidence. It is probably in this sense that we must understand these two passages in which Jesus invites his disciples to believe in him, and therefore not to be troubled (14:1), and where he gives them his peace so that their hearts will not be troubled (14:27); the support of the risen Jesus through faith makes it possible to overcome what is troubling. What about v. 26 where the disciples are troubled? Of course, on a first level, we can say that they are troubled because they are afraid of the arrival of what they believe to be a ghost. But this is forgetting the rest of the story where Jesus identifies himself with the very words used to speak about God (I am), and invites Peter to regain faith, and which ends with a profession of faith by the disciples. From this perspective, to be troubled is to lack faith. It is the same perspective that we find in Luke when the risen Jesus meets the community of gathered disciples: "Why are you troubled (tarassō), and why do doubts arise in your heart? "(Lk 24:38). Let us not forget that the word first appeared in Mark, who was speaking to a persecuted community around 67 or 70 AD, and it was important that this community be identified with the elements of the story, especially with the upheavals experienced by the disciples. Matthew's community does not experience the same situation, but it is the same approach used by the evangelist. In short, the verb tarassō can only be well understood after Easter in a community that faces opposition and has difficulty in finding peace, because it has difficulty believing that its Lord is indeed present to accompany them, and therefore in accepting these words: "And behold, I am with you always, even to the end of the world" (Mt 28:20). |
Verb tarassō in the New Testament | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
phantasma (apparition) |
Phantasma is the noun phantasma in the nominative neutral singular. It means: apparition, shadow, spectrum, ghost. If it were not for Mark, taken up by Matthew, the word would be totally absent from the New Testament: Mt = 1; Mk = 1; Lk = 0; Jn = 0; Acts = 0; 1Jn = 0; 2Jn = 0; 3Jn = 0. Elsewhere in the Bible, there is only one occurrence, in the Greek text of the Septuagint. The noun phantasma is of the same root as the verb phantazō: to make visible, to appear. This last word is also very rare, in fact three occurrences, found only in the Epistle to the Hebrews, the Sirach and the Book of Wisdom.
What does phantasma mean? Let us begin with the text of Wisdom 17:14. This passage belongs to a section where the author offers a commentary on the plagues of Egypt, and more particularly on the plague of darkness (Ex 21:21-29) when Moses, stretching out his hand to heaven, brought three days of opaque darkness over the whole land of Egypt, freezing all the Egyptians in place, while the Israelites had light. He considered the Egyptians as ungodly people who had gone astray, and by enveloping them in darkness, God delivered them to fear, hallucinations, and gloomy ghosts (phasma). He writes: But they sleeping the same sleep that night, which was indeed intolerable, and which came upon them out of the bottoms of inevitable Hades, were partly vexed with monstrous apparitions (phantasma), and partly fainted, their heart failing them: for a sudden fear, and not looked for, came upon them (Wis 17:14-15). The night that would cover the Egyptians would come from Hades. Now, Hades is first in Greek mythology the name of the deity who reigns over the underground empire of the dead, also called: the underworld. By extension, the word became the name of his dwelling place, i.e. Hades. The Septuagint translated the Hebrew word Sheol as Hades, the place where all the dead descend to carry out a reduced, almost vegetative activity. It is in this context that the author of Wisdom places the Egyptians who, in their sleep, have nightmares when they see ghosts or monstrous ghosts. Thus, whether we speak of ghosts or spectres, we are talking about beings that resemble terrifying shadows such as those imagined in Sheol. We can understand the fear that pervades everyone. Let's go back to phantasma in Mark/Matthew. There are certain similarities with the Wisdom text: the context is that of darkness, and we are in an environment of fear. Phantasma literally translates as: apparition. But since this apparition is frightening, we have to think of it as a spectre or a ghost, like those shadows we imagined in Sheol. But knowing that the Mark/Matthew story must be read in the context of the challenge of believing in difficult times, can we not think that the word phantasma was chosen because it accurately describes the appearance of the people in Sheol, and therefore these shadows evoke for the disciples their own death, or that of Jesus himself for those who do not believe in his resurrection? If this was not the intention of the original author of this story, the words chosen are nevertheless perfectly appropriate of such a context. Let's say a word on the verb phantazō which is of the same root and means: to appear. The few occurrences show us that the context can be positive, as when wisdom appears benevolent before those who receive it (Wis 6:16), or negative when a woman in the pains of childbirth begins to have visions (Sir 34:5). There is also the related word phasma, which is found only in the Septuagint and which means: apparition, illusion, ghost. The Book of Wisdom uses it in the same context as phantasma to comment on the plague of darkness that falls on the Egyptians. Otherwise, they are either prodigious or ephemeral visions that only the context can determine their meaning. Thus, we are returned to the subjective aspect of the vision of things. This is what our account tells us about the disciples in the boat. And the listener of Matthew, who finds it difficult to believe in Jesus' resurrection, and for whom the deads vegetate in the Sheol, can identify with the disciples for whom Jesus appears as a spectre of the Sheol, the image of their own death. |
Noun phantasma in the Bible | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
phobou (fear) | Phobou is the noun phobos in the singular masculine genitive form. The genitive is requested by the preposition apo (from), to explain the source of the cries: fear. It is less frequent that we think in the gospel-Acts (Mt = 3; Mk = 1; Lk = 7; Jn = 3; Acts = 5; 1Jn = 3; 2Jn = 0; 3Jn = 0), because the fact of being afraid is mostly expressed by the verb phobeō (Mt = 18; Mk = 12; Lk = 23; Jn = 5; Acts = 14; 1Jn = 1; 2Jn = 0; 3Jn = 0).
The word is translated literally by: fear, which gave our English word: phobia. However, the word "fear" does not reflect the various meanings of phobos in the New Testament, which could be grouped into four categories.
In Matthew, there are only three occurrences of the name phobos, but these three occurrences are unique to him. The scene of 28:4 is that of the tomb guards who die of fear at the arrival of the angel who rolls the stone from the tomb, followed by that of 28:8 where the women, after the angel's announcement that Jesus has risen, are under the quivering of the supernatural event. Finally, there is our scene of the walking on the waters where the disciples are terrified at the sight of what they consider to be a ghost or the living dead. These three occurrences reflect Matthew's own touch. On the one hand, we find in 14:26 (they cried out in fear) and 28:4 (they trembled out of fear) a form of expression that is found nowhere else in the New Testament: apo tou phobou (out of fear). On the other hand, in 14:26 and 28:8, Matthew transformed the tradition received from Mark to add (underlined) the noun phobos.
Let's start with Mt 28:8. Mark uses the verb phobeō to say that the women were so afraid following the angel's message that they didn't say anything to anyone. Matthew does not use the verb phobeō, but rather uses the noun phobos. Why did he use the noun phobos? One can imagine that by wanting to modify Mark's story so that the women would not freeze in place but go to announce the good news, the name phobos offered him more flexibility to add a synonym, the word "joy", so that we no longer speak of fear that terrifies, but of reverential fear before the word of God. In Matthew 14:26 Matthew takes up a phrase of Mark's with a number of accents of his own: the disciples do not simply think they see a ghost within themselves, they say it explicitly ("saying"); they are troubled or upset, which Mark will only say in the next verse; and they cry out in fear, whereas Mark simply mentions that they cried out. Why did Matthew add "fear"? We can imagine that Matthew, in his habit of dotting the i's and crossing the t's, wanted to clarify why the disciples were shouting. And this allowed him to complete the dramatic picture he is painting with the disciples who are troubled, and this fear probably describes very well the state of some members of the community. |
Noun phobos in the New Testament | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ekraxan (they cried) | Ekraxan is the verb krazō in the indicative aorist tense, 3rd person plural form. It means "to cry out" and, in the Gospels, appears especially in Matthew and Mark: Mt = 12; Mk = 10; Lk = 3; Jn = 4; Acts = 11; 1Jn = 0; 2Jn = 0; 3Jn = 0.
When we shout, the reason for shouting is not always the same: we can shout with joy as we can shout in panic. It is the same in the New Testament with the verb krazō. This is how we can group the contexts in which we shout into three categories.
With its twelve occurrences, six of which are his own, we can affirm that krazō is part of Matthew's vocabulary. Here, in v. 26, krazō is found in a context of fear, where the disciples cry out without there being any content to this cry. In Matthew, we find this verb three times in a similar negative context.
What can we conclude? First of all, the three occurrences where krazō appears in a negative context primarily reflect the context proposed by Mark. In Matthew, krazō has above all the meaning of a request or an insistent prayer, and therefore has a truly positive connotation. And here, in v. 26, the verb krazō echoes Mark's verb anakrazō, which Mark had probably chosen to reflect the desperate cries of persecuted Christians in Rome, but which Matthew took up again to probably reflect the harassment experienced by his community in Antioch. |
Verb krazō in the New Testament | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
v. 27 But immediately Jesus intervened and said to them, "Be confident! It is I! Do not be afraid!"
Literally: Then, immediately the Jesus (Iēsous) spoke (elalēsen) to them saying, "Take courage (tharseite)! Me, I am (egō eimi)! Don't be afraid (mē phobeisthe)! |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
elalēsen (he spoke) | Elalēsen is the verb laleō in the indicative aorist 3rd person singular tense and means: to speak. We can imagine that this verb is very frequent: Mt = 26; Mk = 21; Lk = 31; Jn = 59; Acts = 58; 1Jn = 1; 2Jn = 1; 3Jn = 0. We find this verb especially in John who introduces his gospel with the "word" (logos) that became flesh, and in Luke for whom the word is a central theme of his gospel and of his Acts. But in a general way we can say that Judaism presents us with a God who speaks, which gave us these books of the Bible, and the New Testament bears witness to this word made flesh in Jesus. It should therefore come as no surprise that the verbs legō (to say), the most frequent among evangelists (more than two thousand times), and laleō come up so often.
But there is a distinction in Greek between legō (to say) and laleō (to speak): legō is the only one that can introduce the content of a word, and often this verb is in the present participle, as here in v. 27: "Jesus spoke to them (elalēsen) saying (legōn):". Let us note that, even if Matthew takes up the essence of this sentence from Mark 6:50 ("he spoke (elalēsen) with them and said (legei)"), he modifies the tense of the verb legō to have the present participle, rather than the present indicative; we find this stylistic particularity ("he spoke, saying") elsewhere in Matthew's work ("he spoke, saying") in 13:3 and 28:18. What is the function of the verb "to speak" in Matthew? Indeed, if it is the verb legō (to say: 505 occurrences in Matthew) that is essential to introduce the content of what an expression has to say, why sometimes add laleō (speak: 26 occurrences in Matthew). This function is not fundamentally different from that found in other evangelists, but nevertheless let's make an effort to inventory it.
