(From a series of posts working through the Visual Bible's Matthew).Chapter 16 opens with some discussion with and about the Pharisees and Saducees. Again Bruce Marchiano delivers a good scene, although I still wish he was a little less touchy-feely. That's a personal thing however.
The most significant part of of this chapter is Peter's declaration. It's a passage that Catholics and Protestants disagree as to how it should be interpreted. Is the "rock" that Jesus is going to build his church on Peter the man (as the Roman Catholics would argue) or the content of his declaration (as Protestants would contend). There's quite a significant cut to Matthew and his two scribes at this point, which comes after Jesus has told Peter that his words came from the Father, but before he says he is Peter and on this rock. Having the cut in this position leans towards Catholic take on hings. The more natural reading it seems to me is that Jesus means Peter rather than his words.
Incidentally Matthew and his scribes are now by the side of a stream. The scribes are writing on their laps, rather than on the modern-style table they were using earlier. Mark Goodacre would no doubt approve.
Chapter 17 is fairly uneventful apart from the Transfiguration (pictured above). It's a somewhat rare scene in Jesus films, tending only to be present in those films which are made by Evangelical Christian groups. Jesus appears to be leaning on one of the two men for support, it's not clear which of the two it is.
The remainder of the chapter seems a demon-possessed boy healed and the strange case of the fish with a four drachma coin in its mouth (although the text never tells us that things panned out as Jesus said). The composition and lighting of this scene is really nice. This chapter in general features lots of close-ups which is particularly noticeable to me having seen Pasolini do the same thing in his version of this gospel. I'll hopefully write up about that tomorrow.
Regarding paragraph two, "The more natural reading it seems to me," is a mistake on your part. You should not take the translation at face value, but should study the scriptures before deciding this important verse.
ReplyDeleteMatthew 16 - "on this rock" - IN CONTEXT!
Verses 5 - 12, (summarized) Yeshua makes an analogy of the Pharasies and Sadduces being like yeast in bread, and we should be wary of it. The disciples didn't understand at first, meaning they took "yeast" = "bread" that you eat at face value.
Verses 13 - 14, (summarized) Yeshua asks His disciples who they think the Son of Man is, and they lose track of that too.
Verse 15, He (Yeshua) said to them, “But who do you say that I am?”
Verse 16, Simon Peter replied, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.”
Verse 17, Jesus (Yeshua) replied, “Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah, for this was not revealed to you by flesh and blood, but by my Father in heaven.
Verse 18, And I tell you that you are Peter (a little stone), and on this rock (Christ/Messiah, the cornerstone) I will build my church, and the gates of Hell will not overcome it.
The word for “Peter,” Petros (a small stone) (John 1:42). Jesus/Yeshua used a play on words here with petra (“on this rock”) which means a foundation boulder, as in Matthew 7:24, 25 when He described the rock upon which the wise man builds his house.
Claire N Streb
P.S. I am neither Roman Catholic or Protestant, but a born again believer and follower of Jesus Christ, Yeshua Hamashiach.
Hi Claire,
ReplyDeleteThanks for your comment. I have studied the scriptures (and in context) I just don't find that doing so clarifies much in this case. The context can be read in a variety of ways as well.
You didn't actually say how you interpret the verse.
Thanks again
Matt