Bible:
Filter: String:

OT-HISTORY.filter - rwp Galilean:

rwp@Info_Acts @ THE DATE There are three views about the date of the Acts. Baur and his Tubingen School held the second century to be the date of this late pamphlet as they termed it after the fashion of the Clementine Homilies. But that view is now practically abandoned save by the few who still strangely oppose the Lukan authorship. Probably the majority of those who accept the Lukan authorship place it in the latter part of the first century for two reasons. One is that the Gospel according to Luke is dated by them after the destruction of Jerusalem because of the prophecy by Jesus of the encompassing of the city by armies. Predictive prophecy that would be and so it is considered a prophecy _post eventum_. The other reason is the alleged use of the _Antiquities_ of Josephus by Luke. Josephus finished this work A.D. 93 so that, if Luke did use it, he must have written the Acts after that date. Usually this argument is made to show that Luke could not have written it at all, but some hold that he may have lived to an age that would allow it. But it cannot be assumed that Luke used Josephus because of his mention of Theudas and Judas the Galilean. They differ so widely (Acts:5:36f|. and Josephus, _Ant_. XX. v, 1, 2) that Von Dobschutz (_Dictionary of the Apostolic Church_, art. Josephus) argues that the two accounts are entirely independent of each other. Songs:Luke (Luke:13:1f.|) alludes to a Galilean revolt not mentioned by Josephus and Josephus records three revolts under Pilate not referred to by Luke. A comparison of the accounts of the death of Agrippa I in strkjv@Acts:12:20-23| and _Ant_. XIX. viii, 2 redounds to the credit of Luke. The Josephus phase of the argument may be brushed to one side. The third view, held by Harnack and adopted here, is that Luke wrote the Acts while with Paul in Rome and finished the book before Paul's release, that is by A.D. 63. This is the obvious and natural way to take the language of Luke at the close of Acts. Events had gone no farther and so he ends the narrative right there. It is argued against this that Luke contemplated a third volume and for this reason closed with the arrival of Paul in Rome. But the use of \prton\ (first) in strkjv@Acts:1:1| is a common _Koin_ idiom and does not imply three volumes any more than first and second stories with us means that the house has three. Of course this date for the Acts puts the date of the Gospel further back either in Caesarea (57 to 59) or in Rome (60 to 62). And that means that Mark's Gospel is still earlier since Luke used it for his Gospel and the Logia (Q) earlier still. But all these dates are probable in the light of all the known facts.

rwp@Acts:2:7 @{Were amazed} (\existanto\). Imperfect middle of \existmi\, to stand out of themselves, wide-open astonishment. {Marvelled} (\ethaumazon\). Imperfect active. The wonder grew and grew. {Galileans} (\Galilaioi\). There were few followers of Jesus as yet from Jerusalem. The Galileans spoke a rude Aramaic (Mark:14:70|) and probably crude Greek vernacular also. They were not strong on language and yet these are the very people who now show such remarkable linguistic powers. These people who have come together are all Jews and therefore know Aramaic and the vernacular _Koin_, but there were various local tongues "wherein we were born" (\en hi egennthmen\). An example is the Lycaonian (Acts:14:11|). These Galilean Christians are now heard speaking these various local tongues. The lists in verses 9-11| are not linguistic, but geographical and merely illustrate how widespread the Dispersion (\Diaspora\) of the Jews was as represented on this occasion. Jews were everywhere, these "Jews among the nations" (Acts:21:21|). Page notes four main divisions here: (I) The Eastern or Babylonian, like the Parthians, Medes, Elamites, Mesopotamians. (2) The Syrian like Judea, Cappadocia, Pontus, Asia, Phrygia, Pamphylia. (3) The Egyptian like Egypt, Libya, Cyrene. (4) The Roman. {Jews and proselytes} (\proslutoi\). These last from \proserchomai\, to come to, to join, Gentile converts to Judaism (circumcision, baptism, sacrifice). This proselyte baptism was immersion as is shown by I. Abrahams (_Studies in Pharisaism and the Gospels_, p. 38). Many remained uncircumcised and were called proselytes of the gate.