Let us return to our v. 27. Here we have precisely the expression "Jesus spoke saying", a solemn expression, we have said, whose function is to underline the importance of what Jesus is about to say, and is therefore an invitation to listen carefully to his word. We shall see what this word is. Let us also note that the verb laleō is preceded here by the adverb euthys (immediately), a set that Matthew takes from Mark 6:50. The fact of saying that Jesus spoke 'immediately' when the disciples began to cry out in fear is a way of affirming that Jesus does not abandon them: from the first cry, he is there. |
Verb laleō in the Gospels-Acts | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Iēsous (Jesus) |
Iēsous (Jesus) is the name attributed to the central personality of the Gospels. It comes from the Hebrew in the form יְהוֹשֻׁעַ or יְהוֹשׁוּעַ (yĕhôšûaʿ), the name that Joshua had in the Old Testament. It means: Yahveh saves. Obviously, the word is extremely frequent throughout the New Testament, with about 873 occurrences depending on the versions used, being present in all the books that make it up. It is the same among the evangelists: Mt = 152; Mk = 82; Lk = 88; Jn = 243; Acts = 69; 1Jn = 12; 2Jn = 2; 3Jn = 0. The fourth gospel largely dominates these statistics: because of the number of dialogues it contains, it is understandable that it must constantly be named explicitly.
In the Gospels, the name Iēsous appears almost always in the narrator's pen. But there are a few exceptions where it is put in someone else's mouth: Mt = 7; Mk = 5; Lk = 6; Jn = 7. Let's summarize these occurrences.
Let's make a few points.
Starting with the first Christian generations, the name "Jesus" will almost always be accompanied by the title of Christ (i.e. anointed or messiah) and Lord, so that the so-called Pauline epistles use the expressions: Christ Jesus or the Lord Jesus, or our Lord Jesus Christ. The Gospel of Mark begins like this: "Beginning of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, Son of God", and that of Matthew: "Book of Genesis of Jesus Christ, son of David, son of Abraham"; and in the Prologue of John (1:17) we find the expression: "For the Law was given by Moses; grace and truth came through Jesus Christ". The name "Jesus" refers to the historical being, and in faith it refers to the one who has risen, or who has been made Christ and Lord. There are a number of exceptions to what has just been said. But very often the use of the name "Jesus" without the qualifiers of Christ or Lord outside the Gospels comes from a context in which reference is made to his earthly life, in particular his suffering and death, and all the testimony he gave while he was among us, or again when reference is made to the non-believer. For example:
Here, in v. 27, the understanding of Jesus is the post-Easter understanding, but since the story is set in a historical context, it is the simple name of Jesus that appears in the pen of the evangelist. |
Noun Iēsous in the Testament | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
tharseite (take courage) |
Tharseite is the verb tharseō in the imperative tense, 2nd plural person, and means: to have good courage. In the New Testament, there are only a few occurrences among the evangelists: Mt = 3; Mk = 2; Lk = 0; Jn = 1; Acts = 1; 1Jn = 0; 2Jn = 0; 3Jn = 0. Elsewhere, in the Septuagint, there are about twenty occurrences.
Mark introduced the term for the first time in the Gospels with his account of the stilling storm (6: 50) where he puts in the mouth of Jesus the verb tharseō to the imperative and which our Bibles translate as follows: "Take heart" (NRSV), "Take courage" (NAB, NIV), "Be of good cheer" (ASB, KJB), "Courage" (JB). This verb reappears in Mark's account of the blind man Bartimaeus (10:49), but this time in the mouth of the crowd who speak to the blind man to encourage him to get up and meet Jesus. The evangelist John uses tharseō in the imperative tense in Jesus' final great discourse (16:33), after mentioning that the disciples will have much to suffer in the world, but they need to know that Jesus has conquered the world, and that this should reassure them. Finally, Luke in the Acts of the Apostles (23:11) tells us that Paul, while he is in prison and after giving testimony before the Sanhedrin, receives a word from the Lord during the night to tell him to keep courage, because he is called to continue to testify, but this time in Rome. In all these mentions of tharseō there is a common thread: the presence of Jesus who gives the strength to move forward in spite of adversity. What about Matthew? There is something astonishing about him: on the one hand he allows himself to add tharseō in some texts he receives from Mark, which gives the impression that he gives it great importance, but on the other hand there is a case where he eliminates it. Let's start with the latter case. In the story about the blind man Bartimaeus (Mk 10:46-52), Mark presents the crowd as an obstacle to the blind man's prayer to Jesus (they ask him to be silent), then when Jesus asks for him to be brought, the crowd says, "Be confident (tharseō)! Get up, he is calling you!". Matthew gives us a slightly modified version of the story (Mt 20:29-34) with two blind people crying out to Jesus. But after mentioning the crowd as an obstacle, it is Jesus himself who calls the blind without the intermediary of the crowd: there is no more room for the crowd to call for trust. It is probably to be thought that given Matthew's perception of Jesus' transcendence, it is unthinkable that Jesus needs the crowd to make the blind come to him; and it is probably also unthinkable in Matthew that the invitation to trust should be in the mouth of someone other than Jesus. So this detail of Mark has been eliminated. On the other hand, twice Matthew adds tharseō to the account he receives from Mark, first the account of the paralytic being forgiven and healed (Mk 2:1-12 || Mt 9:1-8) and the account of the woman with hemorrhages being healed (Mk 5:25-34 | Mt 9:20-22).
Thus, in Matthew, tharseō is always in the mouth of Jesus, and in the two texts we have just considered, we are clearly in a context of faith. Tharseō becomes an invitation to be assured of healing. Why such an insistence? Probably for Matthew it is a way of inviting his community to a general attitude in the face of adversity. To better understand this notion, let us turn to the Old Testament which was certainly dear to the Jew Matthew, in particular this Greek translation called: Septuagint. The authors of the Septuagint used tharseō to translate the Hebrew expression: al-yare', which means: not to be afraid, and which our Bibles have translated as : "do not be afraid". For example:
The choice of tharseō, a positive form, has something astonishing in translating a negative Hebrew form on the part of the authors of the Septuagint. For, at other times, the Septuagint has appropriately translated al-yare' by the Greek expression: mē phobeō (do not be afraid), e.g. Gen 15:1: "After these things Abram in a vision heard the word of God saying to him, 'Do not be afraid (Mē phobou), Abram, I will cover you with my protection; your reward will be great'". Can we give any meaning to all this, apart from mentioning a certain inconsistency in the translations of the Septuagint? In fact, to speak of having good courage (tharseō) or of not being afraid (mē phobeō) is to refer to two dimensions of the same reality regarding faith: for fear is the opposite of faith, and to believe is to be firm, solid, courageous, daring and to move forward; thus, faith has a negative dimension (not to be afraid), and it has a positive dimension (to trust, to go forward, to be courageous). According to Boismard (op. cit.), "the expressions 'reassure yourself' or 'be confident' and 'do not fear' or 'do not be afraid' are equivalent and could be the translation of the same Aramaic original" (p. 226). Tharseō therefore describes the positive dimension of faith, which is why our v. 27 is translated as : "Be confident", "Courage", "Rest assured". This is the choice sometimes made by some translators of the Septuagint when they encountered the expression "do not be afraid". But the text of Mk 6:50, which Matthew takes up again, includes the two expressions: "Take courage" and two words further on, "Do not be afraid". Why is this? One could answer that the author wanted to represent the two dimensions of faith, its positive and negative dimensions. But why is it that when John presents his version of the story (Jn 6:20), he only mentions "do not be afraid"? One possible hypothesis (see Boismard) is that there were two ancient Greek versions of the story of the walk on the sea, one with "take courage" and the other with "do not be afraid", which Mark merged, and John would have had access to only one. In any case, Matthew presents this version of Mark with first "take courage", which can be translated as "be confident" or "be assured", and then "do not be afraid" to insist that we are in a context of faith. Let's say a word about the name tharsos (courage) which only appears in the Acts of the Apostles throughout the New Testament and in three books of the Septuagint for a grand total of five occurrences. The word is not related to faith, but rather to the ability to be strong. In the Acts of the Apostles (28:15), the word describes the state of Paul who finds the energy to face the world of Rome for the first time. In the second book of the Chronicles (16:8) and in 1 Maccabees (4:35), the word is used as an attribute of a courageous and resilient army. Finally, in Job (4:4; 17:9) it describes the strength of the person supported by God and who remains upright. In short, we are in a different register from what is found here in v. 27. |
Verb tharseō in the Bible | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
egō eimi (Me, I am) |
The expression egō eimi has already been introduced in the glossary. Let's summarize the main points.
