4. JESUS HIS DEATH AND Mark 8:31-33 (Matthew 16:21-23; Luke 9:22) 31 And he began to teach them,--This does not mean that he had never mentioned the matter of his sufferings before. He had alluded to them again and again (Matthew 9:15; Matthew 10:38; Matthew 12:40; John 2:19; John 3:14; John 6:51), but these allusions were figurative and covert, and conveyed no clear idea to their minds. A suffering Messiah was so utterly foreign to all their conceptions of Messiah that only the most explicit declaration could induce them to accept it. that the Son of man must suffer many things,--The few prophets who had ever applied the prophecies to suffering, such as Isaiah (53), to the Messiah, had made no large impression either on rabbinical teaching or the views of the nation. A conquering, triumphant Messiah was what the people liked to hear of, and what the rabbis announced. How startling then this communication. and be rejected by the elders, and the chief priests, and the scribes,--An examination of Mar 14:43; Matthew 27:41, with parallel passages, will show how actively all these classes participated in making him suffer. Their authority with the people threatened to be displaced by that of Jesus, and they made common cause against him. and be killed,--The first direct statement of this truth, the most appalling that could come to their minds. The Sanhedrin was composed of the elders, chief priests, and scribes. It was the highest civil and ecclesiastical court of the Jews, and consisted of seventy-one members. The whole Sanhedrin would join in these terrible evils against Jesus. and after three days rise again.--A most explicit declaration of the resurrection. Yet it is not at all likely that they took in the full force of his words. They sometimes understood his figurative expressions literally (Matthew 16:7; John 4:33; John 11:12), and sometimes his literal expressions figuratively (Matthew 15:15-17). In this case the attitude of their minds was so averse to the idea of death that they would scarcely receive the other, which depended on death. After his resurrection it is said: "For as yet they knew not the scripture, that he must rise again from the dead." (John 20:9.) With their erroneous ideas, it was hard for them to learn the truth. So it is with people now. "After three days" is equivalent to "the third day" of Matthew (Matthew 16:21) and Luke (Luke 9:22). The Jews were accustomed to reckon the odd parts of a day as a whole day. Jesus died on Friday afternoon, and rose early on the first day, or Sunday morning; the time intervening was one whole day and parts of two days, which were reckoned as three days. 32 And he spake the saying openly.-Jesus spoke freely, frankly, and boldly, without concealment or ambiguity. And Peter took him, and began to rebuke him.--To chide him for the utterance of such sad forebodings. He probably considered them simply as coming from low spirits occasioned by his recent trials in Galilee. Matthew gives the chiding words, "Be it far from thee, Lord: this shall never be unto thee." The word "rebuke" here means to admonish or earnestly to entreat, as in Luke (Luke 17:3) . 33 But he turning about, and seeing his disciples, rebuked Peter, and saith, Get thee behind me, Satan;--The same words used by Jesus in the wilderness to Satan himself, and probably a reminiscence. At all events the temptation was the same, and put beyond doubt that the clearness of Peter's confession did by no means show clearness of conception of the surroundings of the Messiah. Christ rebuked Peter, doubtless for his good and that of the other disciples. Peter's rebuke of his Lord was presumptuous and worldly Christ's rebuke of Peter was deserved, timely and wise. He thus checked the spirit of insubordination and of worldly ambition in his disciples. The word "Satan" means literally an adversary, or one that opposes us in the accomplishment of our designs. It is applied to the devil commonly, as the opposer or adversary of man. But there is no evidence that the Lord meant to apply this term to Peter, as signifying that he was Satan or the devil, or that he used the term in anger. for thou mindest not the things of God, but the things of men.--His mind fell in naturally with the carnal expectations of the perverse Jewish nation, rather than those purposes of God of which Jesus and the prophets have spoken. It is hard to imagine him to whom such words were spoken as the foundation of the church. Matthew (Matthew 16:23) adds "Thou art a stumblingblock unto me." Peter's advice and wishes were in the way of Jesus. If followed, they would prevent the thing for which he came. Peter thought those things should not be done, which God wishes to be done. He judged of this matter as men do, who are desirous of honor; and not as God, who sees it best that Jesus should die to promote the great interests of mankind.