rwp@Acts:5:36 @{Theudas} (\Theudas\). Luke represents Gamaliel here about A.D. 35 as speaking of a man who led a revolt before that of Judas the Galilean in connection with the enrolment under Quirinius (Cyrenius) in A.D. 6. But Josephus (_Ant_. XX. 5, 1) tells of a Theudas who led a similar insurrection in the reign of Claudius about A.D. 44 or 45. Josephus (_Ant_. XVIII. 1, 6; XX. 5, 2; _War_ ii. 8, 1 and 17, 8) also describes Judas the Galilean or Gaulonite and places him about A.D. 6. It is not certain that Josephus and Luke (Gamaliel) refer to the same Theudas as the name is an abbreviation of Theodosus, a common name. "Josephus gives an account of four men named Simon who followed each other within forty years, and of three named Judas within ten years, who were all instigators of rebellion" (Hackett). If the same Theudas is meant, then either Josephus or Luke (Gamaliel) has the wrong historical order. In that case one will credit Luke or Josephus according to his estimate of the two as reliable historians. {To be somebody} (\einai tina\). Indirect assertion with the infinitive and the accusative of general reference (\heauton\) and \tina\, predicate accusative. \Tina\ could be "anybody" or "somebody" according to context, clearly "somebody" of importance here. {Joined themselves} (\proseklith\). Correct text and not \prosekollth\ (Textus Receptus). First aorist passive indicative of \prosklin\, old verb to lean towards, to incline towards. Here only in the N.T. {Was slain} (\anireth\). First aorist passive of \anaire\ (cf. verse 33|). {Obeyed} (\epeithonto\). Imperfect middle, kept on obeying. {Were dispersed} (\dieluthsan\). First aorist passive indicative (effective aorist) of \dialu\, old verb to dissolve, to go to pieces. Here only in the N.T.

rwp@Acts:5:38 @{Refrain from} (\apostte apo\). Second aorist (ingressive) active imperative of \aphistmi\ of verse 37|. Do ye stand off from these men. "Hands off" was the policy of Gamaliel. {For if--be} (\hoti ean--i\). \Hoti\ gives the reason for the advice. Gamaliel presents two alternatives in terms of two conditional clauses. The first one is stated as a condition of the third class, \ean\ with the present subjunctive \i\, undetermined with prospect of determination. Assuming that it is from men, "it will be overthrown" (\kataluthsetai\, first future passive of \katalu\, to loosen down like a falling house) as was true of the following of Theudas and Judas the Galilean.

rwp@Acts:10:1 @{Cornelius} (\Kornlios\). The great Cornelian family of Rome may have had a freedman or descendant who is {centurion} (\hekaton-tarchs\, leader of a hundred, Latin _centurio_). See on ¯Matthew:8:5|. These Roman centurions always appear in a favourable light in the N.T. (Matthew:8:5; strkjv@Luke:7:2; strkjv@23:47; strkjv@Acts:10:1; strkjv@22:25; strkjv@27:3|). Furneaux notes the contrasts between Joppa, the oldest town in Palestine, and Caesarea, built by Herod; the Galilean fisherman lodging with a tanner and the Roman officer in the seat of governmental authority. {Of the band called the Italian} (\ek speirs ts kaloumens Italiks\). A legion had ten cohorts or "bands" and sixty centuries. The word \speirs\ (note genitive in \-es\ like the Ionic instead of \-as\) is here equal to the Latin _cohors_. In the provinces were stationed cohorts of Italic citizens (volunteers) as an inscription at Carnuntum on the Danube (Ramsay) has shown (epitaph of an officer in the second Italic cohort). Once more Luke has been vindicated. The soldiers could, of course, be Roman citizens who lived in Caesarea. But the Italian cohorts were sent to any part of the empire as needed. The procurator at Caesarea would need a cohort whose loyalty he could trust, for the Jews were restless.

rwp@Acts:10:37 @{Ye know} (\humeis oidate\). Peter reminds his Gentile audience that the main facts concerning Jesus and the gospel were known to them. Note emphatic expression of \humeis\ (you). {Beginning} (\arxamenos\). The Textus Receptus has \arxamenon\ (accusative), but the nominative is given by Aleph A B C D E H and is certainly correct. But it makes a decided anacoluthon. The accusative would agree with \rhma\ used in the sense of message or story as told by the disciples. The nominative does not agree with anything in the sentence. The same phrase occurs in strkjv@Luke:23:5|. Here is this aorist middle participle almost used like an adverb. See a similar loose use of \arxamenos\ in the same sense by Peter in strkjv@Acts:1:22|. The baptism of John is given as the _terminus a quo_. The story began with a skip to Galilee after the baptism just like the Gospel of Mark. This first message of Peter to the Gentiles (10:37-44|) corresponds in broad outline with Mark's Gospel. Mark heard Peter preach many times and evidently planned his Gospel (the Roman Gospel) on this same model. There is in it nothing about the birth and childhood of Jesus nor about the intervening ministry supplied by John's Gospel for the period (a year) between the baptism and the Galilean Ministry. Peter here presents an objective statement of the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus with proof from the Scriptures that he is the Messiah. It is a skilful presentation.