This expression, composed of the personal pronoun egō (I, me) and the verb eimi (to be) in the present tense, is in itself banal and simply serves to identify oneself: it is I. But in the Old Testament, it is an expression that is put in the mouth of God and serves to identify him. Also, in the Gospels, while the expression sometimes has a very ordinary meaning (Lk 1:19: "And the angel answered and said to him, 'I am Gabriel, who stands before God, and I have been sent to speak to you and to bring you this good news'), sometimes it has a solemn meaning with a revelatory function (Jn 8:58: "Jesus said to them, 'Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham existed, I am'. (egō eimi) "). Now, here in v. 27, the expression "I am" is not followed by an attribute or a predicate. One could say that the name "Jesus" is implied: I am Jesus; in this case, it would be an ordinary way of identifying oneself in a context of confusion. But if we refer to the Old Testament and rabbinic Judaism, such an expression without a predicate has a revelatory or apocalyptic function. In Hebrew, we regularly find the expression "I am Yahweh", which is written simply with the pronoun "I" (heb.: ʾănî) and Yahweh (heb.: yhwh), without a linking verb: "I Yahweh". It was translated in Greek by the Septuagint with egō kyrios ("I Lord"), but sometimes adding the verb "to be" (eimi). The expression often aims to reassure the people and invites them not to be afraid, or to affirm the authority of God. But the expression also has a revelatory function, i.e. God's role in relation to his people. Ex 6: 7: I will take you for my people and I will be your God. And you shall know that I am the Lord. (Heb.:ʾănî yhwh; LXX: egō kyrios), your God, who took you away from the chores of the Egyptians It is Deutero-Isaiah (Isaiah 40 - 55) who developed this notion a lot, especially to express the divine name. Is 51, 12: I am, I am, he (Heb.: ʾānōkî ʾānōkî hûʾ, LXX: egō eimi egō eimi) that comforts thee: consider who thou art, that thou wast afraid of mortal man, and of the son of man, who are withered as grass Thus, Yahweh reveals his name: "I am", translated into Greek by: egō eimi. This is the interpretation found in the rabbinic tradition of the 2nd century AD. In the Gospels, John uses this expression most often, but to apply it to Jesus. However, he is not the only one, for it is also found in the synoptic gospels, in fact in two contexts: the walking on the waters and the Jewish trial of Jesus. And since the account of the walking on the waters would go back to an ancient tradition, since Mark seems to have combined two versions of the story, as we have already mentioned, then one can think that quite early the first Christian generation used the expression "I am" to reveal the identity of Jesus. Thus, in this account of the stilling storm, after the disciples had experienced the absence and distance of Jesus, associating him with the ghosts of death, we reach here the culminating point: the revelation of his presence, a presence identified with the very presence of God. But such an association of Jesus with God is only possible after his resurrection. This is why we have been placed in a faith context with the expression "take courage" or "be confident". For Matthew, as he writes his gospel, this scene where Jesus is present refers to the community gathering, as expressed in the symbolism of the boat in which the disciples are in. |
Expression egō eimi without any attribute in reference to Jesus in the Gospels | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
mē phobeisthe (don't be afraid) |
The expression mē phobeisthe is formed from the adverb mē (do not), an adverb of negation, and the verb phobeō (to be afraid) in the middle imperative tense, 2nd person plural. The verb phobeō itself appears regularly in the Gospel-Acts, especially in Luke: Mt = 18; Mk = 12; Lk = 23; Jn = 5; Acts = 14; 1Jn = 1; 2Jn = 0; 3Jn = 0. And earlier, in our analysis of fear, we identified five types of fear depending on the context:
Now, what we are interested in is the expression "not to be afraid". In the Gospel-Acts, the invitation to not be afraid comes either from Jesus or from a messenger of God. What is not to be afraid of?
Thus, the invitation not to be afraid only makes sense in a context of faith: by asking not to be afraid, God calls the person to face his or her situation by being able to count on his or her support, and by assuring him or her that the outcome will be happy in some way. Elsewhere in the New Testament (1 Peter and Revelation), it will be noted that we are in a context of opposition and persecution, and therefore the invitation not to be afraid is an invitation to remain faithful to one's faith in spite of trials. What about the Old Testament? What is there to be afraid of?
In Matthew we find the same range of contexts: not fearing intimidation (e.g., 10:26), not fearing the possibility of death (10:28), not fearing an epiphany at transfiguration (17:7). But when one considers the passages where the expression is proper to him, it is the context of God's interventions that dominates (see 17:7; 28:5; 28:10), and thus the call to trust and believe. Here, in v. 27, we are in a context of God's intervention and revelation, as is the account of the transfiguration. The invitation not to be afraid is thus an invitation to trust in God's support. Therefore, in the phrase "be confident, it is I, do not be afraid", the expressions "be confident" and "do not be afraid" are in some ways synonymous. What should we not be afraid of? There seem to be two things: first the spectre of the night, the undead, and the fact that this spectre walks on water, i.e. masters the power of evil. Fundamentally, we are faced with a call to believe that despite the appearance of death/absence of Jesus, He is very much alive, and that with Him the opposing forces are mastered and overcome. |
Expression mē phobeō to the imperative tense in the Bible | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
v. 28 Replying to Jesus, Peter said, "Lord, if it is you, command me to come to you on the water"
Literally: Then, having answered (apokritheis) him, the Peter (Petros) said, "Lord (kyrie), if you you are (ei sy ei), command (keleuson) (hydata) me to come to you on the waters. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
apokritheis (having answered) |
Apokritheis is the verb apokrinomai in the passive aoristic participle tense, in the masculine singular nominative form, matching the masculine noun Petros. It consists of the preposition apo (from) and the verb krinō (to decide, choose, judge, interpret): literally, to make a decision or a judgment based on what has been said, hence "to answer". It is extremely frequent (the 10th verb for the number of occurrences) in the Gospel-Acts : Mt = 55; Mk = 30; Lk = 46; Jn = 78; Acts = 20.
But what is remarkable in the Gospels is to regularly find the literary structure: "to answer and to say", the first one often in the aoristic participle and the last one expressed by the verb legō (to say) or phēmi (to declare), often in the past tense, for example: "But having answered, he (Jesus) said" (Mt 15:24); to be convinced of the frequency of this structure, it is enough to look at the numbers: Mt = 50; Mk = 19; Lk = 40; Jn = 32. As we can see, Matthew is a bit of a champion of this style. Why add the verb to answer when we already use the verb to say to introduce what an interlocutor is about to express in direct style, i.e. why add the verb to answer when we could simply have "say"? It seems that for the evangelical writer, this emphasizes the "dialogue" aspect or the interaction between the actors. In fact, the mention that an actor "answers" emphasizes the link with what preedes. In any case, this is the impression given by Matthew, where out of the 55 occurrences of this verb, 43 are particular to him, so that he often adds it to the sources he takes up. For example:
Here, in v. 28, we have the form: "Then, having answered him, he said". The expression "Then, having answered" (apokritheis de) or "Then, having answered him" (ho de apokritheis) is typically Matthean: Mt = 32; Mk = 4; Lk = 15; Jn = 0; Acts = 3. This is the signal that Matthew is now leaving his Markan source to introduce us into a narrative he has created. He will return to Mark's account only in his conclusion. We have said that the addition of "having answered" is a way to introduce interaction between the speakers. What does Peter respond to? To what Jesus has just said: "I am" or "It is I". |
Verb apokrinomai in the Gospels-Acts | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Petros (Peter) |
Petros is the name of one of Jesus' disciples, in fact the spokesman for the disciples. Indeed, he often addresses Jesus in the name of the disciples. For example:
This spokesman is known by four names: Petros (Peter: Mt = 23; Mk = 20; Lk = 19; Jn = 34; Acts = 53; Ga = 2; 1P = 1; 2P = 1), Kēphas (Cephas: Jn = 1; 1Co = 4; Ga = 4), Simōn (Simon: Mt = 5; Mk = 7; Lk = 12; Jn = 22; Acts = 5), Symeōn (Simeon: Acts = 1; 2P = 1). One could add the compound name : Simon(Simeon)-Peter: Mt = 1; Mk = 0; Lk = 1; Jn = 16; 2P = 1. How to untangle it all. At the time when Mark, Matthew, Luke and John published their gospels, the spokesman of the disciples was known as Peter. But we learn that this name is in fact a nickname, a nickname that Jesus would have given him. More precisely, Petros is a Greek word to translate the Aramaic word Kēpā' (rock or stone), an Aramaic word transliterated into Greek as: Kēphas. "He brought Simon to Jesus, who looked at him and said, 'You are Simon son of John. You are to be called Cephas' (which is translated Peter (Petros))" (Jn 1: 42). Thus, the real name of this spokesman is Simon (Šim'ôn in Hebrew, transliterated into Greek as: symeon). When did he receive this nickname? We don't really know. It is likely that it happened during the ministry of Jesus, so someone like Paul never uses the name "Simon" to refer to the leader of the Church, but speaks mostly of Cephas, his Aramaic nickname (1 Cor 1:12; 3:22; 9:5; 15:5; Gal 1:18; 2:9.11.14), and sometimes of "Peter" (Gal 2:7-8). It is possible that this nickname was gradually imposed during the first Christian generation, for if we are to believe the Acts of the Apostles, the two names coexisted: the expression "Simon, nicknamed Peter" appears a few times (Acts 10:5.17-18.32; 11:13). What is remarkable is that Jesus uses only the name "Simon" when he addresses Peter in the Gospels (the exception being Lk 22:34 where we note the editorial work of Luke, who takes up Mark's announcement of Peter's denial, and of course Mt 16:18, which we will comment on below).
One possible interpretation of the evangelists' approach to keeping the name "Simon" in Jesus' dialogue with Peter is probably to retain a historical flavor. It is probably for this reason that Luke puts the name "Simeon" in the mouth of James in Acts 15:14, the transliteration of the Hebrew Šim'ôn, thus creating an archaism. Otherwise, and for theological reasons, the spokesman of the disciples always bears the name "Peter" as soon as the group of Twelve is formed, probably defining his role in this group : Mk 3: 16 "So he appointed the twelve: Simon (to whom he gave the name Peter (Petros));" Luke is following the same approach as Mark. If Matthew mentions the name "Simon" at the beginning of his gospel, he always accompanies it with the remark: called Peter. He is interested in the leader of the Christian community reflected in the name "Peter", not the fisherman of Galilee. Finally, John places the change of name at the beginning of Jesus' ministry (1:42), and adopts the original approach of calling him by the double name of "Simon Peter". What do we know about Simon, called Peter? On this point, we will refer to J.P. Meier. In short, he is a Jew from Galilee who resides in Capernaum with his wife and family and works as a fisherman. Around the year 28 or 29, Jesus calls him to join his group. He was present at Jesus' last supper, at his arrest in Gethsemane and at the hearing at the high priest's house. When passers-by questioned him, he broke down and denied knowing Jesus. Very soon after the crucifixion of Jesus, Peter claims to have experienced the risen Jesus (1 Cor 15:5; Lk 24:34; cf. Jn 21:1-14). After various imprisonments in Jerusalem, he went to Antioch (Gal 2:11-14) and perhaps to Corinth (1 Cor 1:12; 3:22). According to Paul, Peter concentrated his mission among Jewish Christians (Gal 2:8-9), and although he was one of the leaders of the community with John and James, the brother of Jesus (Gal 2:9), he sometimes gave in to the conservatives of Jerusalem in the company of James, the brother of Jesus, for fear of them (Gal 2:11-13). Allusions to his martyrdom can be found in the New Testament (Jn 21:18-19; 1 Pet 5:13) and in early patristic testimonies (1 Clement 5:4). In the first Christian generation, what exactly was Peter's role, apart from being on mission to his Jewish compatriots? We are not faced with a precise structure, except for the moral and religious leadership of Peter, John and James, the brother of Jesus, in Jerusalem, if we were to accept Galatians 2:9. But then, how should we interpret Mt 16:17-19? "Jesus said to him, 'Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah, for this revelation has come to you, not from flesh and blood, but from my Father in heaven. I say to you, You are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not stand against it. I will give you the keys of the Kingdom of Heaven: whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.'" For a more detailed analysis, please refer to Meier. Suffice it to say that we are here before a creation of Matthew, and not a word that could be traced back to the historical Jesus for the following reasons:
In short, Mt 16:17-19 echoes the understanding of Peter's role in the Church of Antioch around the 80s or 85, when the structure of the Church was developing under the influence of Ignatius of Antioch. It is time to return to our v. 28. Knowing the place that Peter occupies in Matthew's gospel, we understand the role that he intends to make him play in this scene: he, the spokesman of the disciples, is also the leader of the Church whose continuity he must ensure. How will he fulfill his role? |
Noun Petros in the Bible
Noun Simōn in the New Testament | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
kyrie (Lord) |
Kyrie is the singular masculine vocative of kyrios. In classical Greek, the word means "he who is master of, who has authority", i.e. the master, the master of the house, the legal representative, the guardian (see our Glossary). In a hierarchical society, it is therefore a generic term to describe the relationship of a superior to a subordinate: a superior exercises lordship over the subordinate.
