PERUDA
idealism
liaving
begun
very
early
to
dissolve
the
bond
between
the
two,
and
to
seelc
some
other
path
to
fellow-ship
with
God
than
that
which
lay
through
the
media-tion
of
Jesus
the
Messiah.
VII.
CoNCLnsioN.
—
As
we
survey
the
different
views
of
Christ
set
forth
in
the
NT,
the
sovereign
freedom
with
which
Apostolic
believers
contemplated
Jesus,
and
told
what
they
saw
in
writings
which
have
been
quite
truly
described
as
'literature,
not
dogma,'
is
in-finitely
impressive.
The
looked
at
Jesus
each
through
his
own
eyes;
and
to
try
to
force
their
statements
into
outward
harmony
is
totally
to
mistake
the
genius
of
Christian
faith.
On
the
other
hand,
all
grasped
in
Christ
the
reality
of
a
present
God
of
grace,
and
in
this
decisive
fact
lies
the
deeper,
inward
unity
of
NT
doctrine.
It
is
tempting
to
regard
the
various
types
of
Apostolic
Christology
as
elements
in
an
advancing
and
organic
series.
Thus
it
might
be
asked
whether
the
Synoptics
do
not
give
us
the
Jesus
of
history,
and
St.
Paul
the
living
Christ,
while
St.
John
fuses
both
together
in
an
anti-docetic
way.
It
is
a
reasonable
question;
for,
so
far
as
Christology
is
concerned,
St.
John
does
build
upon
St.
Paul,
and
St.
Paul
upon
the
faith
of
the
primitive
society.
Nevertheless,
it
is
probably
truer
on
the
whole
to
the
facts
if
we
think
of
NT
minds
as
different
prisms,
through
which
the
one
white
light
of
Jesus'
Person
fell,
and
was
analyzed
into
different
colours.
Two
certainties
are
common
to
the
writers
with
whom
we
have
been
dealing:
(1)
That
the
life
and
consciousness
of
Jesus
were
entirely
human
in
form;
(2)
that
this
historic
life,
felt
and
known
as
possessed
of
a
redeeming
supernatural
content,
is
somehow
inseparably
one
with
the
eternal
life
of
God
Himself.
Again,
it
is
implied
wherever
the
matter
comes
up,
that
it
is
one
and
the
same
personal
subject
which
passes
through
the
three
stages
of
pre-existence,
historical
life,
and
exaltation.
Again,
we
are
certain
to
go
wrong
unless
we
note
that
the
NT
is
guided,
in
its
Christological
passages,
by
what
is
really
a
soteriological
interest.
Dr.
Dale's
question:
What
must
Christ's
relation
to
men
be
in
order
that
He
should
be
able
to
die
for
them?
is
entirely
faithful
to
the
Apostolic
attitude.
The
Person
of
the
Messiah
must
be
of
a
quality
that
answers
to
His
function
as
Redeemer
of
the
world.
'
All
the
Christology
of
the
NT,'
as
Kahler
has
justly
said,
'is
but
the
statement
of
the
presup-positions
and
guarantees
of
that
which
believers
may
have,
should
have,
and
actually
do
have,
for
fellowship
with
God,
m
the
Crucified
and
Exalted
One.'
The
chief
problem
which
the
NT
bequeathed
to
dogmatic
theology
is
that
of
thinking
out
and
construing
to
in-telligence
two
things
which
the
Apostles
simply
put
side
by
side
—
the
true
Deity
of
Jesus
Christ
and
His
real
subordination
to
the
Father.
It
lies
beyond
the
scope
of
this
article,
however,
to
follow
the
problem
into
the
Patristic
and
later
ages.
H.
R.
Macintosh.
FEBT7DA.
—
See
Perida.
PESTILENCE.
—
See
Medicine,
p.
698i>.
FETEB.
—
SmOir,
surnamed
Peter,
was
'the
cory-phceus
of
the
Apostle
choir'
(Chrysostom).
His
father
was
named
Jonah
or
John
(Mt
16",
Jn
1«
21"'-i'
RV).
He
belonged
to
Bethsaida
(Jn
1"),
probably
the
fisher-quarter
of
Capernaum
(Bethsaida
=
'
Fisher-home').
There
he
dwelt
with
his
wife,
his
mother-in-law,
and
his
brother
Andrew
(Mk
l^-a-Mt
8»-
"
=
L]£
4S8.
89).
He
and
Andrew
were
fishermen
on
the
Lake
of
Galilee
(Mt
4'8=Mk
1")
in
partnership
with
Zebedee
and
his
sons
(Lk
5'-
",
Mt
4a).
Simon
first
met
with
Jesus
at
Bethany
beyond
Jordan
(Jn
128
RV),
the
scene
of
the
Baptist's
ministry
(vv.»-«).
He
had
repaired
thither
with
other
Galilseans
to
partici-pate
in
the
mighty
revival
which
was
in
progress.
Jesus
was
there;
and
Andrew,
who
was
one
of
the
Baptist's
dis-ciples,
having
been
directed
by
his
master
to
Him
as
the
PETER
Messiah,
told
Simon
of
his
glad
discovery,
and
brought
him
to
Jesus.
Jesus
'looked
upon
him'
(RV)
with
'those
eyes
of
far
perception';
and
the
look
mastered
him
and
won
his
heart.