rwp@Acts:11:26 @{Even for a whole year} (\kai eniauton holon\). Accusative of extent of time, probably the year A.D. 44, the year preceding the visit to Jerusalem (11:30|), the year of the famine. The preceding years with Tarsus as headquarters covered A.D. 37 (39) to 44. {They were gathered together with the church} (\sunachthnai en ti ekklsii\). First aorist passive infinitive of \sunag\, old verb, probably here to meet together as in strkjv@Matthew:28:12|. In strkjv@Acts:14:27| the verb is used of gathering together the church, but here \en ti ekklsii\ excludes that idea. Barnabas met together "in the church" (note first use of the word for the disciples at Antioch). This peculiar phrase accents the leadership and co-operation of Barnabas and Saul in teaching (\didaxai\, first aorist active infinitive) much people. Both infinitives are in the nominative case, the subject of \egeneto\ (it came to pass). {And that the disciples were called Christians first in Antioch} (\chrmatisai te prts en Antiocheii tous mathtas Christianous\). This first active infinitive \chrmatisai\ is also a subject of \egeneto\ and is added as a separate item by the use of \te\ rather than \kai\. For the word itself in the sense of divine command see on ¯Matthew:2:12,22; strkjv@Luke:2:26; strkjv@Acts:10:22|. Here and in strkjv@Romans:7:3| it means to be called or named (assuming a name from one's business, \chrma\, from \chraomai\, to use or to do business). Polybius uses it in this sense as here. \Tous mathtas\ (the disciples) is in the accusative of general reference with the infinitive. \Christianous\ (Christians) is simply predicate accusative. This word is made after the pattern of \Herodianus\ (Matthew:22:16|, \Heridianoi\, followers of Herod), \Caesarianus\, a follower of Caesar (Deissmann, _Light from the Ancient East_, p. 377, gives papyri examples of the genitive \Kaisaros\ meaning also "belonging to Caesar" like the common adjective \Caesarianus\). It is made thus like a Latin adjective, though it is a Greek word, and it refers to the Hebrew belief in a Messiah (Page). The name was evidently given to the followers of Christ by the Gentiles to distinguish them from the Jews since they were Greeks, not Grecian Jews. The Jews would not call them Christians because of their own use of \Christos\ the Messiah. The Jews termed them Galileans or Nazarenes. The followers of Christ called themselves disciples (learners), believers, brethren, saints, those of the Way. The three uses of Christian in the N.T. are from the heathen standpoint (here), strkjv@Acts:26:28| (a term of contempt in the mouth of Agrippa), and strkjv@1Peter:4:16| (persecution from the Roman government). It is a clear distinction from both Jews and Gentiles and it is not strange that it came into use first here in Antioch when the large Greek church gave occasion for it. Later Ignatius was bishop in Antioch and was given to the lions in Rome, and John Chrysostom preached here his wonderful sermons.

rwp@John:4:45 @{Songs:when} (\hote oun\). Transitional use of \oun\, sequence, not consequence. {Received him} (\edexanto auton\). First aorist middle of \dechomai\, "welcomed him." Jesus had evidently anticipated a quiet arrival. {Having seen} (\herakotes\). Perfect active participle of \hora\. Note \therountes\ in strkjv@2:23| about this very thing at the feast in Jerusalem. The miracles of Jesus at that first passover made a stir. {For they also went} (\kai autoi gar lthon\). The Samaritans did not go and so Jesus was a new figure to them, but the Galileans, as orthodox Jews, did go and so were predisposed in his favour.

rwp@John:6:41 @{Murmured} (\egogguzon\). Imperfect active of the onomatopoetic verb \gogguz\, late verb in LXX (murmuring against Moses), papyri (vernacular), like the cooing of doves or the buzzing of bees. These Galilean Jews are puzzled over what Jesus had said (verses 33,35|) about his being the bread of God come down from heaven.