It is the Septuagint, the Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible, that popularized this term to designate God: indeed, as in the Jewish world the proper name of Yahweh is unpronounceable and is replaced by אֲדֹנָי (Adonai), to express his role as master of the universe, then the authors of the Septuagint chose to translate Adonai by kyrios (lord). It will be understood that the term kyrios is extremely frequent in the New Testament, and more particularly in the Gospel-Acts : Mt = 80; Mk = 18; Lk = 104; Jn = 52; Acts = 107. As we can see, Luke uses it the most; speaking to a Greek culture, it became a vehicle well adapted to his environment. On the other hand, Mark uses it much less often as he writes for the community in Rome. The word itself has a great flexibility in that it covers everything that exercises authority and demands respect and honor.
We can make this table about the occurrence and meaning of kyrios (later additions to the gospel of Mark have been excluded from this table).
Let's make a few points:
Let's focus on Matthew. Generally speaking, we can say that kyrios is part of his regular vocabulary, and that he likes to use it. That's why he repeatedly adds it to the sources he uses.
As we can see, Matthew replaces terms such as "you", Jesus, teacher, rabbi or rabboni found in Mark with the title of Lord. Or, when Mark's account is in indirect style, he transforms it into a direct style and adds the vocative "Lord". What can we conclude? Two things.
What about v. 28 in our account of walking on the waters? We have already pointed out that with v. 28 Matthew leaves Mark's account to produce a sequence of its own. Now, how does Peter address Jesus? By calling him : "Lord". We are in a context of faith, and it is with the postpascal outlook that we must understand his vocabulary, especially the title of kyrios that is given here to Jesus: we are before the one whom God raised up and made Christ and Lord. |
Noun Kyrios in the Gospels-Acts | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ei sy ei (if you you are) |
The expression ei sy ei consists of the conjunction ei (if), the personal pronoun 2nd person singular sy (you), and the verb "to be" in the present tense of the 2nd person singular ei (you are). It is a typically Greek expression for questioning a person's identity. It is usually translated as : "Is it really you?" or "if it is you" when the condition is followed by a request.
Throughout the New Testament, the expression is found only in the Gospels, and it is always a question addressed to Jesus: Jesus is asked to say whether he is the Christ (Messiah) (Mt 26:63; Lk 22:67; Jn 10:24), or the King of the Jews (Lk 23:37). And this question is always asked by skeptical people. To better understand the meaning of the expression, we can go through the Septuagint. In Genesis, the expression is found in the mouth of Isaac, now blind, who wants to verify whether it is really Esau whom he has before him and to whom he will give his blessing (Gen 27:21). In the book of Judges, it is Samson's father who asks the angel if he is really the man who announced the good news of the birth of a son to his barren wife (Jg 13:11). In the second book of Samuel, it is again a question of verifying the identity of a person: it is Abner, on Saul's side and at war with David, who wants to know the identity of his pursuer (2 Sm 2:20), it is David who wants to know if someone is indeed one of Saul's servants in order to honor him (2 Sm 9:2), it is a woman from a besieged city who verifies the identity of the chief of the attackers in order to negotiate an agreement (2 Sm 20:17). In the first book of Kings, it is an old prophet who validates the identity of a man of God (1 Kings 13:14), it is Obadiah, a palace ruler, who asks if the man before him is indeed the prophet Elijah (1 Kings 18:18), 7), it is Ahab who verifies whether Elijah is really the man who is doing wrong to Israel (1 Kings 18:17), and finally it is Jezebel, the enemy of the prophet Elijah, who ascertains the identity of his interlocutor (1 Kings 19:2). In each situation, one wants to verify the identity of a person. What is remarkable is that whether in the Gospels or in the Septuagint, the expression "if you are" is always accompanied by an attribute: if you are Christ, if you are the king of the Jews, if you are my son Esau, if you are the man who spoke to my wife, if you are Asael, etc. The only exception is our v. 28 where the expression has no attribute: "if you are". Of course, in the translation we can add an attribute: if it is really you. But then we forget what Jesus has just said: "I am", without attribute, and that is what Peter reacts to; the "if you are" is addressed to the "I am". Now, we have pointed out that the "I am" is an attribute of God in the Jewish world, an attribute that Matthew puts in the mouth of Jesus. In other words, Peter challenges Jesus to back up his assertion of his privilege which he shares with God. |
Expression ei sy ei in the Bible | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
keleuson (command) | Keleuson is the verb keleuō in the aoristic imperative tense, 2nd person singular and means: to command, to order. The word is found primarily in Matthew in the Gospels, otherwise it appears only in the Acts of the Apostles in the rest of the New Testament: Mt = 7; Mk = 0; Lk = 1; Jn = 0; Acts = 17; 1Jn = 0; 2Jn = 0; 3Jn = 0.
The verb "to command" is a somewhat military term, because the subject of such a verb must be someone in authority. In Matthew, the subject of this verb that appears seven times is Jesus three times, if we include our verse 28, otherwise it is King Herod Antipas (14:9), an anonymous king (18:25), and Pilate (27:58,64), therefore people of great authority. If we turn to the Acts of the Apostles, we also notice that the subjects who command are people of authority: the members of the Sanhedrin (4:15), the doctor of the Law Gamaliel (5:34), the Ethiopian eunuch, described as a high official of the Queen of Ethiopia and general administrator of her treasury (8:38), King Herod Agrippa I (12:19), the strategists of the Roman army (16:22), a Roman tribune (21:33-34; 22:24). 30; 23, 10), the high priest Ananias (23, 3), the governor Felix (23, 35), the governor Festus (25, 6.17.21.23), a centurion (27, 43). When we consider the seven occurrences of keleuō in Matthew's gospel, we can see that they are all proper to him. No doubt it is a word he loves. But why would Matthew insist on a Jesus who commands? For example, in the scene of the first Jesus feeding the crowds, which he copied from Mark, he allows himself to slightly modify his account to introduce keleuō.
If Matthew does not hesitate to present us in Jesus a figure who commands, and therefore has authority, it is probably because of his high theology, i.e. a theology that insists on the exaltation of Jesus who shares the divine privileges. In the scene of Jesus feeding the crowds, an evocation of the manna by which God fed his people in the desert, it is God himself who, in Jesus, feeds his new people through the Eucharist. Let us now examine our v. 28 where the word "command" is in Peter's mouth: "command me to come to you on the waters". In fact, Peter asks Jesus, whom he calls "Lord", to play his role of authority by commanding. It may come as a surprise that Peter would ask to be commanded. But the issue of command is not Peter, but the sea, the waters; fundamentally, Peter is asking Jesus to exercise authority over nature. Let us recall what was said earlier about the Jewish conception of the sea and the waves. They are frightening forces, associated with the forces of evil, and it is the privilege of God the Creator to control these elements of nature, to be able to control the waters and walk on the sea, in short, to overcome them. Peter therefore asks Jesus to exercise the very authority of God. |
Verb keleuō in the New Testament | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
hydata (waters) |
Hydata is the noun hydōr in the plural neutral accusative form. The accusative is required by the preposition epi (on), when it accompanies a movement verb; and the movement verb in the sentence is "to come": it is about Peter coming to Jesus on the waters. The noun hydōr means water; it gave us different words in English with the prefix "hydr" such as hydraulic, hydratant, hydrogen, hydroelectricity. It is not very frequent in the Gospel-Acts, except in John: Mt = 7; Mk = 5; Lk = 6; Jn = 21; Acts = 7; 1Jn = 4; 2Jn = 0; 3Jn = 0. Elsewhere in the New Testament, it is in Revelation that we find it the most.
The reference to water appears in various contexts that could be grouped as follows.
What is the context for v. 28? Let us recall that Matthew has just told us that the boat has to face headwinds, and so we are in a rough sea, and in the next verse Peter gets scared, sinks into the water and cries out for help. So we are in a destructive vision of the waters where they are a threat to humanity, at least to the small group of disciples. The fate that may await them is that the sea will swallow them all up. We are indeed in a context of death. But why is the word "water" in the plural form? In order to understand this, we have to place ourselves in the Jewish world. For the Hebrew word itself for water, mayim, is a duel. In fact, in Hebrew, in addition to the singular and plural, there is a duel form for objects that come in two, for example shoes or legs. The ending of these words then takes the form of the plural, which is found with mayim. This perception of water is due to the cosmology of antiquity: Then God made the vault that separates the waters (mayim) from below from the waters (mayim) from above. And so it was (Gen 1: 7) Thus, it is as if there had originally been a primordial ocean that God would have divided in two, creating a sea above the heavenly vault, source of rainwater, which would fit into the holes of the vault to fall to earth, and at ground level, oceans, rivers, cataracts. Water on earth was perceived as coming from multiple underground sources. The text of Revelation gives us several examples of this. The third angel blew his trumpet, and a great star fell from heaven, blazing like a torch, and it fell on a third of the rivers and on the springs of water (hydōr) (Ap 8: 10) The translator of the Septuagint, in translating mayim, sometimes opted for the singular, sometimes for the plural, depending on the object referred to. A good example is this text from Exodus 15:8 when it refers to the passage of the Red Sea at the exit from Egypt when the sea split in two, becoming a plural: (LXX) In the breath of thy wrath the water (hydōr) has parted, the waters (hydōr) have risen up like a tower; the waves have grown strong in the midst of the sea. Among the evangelists, only the Jew Matthew uses the plural to speak of the sea (in Jn 3:23 the plural is explained by a reference to the springs of water at Aenon, suitable for baptism). And the plural allows him to refer to certain citations of the Old Testament such as Psalm 76:20 which tells us about the passage of the Red Sea: (LXX) Thy way is in the sea, and thy paths in the great waters (hydōr), and thy footsteps cannot be known. In the Jewish world, God the creator dominates what he has created, and therefore he dominates the great waters. Since these destructive waters could have been a source of death for the Jewish people leaving Egypt, God made them a place of salvation. It is this context that must be kept in mind when reading our account of the walking on the waters. |
Noun hydōr in the New Testament | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
v. 29 Then Jesus said to him, "Come!" When Peter got out of the boat, he began to walk on the water toward Jesus.