He
was
a
disciple
from
that
hour.
Jesus
read
his
character,
seeing
what
he
was
and
foreseeing
what
the
discipline
of
grace
would
make
him;
and
He
gave
him
a
surname
prophetic
of
the
moral
and
spiritual
strength
which
would
one
day
be
his.
'Thou
art
Simon
the
son
of
John:
thou
shalt
be
called
Cephas.'
Cephas
is
the
Aram.
=Gr.
Petros,
and
means
'rock.'
He
was
not
yet
Peter,
but
only
Simon,
impulsive
and
vacil-lating;
and
Jesus
gave
him
the
new
name
ere
he
had
earned
it,
that
it
might
be
an
incentive
to
him,
reminding
him
of
his
destiny
and
inciting
him
to
achieve
it.
In
after
days,
whenever
he
displayed
any
weakness,
Jesus
would
pointedly
address
him
by
the
old
name,
thus
gently
warning
him
that
he
should
not
fall
from
grace
(cf.
Lk
22",
Mk
143',
jn
21"-").
Presently
the
Lord
began
His
ministry
at
Capernaum,
and
among
His
first
acts
was
the
calling
of
four
of
the
men
who
had
believed
in
Him
to
abandon
their
worldly
employments
and
attach
themselves
to
Him,
following
Him
whithersoever
He
went
(Mt
4"-22-=Mk
I's-^",
Lk
5'-").
Thus
he
began
the
formation
of
the
Apostle-
band.
The
four
were
James
and
John,
Simon
and
Andrew.
They
were
busy
with
their
boats
and
nets,
and
He
called
them
to
become
'fishers
of
men.'
It
was
the
beginning
of
the
second
year
of
Jesus'
ministry
ere
He
had
chosen
all
the
Twelve;
and
then
He
ordained
them
to
their
mission,
arranging
them
in
pairs
for
mutual
assistance
(Mk
6'),
and
coupling
Simon
Peter
and
Andrew
(Mt
10'').
The
distinction
of
Peter
lies
less
in
the
qualities
of
his
mind
than
in
those
of
his
heart.
He
was
impulsive,
'
ever
ardent,
ever
leaping
before
his
fellows'
(Chrysostom),
and
often
speaking
unadvisedly
and
incurring
rebuke.
This,
however,
was
only
the
weakness
of
his
strength,
and
it
was
the
concomitant
of
a
warm
and
generous
affection.
If
John,
says
St.
Augustine,
was
the
disciple
whom
Jesus
loved,
Peter
was
the
disciple
who
loved
Jesus.
This
quality
appeared
on
several
remarkable
occasions.
(1)
In
the
synagogue
of
Capernaum,
after
the
feeding
of
the
five
thousand
at
Bethsaida,
Jesus
delivered
His
discourse
on
the
Bread
of
Life,
full
of
hard
sayings
designed
to
test
the
faith
of
His
disciples
by
shattering
their
Jewish
dream
of
a
worldly
Messiah,
a
temporal
King
of
Israel,
a
restorer
of
the
ancient
monarchy
(Jn
S^-^^).
Many
were
offended,
and
'went
back
and
walked
no
more
with
him.'
Even
the
Twelve
were
discomfited.
'Would
ye
also
go
away7'
He
asked;
and
it
was
Simon
Peter,
"the
mouth
of
the
Apostles'
(Chrysostom),
who
answered,
assuring
Him
of
their
loyalty
(vv.''-i").
(2)
During
the
season
of
retirement
at
Caesarea
Philippi
in
the
last
year
of
His
ministry,
Jesus,
anxious
to
ascertain
whether
their
faith
in
His
Messiahship
had
stood
the
strain
of
disillusionment,
whether
they
still
regarded
Him
as
the
Messiah,
though
He
was
not
the
sort
of
Messiah
they
had
expected,
put
to
the
Twelve
the
question:
'Who
do
ye
say
that
I
am?'
Again
it
was
Peter
who
answered
promptly
and
firmly:
'
Thou
art
the
Christ,'
filling
the
Lord's
heart
with
exultant
rapture,
and
proving
that
he
had
indeed
earned
his
new
name
Peter,
the
rock
on
which
Jesus
would
build
His
Church,
the
first
stone
of
that
living
temple.
Presently
Jesus
told
them
of
His
approaching
Passion,
and
again
it
was
Peter
who
gave
expression
to
the
horror
of
the
Twelve:
'Be
it
far
from
thee.
Lord;
this
shall
never
be
unto
thee.'
Even
here
it
was
love
that
spoke.
The
Sinaitic
Palimpsest
reads:
'Then
Simon
Cephas,
as
though
he
pitied
Him,
said
to
Him,
"Be
it
far
from
Thee'"
(Mt
le's-^a^MkS"-™
=Lk
9"-").
(3)
A
week
later
Jesus
went
up
to
the
Mount
with
Peter,
James,
and
John,
and
'was
trans-figured
before
them,'
communing
with
Moses
and
Elijah,
who
'appeared
in
glory'
(Mt
17'-8=Mk
92-8=Lk
9"-^).
Though
awe-stricken,
Peter
spoke;
'Lord,
it
is
good
for
us
to
be
here:
if
thou
wilt,
I
will
make
here
three