rwp@John:6:51 @{The living bread} (\ho artos ho zn\). "The bread the living." Repetition of the claim in 35,41,48|, but with a slight change from \zs\ to \zn\ (present active participle of \za\). It is alive and can give life. See strkjv@4:10| for living water. In strkjv@Revelation:1:17| Jesus calls himself the Living One (\ho zn\). {For ever} (\eis ton aina\). Eternally like \ainion\ with \zn\ in 47|. {I shall give} (\eg ds\). Emphasis on \eg\ (I). Superior so to Moses. {Is my flesh} (\h sarx mou estin\). See on ¯1:14| for \sarx\ the Incarnation. This new idea creates far more difficulty to the hearers who cannot grasp Christ's idea of self-sacrifice. {For the life of the world} (\huper ts tou kosmou zs\). Over, in behalf of, \huper\ means, and in some connexions instead of as in strkjv@11:50|. See strkjv@1:30| for the Baptist's picture of Christ as the Lamb of God that taketh away the sin of the world. See also strkjv@3:17; strkjv@4:42; strkjv@1John:3:16; strkjv@Matthew:20:28; strkjv@Galatians:3:13; strkjv@2Corinthians:5:14f.; strkjv@Romans:5:8|. Jesus has here presented to this Galilean multitude the central fact of his atoning death for the spiritual life of the world.

rwp@John:6:71 @{Of Simon Iscariot} (\Simnos Iskaritou\). Songs:his father was named Iscariot also, a man of Kerioth (possibly in Judah, strkjv@Joshua:15:25|, possibly in Moab, strkjv@Jeremiah:48:24|), not in Galilee. Judas was the only one of the twelve not a Galilean. The rest of the verse is like strkjv@12:4|. {One of the twelve} (\heis ek tn ddeka\). The eternal horror of the thing.

rwp@John:7:11 @{The Jews} (\hoi Ioudaioi\). The hostile leaders in Jerusalem, not the Galilean crowds (7:12|) nor the populace in Jerusalem (7:25|). {Sought} (\eztoun\). Imperfect active of \zte\, "were seeking," picture of the attitude of the Jewish leaders toward Jesus who had not yet appeared in public at the feast. In fact he had avoided Jerusalem since the collision in chapter 5. The leaders clearly wished to attack him. {Where is he?} (\pou estin ekeinos;\). "Where is that one? (emphatic use of \ekeinos\ as in strkjv@1:8; strkjv@9:12|). Jesus had been at two feasts during his ministry (passover in strkjv@2:12ff.|; possibly another passover in strkjv@5:1|), but he had avoided the preceding passover (6:4; strkjv@7:1|). The leaders in Jerusalem had kept in touch with Christ's work in Galilee. They anticipate a crisis in Jerusalem.

rwp@John:7:12 @{Much murmuring} (\goggusmos polus\). This Ionic onomatopoetic word is from \gogguz\ for which verb see strkjv@6:41,61; strkjv@7:32|, for secret displeasure (Acts:6:1|) or querulous discontent (Phillipians:2:14|). {Among the multitudes} (\en tois ochlois\). "The multitudes" literally, plural here only in John. These different groups were visitors from Galilee and elsewhere and were divided in their opinion of Jesus as the Galileans had already become (6:66|). {A good man} (\agathos\). Pure in motive. See strkjv@Mark:10:17f.; strkjv@Romans:5:7| (absolute sense of God). Superior to \dikaios\. Jesus had champions in these scattered groups in the temple courts. {Not so, but he leadeth the multitude astray} (\ou, alla plani ton ochlon\). Sharp clash in the crowd. Present active indicative of \plana\, to go astray (Matthew:18:12f.|), like our "planets," to lead others astray (Matthew:24:4,5,11|, etc.). In the end the rulers will call Jesus "that deceiver" (\ekeinos ho planos\, strkjv@Matthew:27:63|). The Jewish leaders have a following among the crowds as is seen (7:31f.|).