Literally: Then he said to him, "Come (elthe)". He got out (katabas) of the boat, and the Peter walked on the waters, and went to Jesus. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
elthe (come) | Elthe is the verb erchomai in the aorist imperative 2nd person singular tense. We analyzed this verb earlier. But this time it is the imperative. We understand why. Because Peter asked Jesus to give him an order. The imperative is the expression of that command. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
katabas (he got out) | Katabas is the verb katabainō in the aoristic participle tense, nominative masculine singular, and is consistent with the subject Petros that follows. This verb is formed from the preposition kata (expresses a movement from up to down) and the verb bainō (to walk, to advance), and therefore means: to descend. It returns regularly in the Gospels-Acts (Mt = 11; Mk = 6; Lk = 12; Jn = 17; Acts = 19; 1Jn = 0; 2Jn = 0; 3Jn = 0), and it is rarely found elsewhere, except in Revelation.
This verb appears in two different contexts. First there is the physical and geographical context. One comes down from the mountain, one comes down from the terrace. Since Jerusalem is located at an altitude of nearly 2,500 feet, one regularly descends from Jerusalem. Or the rain comes down on the houses. Some examples:
But there is a symbolic context in which non-tangible objects, spiritual realities, move. For example, we will speak of a reality that comes down from heaven to signify that it comes from God. Most of the occurrences of the verb katabainō in John or in Revelation belong to this context. Some examples are:
In Matthew's work, we encounter both contexts. But here, in v. 29, even though the narrative has a high theological value, it refers to the concrete act of getting out of a boat in order to set foot on the water. |
Verb katabainō in the New Testament | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
v. 30 But when he saw the power of the wind, he was afraid, and began to sink into the water, and he cried out, "Lord, help!"
Literally: Then, then looking at (blepō) the [mighty] (ischyron) wind, and was afraid, and began (arxamenos) to be submerged (katapontizesthai)in the sea, and cried, saying, "Lord, save (sōson) (me)." |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
blepō (looking at) | Blepōn is the verb blepō in the present tense nominative masculine singular participle form, agreeing with the implied subject "he", designating Peter. It appears regularly in the Gospels: Mt = 20; Mk = 15; Lk = 16; Jn = 17; Acts = 13; 1Jn = 0; 2Jn = 1; 3Jn = 0, and means: to look at, to observe, to see. The primary meaning is to gaze at an object. In this sense it shares the semantic field of the verb oraō, which we analyzed previously, while being less frequent.
Matthew is the one who uses this verb the most among the evangelists, and among the 20 occurrences of his gospel, 13 are his own, even though they appear in stories that are unique to him. This is the case here in v. 30. The use of the present participle and the verb blepō conveys the idea that Peter is in a state where he is staring at the wind, and this state will provoke a reaction. |
Verb blepō in Gospels-Acts | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
[ischyron] (mighty) | Ischyron is the adective ischyros in the masculine accusative singular form, because it is in harmony with the noun anemon (wind) in the masculine accusative singular. It basically means: strong. But depending on the context and the word it qualifies, the adjective can take on different nuances, for example: severe (a famine, a letter), powerful (wind, voice, city, angel), violent (clamour), valiant (the man at war), influential (the person socially). This is a word that is not very common among evangelists (Mt = 3; Mk = 2; Lk = 2; Jn = 0; Acts = 0; 1Jn = 1; 2Jn = 0; 3Jn = 0), and throughout the New Testament, except in Revelation, which uses a lot of hyperbole in its visions.
When we look at the Gospels, we note that it was Mark who introduced the adjective "strong" which he uses as a noun: literally "the strong", which is translated as: the strong man. The word was taken up again by Matthew 12:29 and by Luke 11:21. So we are left with two occurrences for the rest of the Gospels, Lk 15:14 which applies it to famine, and our passage here from Mt 14:30. But our passage poses a problem. One will have noticed indeed that the word has been put in square brackets, i.e. the word does not appear in all versions. For example, the codex Sinaiticus (4th c.) and original Vaticanus (4th c.) as well as the various Coptic versions (3rd and 4th c.) don't have the adjective ischyros which accompanies the wind. On the other hand, this adjective is found in the corrected version of the codex Vaticanus, in the codexes Ephraemi Rescriptus (5th c.) and Bezae (5th-6th c.), in the Vulgate of St. Jerome (completed in 405). There are therefore two possible hypotheses: either the original contained ischyros, and later a copyist inadvertently skipped this adjective, causing the other publications from this copy not to have this word; or, the original did not contain ischyros, and it was a copyist who took the initiative to add this word, finding it necessary to explain Peter's fear, or perhaps influenced by the version found in John 6:18 which speaks of "great wind", and thus becoming the basis of all the other copies with this adjective. It is difficult to decide, but most of our Bibles have opted to consider ischyros as part of the original version, considering it more plausible that a copyist had inadvertently "skipped" the word, that a copyist had taken the initiative to add it. In any case, all this does not change the meaning of the verse much. Even in the absence of the adjective ischyros, it is understandable that it is the strength of the wind that causes fear in Peter. For the marine world, it is the wind that can be the source of terror. The similar story of the stilling of the storm revolves around the wind that Jesus is going to "exorcise" (Mk 4:36-41; Mt 8:23-27; Lk 8:23-25). |
Adjective ischyros in the New Testament | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
arxamenos (he began) | Arxamenos is the verb archō in the middle aoristic participle tense in the nominative masculine singular form, agreeing with the implied subject "he", which is Peter. It is a verb formed from the root arch which designates what is first: one can be first in time, as one can be first in the order of things. For example, the noun archē can mean "beginning" just as it can mean "ruler". So it is with the verb archō which, in the active form, means: to rule, and in the middle form means: to begin. It is quite frequent in the Gospel-Acts: Mt = 13; Mk = 27; Lk = 31; Jn = 2; Acts = 10; 1Jn = 0; 2Jn = 0; 3Jn = 0, where it is mostly in the middle form and means: to begin.
The verb "to begin" is used to indicate that an action that has been initiated is extended in time. Mark and Luke are the most frequent users of this verb. For example:
The verb archō is less frequent in Matthew, and in half of the cases it is a copy of Mark. Nevertheless, we find it in a few passages that are proper to him, as in 18:24 (parable of the ruthless debtor), 20:8 (workers of the eleventh hour) and here in v. 30. So the word belongs to his vocabulary. In the scene of the walking on the waters, it intends to express the idea that sinking into the water is a gradual process that extends over time, and has just begun. Of course, there is something surreal about the scene, because on a physical level, a human being doesn't gradually take on water unless he is a boat. But since we are in the symbolic universe of faith, the scene describes a form of reality. |
Verb archō in the New Testament | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
katapontizesthai (to be submerged) |
Katapontizesthai is the verb katapontizō in the middle form of the present infinitive tense. It is formed from the preposition kata which describes a movement from top to bottom, and from the root which gave us the name pontos (the open sea, the wide), and therefore means: to submerge, with the idea of engulfing. It therefore has a negative connotation, because the desired final state is destruction. It is a very rare word, appearing only in Matthew throughout the New Testament, and sometimes in the Septuagint.
One of the two occurrences of the verb in Matthew is a substitution (underlined) for the verb "to throw away" received from Mark.
We must think that Matthew considered it more appropriate to use katapontizō to express the idea of destroying evil by plunging the person into the sea. Why is that? Some passages from the Septuagint may have influenced him. Let us think of the well-known song of Moses in which he celebrates the victory of Yahweh over Pharaoh and his army, throwing them into the sea where they were submerged (LXX: katapontizō; heb. ṭābaʿ: sinking) (Ex 15:4); those who put a stumbling block will know the fate of the pagans, the Egyptians. What about our v. 30 where Matthew uses katapontizō to describe Peter's situation? Two psalms of the Septuagint where we find this verb can help us to understand Matthew's intention. We have highlighted the vocabulary that is also found in our story.
Psalm 69 is the prayer of the person who is persecuted because of his faith in God, who cries out his distress and humiliation, and it is his faith that leads him to be sure of his salvation, so that he ends his prayer with a song of praise. As for Psalm 124, it is a collective prayer of a community that is grateful to the Lord for having delivered it. These two psalms could very well express what Matthew's community, despised by its Jewish co-religionists, experienced. It is therefore not by chance that Matthew uses katapontizō to describe the situation of Peter, who represents the whole community: one is overwhelmed or submerged to the point of drowning, one can't take it anymore, one feels like one is dying. |
Verb katapontizō in the Bible | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
sōson (save) |
Sōson is the verb sōzō in the aoristic imperative tense, 2nd person singular. In classical Greek, it means: to keep safe, to save, to preserve. As for the root "sōs", it refers to a situation where one saves from danger, disease, war, shipwreck (see André Myre, Nouveau vocabulaire théologique. Paris-Bayard: Bayard-Médiaspaul, 2004, pp. 477-478). The verb sōzō appears regularly among the evangelists (Mt = 15; Mk = 15; Lk = 17; Jn = 6; Acts = 13; 1Jn = 0; 2Jn = 0; 3Jn = 0) and in the rest of the New Testament.
To fully understand the meaning of this verb, we must first grasp its Old Testament context. Translators of the Septuagint have often translated by sōzō the Hebrew word yāšaʿ, which means: to save, to deliver, to help (we refer to Jean-Pierre Prévost, Nouveau vocabulaire théologique. p. 240-245). The context always refers to a precise danger, a catastrophe or a concrete and visible enemy from which one is delivered. Thus, in a number of books (i.e. Judges, Kings 1 and 2, and Samuel 1 and 2), salvation is synonymous with military and political victory. On the other hand, the book of Psalms emphasizes above all the individual experience of salvation: liberation from the aggressor, from the enemy, from bodily peril or anguish. With Deutero-Isaiah (ch. 40-66), we pass to a universalist, cosmic and eschatological vision of salvation. But, beyond the word yāšaʿ, it is the experience of having come out of the Egyptian hold under the leadership of Moses, and especially the return from the Babylon exile, which will mark the perception of salvation in the Jewish world. Indeed, it will be less and less a question of victory over the enemy than of reconstruction and national reconciliation. And even, with Isaiah, an ecumenical perspective develops in which deliverance is offered to all nations (Isiah 49:6). Note that several names have been formed from the Hebrew root yshʿ: Yehôshûaʿ (Joshua and Jesus: "Yahweh saves"), Yeshaʿyahû (Isaiah: "He, Yahweh, saves") and Hôsheaʿ (Hosea: "He saves"). It is from this context that we must try to understand the New Testament and in particular the Gospels. When we review the occurrences of the verb sōzō in the New Testament, we note that the word can take on four different major meanings.
You can see the whole evolution of the meaning of sōzō. In the Old Testament, it is primarily about being saved, either individually or collectively, from imminent peril, especially from enemies and persecutors. But with the Gospels, without there necessarily being any persecutors, salvation expands to include physical, moral and spiritual evils. Then, just as Jesus preached the imminence of God's reign, salvation now includes escaping God's judgment and entering the world of God at the end times. Finally, with faith in the risen Christ, we began to speak of a salvation that the believer already achieves by escaping from the world of darkness and entering into life in the Spirit, awaiting the final salvation at the return of the risen Christ; the notion of salvation has been totally spiritualized. If we limit ourselves to the Gospel-Acts, we obtain the following table:
Let's make a few points:
Let us now turn to Matthew. Most of the occurrences of sōzō in his gospel come from Mark's accounts that he copied. There is a first exception when he adds sōzō to the account he receives from Mark:
Why would Matthew have changed Mark's phrase (go in peace and be healed of your infirmity) to: and instantly the woman was saved. The answer is probably this:
We will have noted in passing the expression "take courage" (tharsei) in Matthew, which we saw earlier in v.27, which appears here in a context of faith. Another exception is where Matthew adds sōzō to the account of the stilling storm that he receives from Mark:
The accent of the two versions of the stilling storm is totally different. In Mark the emphasis is on Jesus' silence and his apparent indifference to what is happening, no doubt an echo of what the persecuted community in Rome is experiencing. In Matthew, the emphasis is on the lack of faith; we are in front of a prayer, with the expression "Lord" and the imperative "save", but a prayer born of fear. For Matthew, fear is the opposite of faith. All this brings us to our v. 30 which is unique to Matthew and where we find the same verb in the imperative: save. Let us note that in Mt 8:25 and here in Mt 14:30 the verb sōzō is in both cases in the imperative 2nd person singular, and in both cases in the mouth of someone who cries out: "Help". All this is unique to Matthew (elsewhere, there is Mark who presents people inviting Jesus on the cross to save himself, or John (12:27) who presents a Jesus who refuses to ask to be saved from the hour of the cross). What does Peter want to be saved from? Just as in Mt 8:25 he wants to be saved from drowning, and therefore from physical death, one of the great themes of the New Testament. But for Matthew, the source of this call for "help" can only be the lack of faith. |
Verb sōzō in the Nouveau Testament | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
v. 31 Immediately Jesus took hold of him with an outstretched hand, saying, "You have so little faith, why did you doubt?"
Literally: Then, immediately the Jesus stretched forth (ekteinas) his hand, and took hold (epelabeto) of him, and said to him, "You of little faith (oligopiste), why did you doubt (edistasas)?" |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ekteinas (stretched forth) |
Ekteinas is the verb ekteinō in the singular masculine nominative aoristic participle tense, agreeing with the subject Jesus. Throughout the New Testament, it appears only in the Gospel-Acts : Mt = 6; Mk = 3; Lk = 3; Jn = 1; Acts = 3; 1Jn = 0; 2Jn = 0; 3Jn = 0. In addition, of the 16 occurrences, 15 belong to the expression "stretching the hand" (the only exception being Acts 27: 30 where the term "stretching out the anchors from the bow of the ship" is used).
The expression "stretching the hand" is found in different contexts.
Here, in v. 31, the gesture of stretching out the hand is intended to take hold of Peter and prevent him from drowning. In Judaism, to speak of extending the hand refers to the idea of intervening, of acting, of taking action. In the Septuagint, the verb ekteinō is often used with God as the subject. For example, in Exodus 7:5 God's initiative to free his people is expressed as follows: LXX "And all the Egyptians shall know that I am the Lord who stretched out my hand (ekteinōn tēn cheira) in the land of Egypt, and from among this people I will bring forth the children of Israel". We pointed out the negative perception of water, waves and the sea in the Jewish world. The gesture of Jesus, as Lord, to stretch out his hand, is the very hand of God who intervenes to save his people from the enemy and from evil. Moreover, let us note that the sentence begins with "immediately" (eutheōs): the answer to Peter's prayer is immediate. |
Verb ekteinō in the New Testament | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
epelabeto (he took hold) | Epelabeto is the verb epilambanō in the middle aorist tense, 3rd person singular. It is formed of the preposition epi (on) and the verb lambanō (to take), and means: to put one's hand on something or someone, to seize. It is rare throughout the New Testament and in the Gospel-Acts, except in Luke where it appears a few times: Mt = 1; Mk = 1; Lk = 5; Jn = 0; Acts = 7; 1Jn = 0; 2Jn = 0; 3Jn = 0.
In most of the occurrences of epilambanō, it is a person who is seized, either to arrest him
"Then all of them took hold of (epilambanō) Sosthenes, the official of the synagogue, and beat him in front of the tribunal. But Gallio paid no attention to any of these things", Acts 18:17or to do him good "But they were silent. So Jesus took hold of (epilambanō) him and healed him, and sent him away", Lk 14:4or to take further action "But Jesus, aware of their inner thoughts, took hold of (epilambanō) a little child and put it by his side" (follows the exhortation to welcome children in the name of Jesus), Lk 9:47Here, in v. 31, we have the expression "He stretched forth his hand and took hold of him". Usually, stretching one's hand to grasp someone is a benevolent action.
But what could better enlighten Jesus' gesture towards Peter is this passage from the epistle to the Hebrews which paraphrases Jeremiah 31:31-34 and puts this in the mouth of God: (I will make a new covenant) not like the covenant that I made with their ancestors, on the day when I took hold of (epilambanō) them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt; for they did not continue in my covenant, and so I had no concern for them, says the Lord. (Hebrews 8: 9) To take hold of the hand is an expression of salvation that could refer to what God did for His people in Egypt. Thus, we must look at the gesture of Jesus stretching his hand to take hold of Peter, who is drowning, with a vision much broader than the simple rescue of an individual; in Jesus, it is God who comes to the rescue of his new people, of which Peter is the representative. |
Verb epilambanō in the New Testament | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
oligopiste (of little faith) |
Oligopiste is the adjective oligopistos with the singular masculine vocative form. The word is in the vocative because it is a call for attention. It is composed of two words: the adjective oligos (little, small) and the adjective pistos (faithful, worthy of faith, believer), and therefore means: little faithful. But Matthew makes it play the role of a noun, and therefore it must be translated : (man) of little faith, or little faithful (man). It is found nowhere else in the whole Bible except in Matthew and Luke: Mt = 4; Mk = 0; Lk = 1; Jk = 0; Acts = 0; 1Jn = 0; 2Jn = 0; 3Jn = 0.
We are probably looking at a word made up by the first generation of Christians. It was introduced in the Gospels through Document Q (Lk 12:28; Mt 6:30) when Jesus invites the disciples not to worry about food and clothing: for if God sees to it that the birds have enough to eat and that flowers such as lilies are well dressed, why do the disciples worry so much about tomorrow's food and clothing? All this indicates that they are people of little faith. But Matthew took up this term again and expanded it, probably because it was in line with one of his favorite theological themes. So he took the liberty of adding it to the stories he received from Mark.
If Matthew takes the liberty of modifying the account he receives from Mark to add the expression "people of little faith", it is because he sees this as one of the major problems among some Christians. It seems to him that when a Christian is afraid, afraid of running out of food or not having the right clothes, afraid of the adversity or opposition he may encounter, and that this takes up all the attention, then it is a sign that he does not have the faith required of the true believer. One cannot speak of the word oligopistos without mentioning his twin sister: oligopistia. The only difference is that the first is an adjective, and the second is a feminine noun that basically means the same thing: little faith. It is possible that it is a word created by Matthew himself. But what is certain is that it reflects Matthew's view that lack of faith is a fundamental problem of the community. Indeed, oligopistia appears after the account of the transfiguration, and after the disciples were confronted with their failure to face an epileptic child whose demon they were unable to root out and heal him. Then they ask Jesus why they failed. Let us compare Jesus' answer according to Mark and Matthew:
What Mark's version says: Only God can perform certain healings through prayer. Matthew's version rather says: you are capable of it, if only you had the faith to lift the mountains. Once again, all this shows how faith is a central element of Christian faith in Matthew. It is in this context that we must read our v. 31 where Matthew again presents us with the expression "little faith", but this time addressed to Peter. One may be surprised and even shocked that Matthew has the audacity to present the spokesman for the disciples as a man of little faith. But this is his way of emphasizing the vital role of faith, and that no matter what role one person plays in the community, no matter how important, all must follow the path of unshakeable trust in the presence and support of the risen Christ. |
Adjective oligopistos in the Bible | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
edistasas (you doubted) | Edistasas is the verb distazō in the indicative aorist tense, 2nd person singular. It means: to doubt, to hesitate, and is found only in Matthew throughout the Bible: Mt = 2; Mk = 0; Lk = 0; Jn = 0; Acts = 0; 1Jn = 0; 2Jn = 0; 3Jn = 0. It is probable that it was Matthew who introduced this word in the Gospels, even though the word is present in classical Greek, appearing for example in the pen of the philosopher Plato.
With the expression "people of little faith" we have noted how much faith was at the heart of Matthew's theology. The very fact that he introduces the verb "to doubt" accentuates this point. The other occurrence of distazō is in the last scene of his gospel, a scene around the resurrected Jesus which takes up his main themes: we are on a mountain, the same setting where Jesus, as the new Moses, delivered his inaugural discourse, the New Law (Mt 5), surrounded by his disciples whom he now sends on mission and to whom he gives his assurance of support. He writes in 28:17 When they saw him, they prostrated before him; but some doubted (distazō). How to interpret this scene? Matthew's gesture of mentioning the doubt of some disciples about the risen Jesus is not without reminding us of the scene in John 20:24-28 about Thomas who did not want to believe in the risen Jesus at first. But why does Matthew insist on this point to include it in this final scene? Yet does he not explicitly say at the beginning of the sentence "his disciples saw him"? So, seeing and believing seem two different realities. Matthew writes about 50 years after the events he refers to. He addresses a community that is a little torn, which meets a lot of opposition. And for him, the central issue is that of faith. And in his final account, he says: "Do you think that the disciples who accompanied Jesus and were with him on the mountain had an advantage over you? Look, many doubted that he was risen and present in our world. Faith is not a matter of seeing and touching. And here, in v. 31, the reproach of doubt is addressed to Peter, the one who is considered the head of this Church to which Matthew's community belongs. The evangelist's intention is clear, for he finds himself saying to his community: "Despite his closeness to Jesus, Peter has no advantage over you. He, too, had to learn to believe". A final note: the connection between our v. 31 and the final Mt. 28:16-20 is one more argument for thinking that the Jesus of the water walk in Matthew is the Jesus after his resurrection. |
Verb distazō in the Bible | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
v. 32 When they both got into the boat, the wind died down.