rwp@John:7:20 @{The multitude} (\ho ochlos\). Outside of Jerusalem (the Galilean crowd as in verses 11f.|) and so unfamiliar with the effort to kill Jesus recorded in strkjv@5:18|. It is important in this chapter to distinguish clearly the several groups like the Jewish leaders (7:13,15,25,26,30,32|, etc.), the multitude from Galilee and elsewhere (10-13,20,31,40,49|), the common people of Jerusalem (25|), the Roman soldiers (45f.|). {Thou hast a devil} (\daimonion echeis\). "Demon," of course, as always in the Gospels. These pilgrims make the same charge against Jesus made long ago by the Pharisees in Jerusalem in explanation of the difference between John and Jesus (Matthew:11:18; strkjv@Luke:7:33|). It is an easy way to make a fling like that. "He is a monomaniac labouring under a hallucination that people wish to kill him" (Dods).

rwp@John:7:25 @{Some therefore of them of Jerusalem} (\oun tines ek tn Ierosolumeitn\). The people of the city in contrast to the multitude of pilgrims at the feast. They form a separate group. The word is made from \Ierosoluma\ and occurs in Josephus and IV Maccabees. In N.T. only here and strkjv@Mark:1:5|. These Jerusalem people knew better than the pilgrims the designs of the rulers (Vincent). {Is not this?} (\ouch houtos estin;\). Expecting affirmative answer. Clearly they were not as familiar with the appearance of Jesus as the Galilean multitude (Dods). {They seek} (\ztousin\). The plural refers to the group of leaders already present (7:15|) to whom the Jerusalem crowd probably pointed. They knew of their threats to kill Jesus (5:18|).

rwp@John:7:27 @{Howbeit} (\alla\). Clearly adversative here. {This man} (\touton\). Possibly contemptuous use of \houtos\ as may be true in 25,26|. {Whence he is} (\pothen estin\). The Galilean Jews knew the family of Jesus (6:42|), but they knew Jesus only as from Nazareth, not as born in Bethlehem (verse 42|). {When the Christ cometh} (\ho Christos hotan erchtai\). Prolepsis of \ho Christos\ and indefinite temporal clause with \hotan\ and the present middle subjunctive \erchtai\ rather than the more usual second aorist active \elthi\ as in verse 31|, a trifle more picturesque. This is a piece of popular theology. "Three things come wholly unexpected--Messiah, a godsend, and a scorpion" (_Sanhedrin_ 97a). The rulers knew the birthplace to be Bethlehem (7:42; strkjv@Matthew:2:5f.|), but some even expected the Messiah to drop suddenly from the skies as Satan proposed to Jesus to fall down from the pinnacle of the temple. The Jews generally expected a sudden emergence of the Messiah from concealment with an anointing by Elijah (_Apoc. of Bar_. XXIX. 3; 2Esdr. strkjv@7:28; strkjv@13:32; Justin Martyr, _Tryph_. 110).

rwp@John:7:46 @{Never man so spake} (\oudepote elalsen houts anthrpos\). Police officers are not usually carried away by public speech. They had fallen under the power of Jesus "as the Galilean peasants had been impressed" (Bernard) in verses 28f|. It was the words of Jesus that had so gripped these officers, not his works (15:24|). It was most disconcerting to the Sanhedrin.

rwp@John:7:52 @{Art thou also of Galilee?} (\M kai su ek ts Galilaias ei;\). Formally negative answer expected by \m\, but really they mean to imply that Nicodemus from local feeling or prejudice has lined himself up with this Galilean mob (\ochlos\) of sympathizers with Jesus and is like Jesus himself a Galilean. "These aristocrats of Jerusalem had a scornful contempt for the rural Galileans" (Bernard). {That out of Galilee ariseth no prophet} (\hoti ek ts Galilaias prophts ouk egeiretai\). As a matter of fact Jonah, Hosea, Nahum, possibly also Elijah, Elisha, and Amos were from Galilee. It was simply the rage of the Sanhedrin against Jesus regardless of the facts. Westcott suggests that they may have reference to the future, but that is a mere excuse for them.

rwp@John:9:27 @{I told you even now} (\eipon humin d\). In verses 15,17,25|. {Would ye also become his disciples?} (\M kai humeis thelete autou mathtai genesthai;\). Negative answer formally expected, but the keenest irony in this gibe. Clearly the healed man knew from the use of "also" (\kai\) that Jesus had some "disciples" (\mathtai\, predicate nominative with the infinitive \genesthai\) and that the Pharisees knew that fact. "Do ye also (like the Galilean mob) wish, etc." See strkjv@7:45-52|. It cut to the bone.