Literally: And them, having gone up to the boat, the wind ceased (ekopasen). |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ekopasen (it ceased) |
Ekopasen is the verb kopazō in the indicative aoristic tense, 3rd person singular. Literally it means: to get tired, to calm down, to stop. It is practically absent from the New Testament. Mark seems to have introduced this verb for the scene of the stilling storm and walking on water, taken up by Matthew: Mt = 1; Mk = 2; Lk = 0; Jn = 0; Acts = 0; 1Jn = 0; 2Jn = 0; 3Jn = 0.
Also, we must turn to the Septuagint to get a better idea of how this verb is used. Now, we notice that kopazō concerns three different realities.
This long detour through the Septuagint makes us aware of one thing: kopazō is always associated with a destructive force that we try to contain. And according to the mentality of antiquity, of which Judaism is an example, the destructive forces of nature take their source in the anger of God who expresses his feelings in the face of evil. All this gives us a context for understanding our v. 31, especially the beginning of the story of Jonah (Jonah 1:1-16). Let us remember that the Lord sent him to Nineveh to preach his word and ask for his conversion. But the prophet flees on a ship to Tarshish. Then the Lord throws such a strong wind on the sea that the ship is in danger of breaking up. The crew consults the spells that designated Jonah as responsible for God's wrath. They cast Jonah into the sea, and immediately the sea stood still. This story most likely influenced the story that has been told in two versions with a similar theme, the stilling storm and the walking on the waters. For we are in front of a raging sea, a symbol of evil, which threatens to destroy the boat and its occupants. In the story of Jonah, the sailors pray to the Lord before eliminating the one who has displeased him, and then calm is achieved; calm is linked with a certain synchronicity with God. In the story of walking on the waters, calm is achieved when Jesus becomes present in the boat, symbol of the faith regained, and therefore of a certain synchronization with God. We will have noticed that, contrary to the story of the calm storm, Jesus does not make any exorcism gesture to ask the wind to stop. The wind stops when Jesus gets into the boat. Now, Jesus can only get into the boat by faith. Matthew's message is clear to his community: "As long as you do not allow yourself to be guided by faith, the sea of opposition will continue to frighten you, for you will only feel a certain serenity when in faith you let the Lord Jesus enter the Church that you are". What is this faith? V. 33 gives us the answer. |
Verb kopazō in the Bible | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
v. 33 The disciples recognized his authority, saying, "Truly, you are God's son."
Literally: Then those in the boat prostrated (prosekynēsan) [before] him, saying, "Truly (alēthōs), of God (theou), son (huios), you are." |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
prosekynēsan (they prostrated) |
Prosekynēsan is the verb proskyneō in the indicative aorist tense, 3rd person plural, because the subject is: the disciples. Apart from Matthew, John and Revelation, it is not very frequent in the New Testament, and especially in the Gospel-Acts : Mt = 13; Mk = 2; Lk = 3; Jn = 11; Acts = 4; 1Jn = 0; 2Jn = 0; 3Jn = 0. But even the number of occurrences is deceptive in John, for of the 11 presences of the verb, 9 appear in the dialogue with the Samaritan woman where the place of worship is discussed (proskyneō).
What does this verb mean? Usually it is translated as: to prostrate oneself. In the ancient Eastern world, one would kneel down and touch the ground with his forehead to express his reverence before someone, for example a king or ruler; it is a way of acknowledging his authority and promising obedience. In the religious world, it will be a way of expressing one's reverence to the deity, of worshipping him, which the Latins will express with the word: to adore, worship or venerate. But sometimes, at a less extreme level, the verb can be used to express respect for someone or to greet him respectfully. What about the New Testament?
Let's get back to Matthew. In the Gospels, he's the one who uses proskyneō the most. Not only is he the one who uses this verb the most, but out of the 13 occurrences 10 are addressed to Jesus, and these ten occurrences are his own. This is Matthew's expression of a high theology, where Jesus is presented under his divine figure. Also, we must read our v. 33 in this context: the Jesus before whom the disciples prostrate in the boat is the Jesus known after Easter, the one who shares the prerogatives of God. It is useless to try to obtain a video of the scene: one would be very embarrassed to find room in the small boat for all the disciples to lie down on the floor in a prostrate gesture. Matthew is in the world of catechesis and faith. |
Verb proskyneō in the New Testament | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
alēthōs (truly) | Alēthōs is an uncommon adverb in the Gospel-Acts: Mt = 3; Mk = 2; Lk = 3; Jn = 7; Acts = 1; 1Jn = 1; 2Jn = 0; 3Jn = 0. It comes from the verbal root lanthanō (to be hidden, ignored, unnoticed), preceded by the negative prefix a-. It thus qualifies what does not pass unnoticed, what is not hidden, what is not concealed. It is usually translated as "truly".
But the adverb can take on many nuances and play different roles. Indeed, alēthōs can be used to affirm a point of view that is not obvious and appears confusing: it is a way of saying that this is the truth. For example:
In a context of opposition or debate, it is a way of saying that the opponent is wrong and of insisting that one's own point of view nevertheless reflects reality. For example:
Alēthōs often appears in a context where events confirm a certain reality, and the interlocutor lets it be known that this reality has been validated. For example:
The adverb can be used simply to stress the importance of what is being asserted in order to emphasize it; this is a solemn affirmation. For example:
In some cases, it is less a question of conformity with reality than of a person's authenticity, reliability and representativeness. For example:
Thus, adding "truly" in a sentence serves different purposes. Why do we have "truly" here in v. 33 when the disciples say, "Truly, you are God's son"? This statement follows the walking on the waters, so alēthōs is a way of saying that the statement has been validated by the "facts" (let's not forget that we are in theological language and that the waters represent evil). It is the same approach that he will use at the end of his gospel, 27: 54: "Now when the centurion and those with him, who were keeping watch over Jesus, saw the earthquake and what took place, they were terrified and said, 'Truly (alēthōs) this man was God's Son!'". We find something similar in Mk 15:39: "Now when the centurion, who stood facing him, saw that in this way he breathed his last, he said, 'Truly (alēthōs) this man was God's Son!'". The darkness, the call to God from Jesus, and especially the veil of the sanctuary being torn in two, all led the centurion to confess his faith in Jesus, the Son of God. It is also the same thing we have in 1 Kings 18:39: "And all the people fell upon their faces, and said, 'Truly (alēthōs) the Lord is God'"; the people have just witnessed God's intervention, sending fire to devour the burnt offering, wood, stones, dust and water from the ditch. At the same time, the presence of "truly" in the sentence gives great solemnity to the disciples' statement: it is a true confession of faith that Matthew intends to emphasize. |
Adverb alēthōs in the Bible | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
theou huios (of God son) |
The expression theou huios is surprising, because theou (God) is a singular masculine genitive, therefore the complement of the noun huios (son), which is in the singular masculine nominative form: the noun's complement precedes the noun it completes, and therefore instead of having "son of God", we have here : "of God son". Since the sentence ends with the verb to be, we must translate: of God son you are. Of all the evangelists, Matthew is the only one to use this construction. Here are two other passages:
Why this reversal of the normal order? We reverse the order of an expression in a language when we want to emphasize one of the words, usually the first one. For example, if I say of someone: the prince of Siberia, I emphasize the fact that he is a prince, and Siberia only specifies on which territory he is a prince. But if I say: of Siberia, he is the prince, I emphasize the immense territory of Siberia, and the word "prince" just clarifies who plays a role in that territory. One might guess that this is Matthew's intention: to emphasize God is to emphasize the person whose son he is, as if he were saying, "Be aware? It is of God that he is the son. The three occurrences of this inversion are accompanied by the verb "to be". Let us not forget that Matthew has a high theology, in which he insists on the transcendent side of Jesus. In the rest of the Bible there are two other occurrences of this inversion, 2 Corinthians 1:19 and Wisdom 18:13 where the author refers to the people of Israel. But the same logic on what is sought to be emphasized prevails. Now, let us ask ourselves the question: what does the expression "son of God" mean in Matthew? Unfortunately, the word son has multiple meanings. The clearest is the biological meaning, for example: the mother of the sons of Zebedee (Mt 27:56). But there is also the genealogical lineage, for example: Jesus is sometimes called "son of David" (e.g. Mt 9:27), not because he is a biological son, but according to his genealogy he would have King David as his ancestor. Then there is the group or race to which one belongs, for example: the sons of Israel (Mt 27:9). We can add this meaning that comes from the allegiance at the level of ideas and values to a master or a group of people, for example: the sons of the Pharisees (Mt 12:27). Within the setting of these categories, where is the expression "sons of God" to be found? In the strictest sense, it could be an adherence to the values that we believe have God as their source. But if people can call themselves "sons of God", is this what Matthew and the other evangelists mean with respect to Jesus? The Old Testament In order to fully understand what this is all about, we must start with the Old Testament universe. It is possible that this universe integrated from the Greco-Roman world or from the surrounding peoples a multiplicity of gods, supra-human powers, while submitting them to the one God, called ʾēl, or to the plural of majesty ĕlōhîm, of which one of the possible etymologies would be the root ʾōl (powerful being, pre-eminent being) (see Jean-Pierre Prévost, ēl, Nouveau vocabulaire biblique. Paris-Montréal: Bayard-Médiaspaul, 2004, p. 125). Thus Genesis tells us of the sons of God who would have mated with women of the earth to give birth to giants, famous men (Genesis 6:2-4). To speak of "sons of God" here means to share a little of God's power and pre-eminence. When Psalm 82:1 says, "God stood in the assembly of the gods," we can think that these "gods" are either heavenly beings, angels, or earthly judges. Whatever the case, they are always beings endowed with a certain authority, and therefore share a divine privilege. When the Septuagint encounters the Hebrew expression "sons of God," it will often translate it as angels, for example Job 1:6: LXX "Now in one of those days the angels of God (hoi angeloi tou theou, Heb. benê ĕlōhîm: sons of God) came to appear before the Lord, and the devil came with them" (see also Job 2:1; 38:7; Ps 29:1). But there is one office in particular that deserves the title of son of God, that of king. Thus, at his enthronement, Ps 2:7 was recited: "Let me quote the decree of the Lord; he said to me, 'You are my son. Today I have begotten you". We can speak of spiritual filiation or adoption, inasmuch as God delegates some of his privileges to the king to exercise his role of judging and governing. And among these royal sons of God, stands out the figure of the Messiah or Christ (anointed), a descendant of David, according to the author of 2 Samuel 7:14 where God gives this message to the prophet Nathan that he must transmit to King David, a message in which he assures him a long descent, and of his successor and of all his successors he says : LXX "I will be a father to him, and he shall be a son to me; and if any iniquity befalls him, I will chasten him with the rod that chastises men, and I will strike him with the blows that are dealt to the sons of men". Thus, in spite of the hazards of royalty, in spite of exile and the presence of foreign forces, faith in the promise of God of a figure like David has been maintained, as Psalm 132:17: LXX (131) sings: "There will I cause to spring up a horn to David, there I have prepared a lamp for my Christ (Christos, Heb. māšîaḥ: Messiah)". In the Old Testament, the people of Israel are also called sons of God. Why are they called sons of God? We are no longer before beings who share a certain authority. Rather, it is God's choice, according to the implication of Hosea 11:1: "When Israel was young, I loved him, and out of Egypt I called my son". And God commits himself to watch over this son: "The number of the sons of Israel will be like the sand of the sea, which cannot be measured or counted; it will happen that at the place where they were told, 'You are not my people', they will be told, 'Son of the living God'" (Hos 2:1). This is a tradition found almost everywhere in the Old Testament, for example Exodus 4:22: "You shall say to Pharaoh, Thus says the Lord, My firstborn son is Israel" (see also Isaiah 1:2; Jeremiah 3:19; Deuteronomy 32:6; Malachi 1:6). According to the Greek Esther, this is one of the reasons why the Persian king Artaxerxes, in his edict to all the subjects of his kingdom, asks them to help the Jews to repel those who will attack them: and being the sons of the living God (huioi zōvtos theou), the most high and mighty, who maintains the kingdom, to us as well as to our forefathers, in the most excellent order (Est 8: 12q) It also happens that some individuals are called "sons of God". This is the case of the righteous, i.e. those who are faithful to the covenant made with God and expressed by His Law. "For if the just man be the son of God (huios theou), he will help him, and deliver him from the hand of his enemies" (Wis 2: 18) Thus, at the dawn of the period of the evangelists, the title " Son of God " could designate the king messiah, the whole Jewish people, or individuals considered just before God. They were sons because of a spiritual filiation initiated by God himself, in which they expressed the salvific and compassionate dimension of God, and the privilege they could boast of was that of being supported and protected by God. The Gospels In the New Testament, the title "Son of God" applies only to Jesus. But this is not the title that is most often attributed to him, the title of Messiah or Christ being much more common. Let us look at the evangelists. The occurrences of "Son of God" or equivalent expressions (Son of the Father, my son, only son, the Son) are established as follows: Mt = 13; Mk = 8; Lk = 10; Jn = 24; Acts = 1; 1Jn = 8; 2Jn = 0; 3Jn = 0. According to these numbers, there is a gradation that begins with Mark and reaches its climax with John. What is meant by "Son of God" when the title refers to Jesus? For the period of Jesus, our only clue as to what the title could mean is an isolated and obscure text from Qumran (4Q246) that alludes to a Son of God, perhaps a messianic figure. In fact, several times in the Gospels the title "Son of God" is accompanied by the title Messiah or Christ, as if they were synonymous. This is how Mark's Gospel begins: "Beginning of the Gospel of Jesus Christ (christos), Son of God (huiou Theou)". And all the evangelists present texts where Messiah (Christos) and Son of God are in apposition:
Moreover, the election of Jesus at his baptism of which Mark 1:11 speaks ("And a voice came from heaven, "You are my Son (huios mou), the Beloved; with you I am well pleased"), taken up by Matthew and Luke, is a way for the evangelist to affirm that Jesus was chosen to fulfill his messianic mission, just like the enthronement of a king expressed in Ps 2:7. This election will be confirmed before his disciples in the transfiguration (Mk 9:7) where God presents him as the prophet to be listened to. But, as we can well guess, the title "Son of God" is not only synonymous with the Messiah. Here we must follow each evangelist in the clues they give us. Mark With Mark, let us note first of all that only supernatural beings are capable of identifying him as a "son of God" during his lifetime, because this is not a reality that can be observed by a human being. Thus, Mark 1:21-28 tells us that an unclean spirit, about to be expelled from a man, will say, "What have you to do with us, Jesus of Nazareth? Have you come to destroy us? I know who you are, the Holy One of God (hagios tou theou)". Thus, he who comes from God has authority over the evil that is sickness (Mk 1:24; see also 3:11; 5:7). Finally, there is the centurion's confession: "Truly this man was a son of God (huios theou)" (15:39). On what basis can he make such a statement? Jesus has just called upon God ("My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?"), and God intervened with darkness for three hours, and especially with the veil of the sanctuary being torn, confirming the word about the destruction of the temple. Jesus is a son of God, not only because he is the Messiah chosen by God, but he shares with God the authority over evil, and God intervened at his prayer. Luke First of all, Luke shares the general perception that Jesus is a son of God because he is the Messiah, that promised king from the line of David: "He will be great, and will be called the Son of the Most High (huios hypsistou), and the Lord God will give to him the throne of his ancestor David" (1:32). In the same way, he takes up Mark's assertions about Jesus' authority over evil through his healings, and that in this supernatural beings recognize that he is the Son of God. But Luke adds two attributes to the son of God. First of all, through the account of the temptation of Jesus (4:1-13) which he receives from Document Q, he presents the Son of God as the one who remains totally faithful to his messianic mission and to God, unlike the Israelites in the desert, and therefore is personally victorious over evil by totally assuming his human condition, by refusing power with the related wealth, by refusing a way that would allow him to avoid death; in short, Jesus shows himself to be a son of God by being fully and poorly human. But there is a second attribute that is perhaps even more important: "The angel said to her, "The Holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you; therefore the child to be born will be holy; he will be called Son of God (huios theou)" (1:35). It is because he is filled with the Holy Spirit that he is able to emerge victorious from his battle against Satan and evil: "Jesus, filled with the Holy Spirit, returned from the Jordan and was led by the Spirit through the wilderness" (4:1). And if he is able to carry out his messianic mission to the end, it is because of this Spirit of God: "The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he has anointed me to bring the good news" (4:18). And in the Acts of the Apostles, as a son of God, he will pour out the Spirit into the world (2:1-36). Matthew In Matthew we find more or less the same attributes of the Son of God that we were able to identify in Mark and Luke: he is Son of God as Messiah, he is Son of God by his authority over the evil of the disease that supernatural beings perceive well, he is Son of God because he is faithful to the will of God as the scene of the temptation in the desert showed. But he will draw attention to two other attributes. The first is the presentation of the Son of God as one who trusts in God completely and as the one whom God cares for eminently: "He trusts in God; let God deliver him now, if he wants to; for he said, 'I am God's Son ( theou eimi huios )" (27:43); this is a reference to Ps 22:9, the psalm that Jesus began to recite (My God, my God, why have you forsaken me). But above all there is the general authority over the forces of evil represented by the dominion over nature such as walking on the waters (14:22-33), and the earthquake at his death (27:51), and above all represented by the evil par excellence that is death (the bodies of many who died rose from the dead, 27:52): "Now when the centurion and those with him, who were keeping watch over Jesus, saw the earthquake and what took place, they were terrified and said, "Truly this man was God's Son (theou huios)!" (27: 54). John In John there are elements similar to those found in the other evangelists, such as the apposition of the title "Son of God" and Messiah: "She said to him, "Yes, Lord, I believe that you are the Messiah, the Son of God (huios tou theou), the one coming into the world" (11:27). In the same way, as we have seen in Luke, the Son of God is the one who received the Holy Spirit: "And I did not know him, but he who sent me to baptize in water said to me, 'He on whom you will see the Spirit descending and dwelling, this is he who baptizes in the Holy Spirit. And I have seen and bear witness that this is the Son of God (huios tou theou)" (1:33-34). But John takes us to another register when he speaks to us of the "only Son" (3:16,18), and above all he presents this Son as the Word of God who became flesh and a perfect reflection of God: "And he who sees me sees him who sent me" (12:45); "Very truly, I tell you, the Son (huios) can do nothing on his own, but only what he sees the Father doing; for whatever the Father does, the Son (huios) does likewise." (5:19); "For just as the Father has life in himself, so he has granted the Son (huios) also to have life in himself" (5:26). And it is this capacity to give life that will provoke in his adversaries the desire to kill him and culminate in this accusation before Pilate: "The Jews answered him, "We have a law, and according to that law he ought to die because he has claimed to be the Son of God (huios tou theou)" (19:7). Thus, for John, Jesus is this only Son because he is the true revealer of what God is, and this revelation is the source of a unique life for the believer, the very life of God. After this evangelical overview, we can ask the question: when did we begin to give Jesus the title of Son of God? There is no indication that it was during his lifetime. On the contrary, when the evangelists offer us passages where it is said that he is a son of God, they take the precaution of putting him in the mouths of supernatural beings, because it will only be after his death that humans will clearly say so. As for John, this is a long theological reflection some sixty years after Jesus' ministry. These voices from heaven where God says that Jesus is his son are Old Testament quotes. The confession on Jesus as sons of God from the disciples following the walking on the waters and Peter's confession reflect Matthew's editorial work (on this point see R.E. Brown). But what is clear is that the notion of Jesus as the son of God developed at lightning speed after his death, as can be seen, for example, in the Pauline epistles, especially the epistle to the Romans (about A.D. 55). It is time to return to our v. 33 and to the title "Son of God". In our analysis of this title in Matthew, we have emphasized that this title is given to him as a result of his manifested authority over the forces of evil represented by the waters, the waves and the sea. The sea was also associated with the Abyss, Sheol of the Dead. Two other things must now be emphasized.
|
Noun theos in Gospels-Acts | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
-André Gilbert, Gatineau, July 2020 |