rwp@John:12:4 @{Judas Iscariot} (\Ioudas ho Iskarits\). See \ho Iskarits\ in strkjv@14:22|. See strkjv@6:71; strkjv@13:1| for like description of Judas save that in strkjv@6:71| the father's name is given in the genitive, \Simnos\ and \Iskaritou\ (agreeing with the father), but in strkjv@13:1| \Iskarits\ agrees with \Ioudas\, not with \Simnos\. Clearly then both father and son were called "Iscariot" or man of Kerioth in the tribe of Judah (Joshua:15:25|). Judas is the only one of the twelve not a Galilean. {One of his disciples} (\heis tn mathtn autou\). Likewise in strkjv@6:71|, only there \ek\ is used after \heis\ as some MSS. have here. This is the shameful fact that clung to the name of Judas. {Which should betray him} (\ho melln auton paradidonai\). John does not say in strkjv@6:71| (\emellen paradidonai auton\) or here that Judas "was predestined to betray Jesus" as Bernard suggests. He had his own responsibility for his guilt as Jesus said (Matthew:26:24|). \Mell\ here simply points to the act as future, not as necessary. Note the contrast between Mary and Judas. "Mary in her devotion unconsciously provides for the honour of the dead. Judas in his selfishness unconsciously brings about the death itself" (Westcott).

rwp@Luke:4:14 @{Returned} (\hupestrepsen\). Luke does not fill in the gap between the temptations in the wilderness of Judea and the Galilean Ministry. He follows the outline of Mark. It is John's Gospel alone that tells of the year of obscurity (Stalker) in various parts of the Holy Land. {In the power of the Spirit} (\en ti dunamei tou pneumatos\). Luke in these two verses (14,15|) gives a description of the Galilean Ministry with three marked characteristics (Plummer): the power of the spirit, rapid spread of Christ's fame, use of the Jewish synagogues. Luke often notes the power of the Holy Spirit in the work of Christ. Our word dynamite is this same word \dunamis\ (power). {A fame} (\phm\). An old Greek word found in the N.T. only here and strkjv@Matthew:9:26|. It is from \phmi\, to say. Talk ran rapidly in every direction. It assumes the previous ministry as told by John.

rwp@Luke:4:31 @{Came down} (\katlthen\). strkjv@Mark:1:21| has the historical present, {they go into} (\eisporeuontai\). Capernaum (Tell Hum) is now the headquarters of the Galilean ministry, since Nazareth has rejected Jesus. strkjv@Luke:4:31-37| is parallel with strkjv@Mark:1:21-28| which he manifestly uses. It is the first of Christ's miracles which they give. {Was teaching them} (\n didaskn autous\). Periphrastic imperfect. Mark has \edidasken\ first and then \en didaskn\. "Them" here means the people present in the synagogue on the sabbath, construction according to sense as in strkjv@Mark:1:22|.

rwp@Matthew:10:15 @{More tolerable} (\anektoteron\). The papyri use this adjective of a convalescent. People in their vernacular today speak of feeling "tolerable." The Galileans were having more privileges than Sodom and Gomorrah had.

rwp@Matthew:10:19 @{Be not anxious} (\m merimnste\). Ingressive aorist subjunctive in prohibition. "Do not become anxious" (Matthew:6:31|). "Self-defence before Jewish kings and heathen governors would be a terrible ordeal for humble Galileans. The injunction applied to cases when preparation of a speech would be impossible" (McNeile). "It might well alarm the bravest of these simple fishermen to be told that they would have to answer for their doings on Christ's behalf before Jewish councils and heathen courts" (Plummer). Christ is not talking about preparation of sermons. "{In that hour}" (\en ekeini ti hri\), if not before. The Spirit of your Father will speak to you and through you (10:20|). Here is no posing as martyr or courting a martyr's crown, but real heroism with full loyalty to Christ.

rwp@Matthew:16:16 @Peter is the spokesman now: "Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God" (\Su ei ho Christos ho huios tou theou tou zntos\). It was a noble confession, but not a new claim by Jesus. Peter had made it before (John:6:69|) when the multitude deserted Jesus in Capernaum. Since the early ministry (John 4) Jesus had avoided the word Messiah because of its political meaning to the people. But now Peter plainly calls Jesus the Anointed One, the Messiah, the Son of the God the living one (note the four Greek articles). This great confession of Peter means that he and the other disciples believe in Jesus as the Messiah and are still true to him in spite of the defection of the Galilean populace (John 6).