SIMON PETER
Of all the Apostles of our Lord, none seems to be better known than Simon Peter. He is conspicuous in the New Testament in the Gospel narratives, and in the first part of the Acts of the Apostles. He has been prominent in Church history, and remains today among the most fascinating of the band of men which surrounded the Lord in the days of His earthly ministry. This familiarity is both a hindrance and a help. It is a help because it removes anything in the nature of detailed reference. It is a hindrance in that it may lead us to be more occupied with the man than with our Lord's method of dealing with him.
We need first to remind ourselves that his name was not Peter originally, but Simon. I never come to the study of this man without being reminded of something that Henry Drummond said concerning Dwight Lyman Moody, namely, that he was the greatest human that he had ever met. This characterization seems to me to apply to Peter. Drummond did not suggest that in intellectual capacity or attainment Moody was the greatest man he had met, but rather to the fact of his essential greatness of human nature. This is clearly evident of Simon as we study him carefully. I should describe him as an elemental man. All the essential elements that go to the making of human personality were found in him.
We may fall back upon an old definition of personality that, namely, of Kant, who said that in it we have the union and the welding of intellect, emotion, and volition. Necessarily, as we look at Simon Peter, we see him in his relationships with Christ and in the atmosphere therefore of Christianity. Nevertheless, through all these things we may discover the essential truth concerning him. Dr. MacInnis of California wrote a remarkable book on Peter and his teaching, which he called "The Fisherman Philosopher." It was an apt and true description. He was a man of intellectual capacity, as is seen quite simply in the accomplishment that the records speak of him as asking more questions than any of the disciples. The asking of questions is a sure sign of intellectuality. If a man never asks a question, it is because the intellectual side of his nature is deadened. As we follow Peter, we hear him saying, inter alia, "To whom shall we go? Thou hast the words of eternal life." "How often shall my brother sin against me and I forgive him?” "Who is it that betrayeth Thee?” "Whither goest Thou?” "Why cannot I follow Thee?” "What shall this man do?” A careful consideration of these questions will show that in every case they were really big questions, even though they may reveal a certain amount of ignorance.
That he was a man full of human emotion needs no argument. On the occasion when he cried out in the bitterness of his spirit, "Depart from me; for I am a sinful man, O Lord," he revealed that emotional nature. So also, when at Caesarea Philippi he said to his Lord in anger, "That be far from Thee," the same thing is manifest. When he said, "I will lay down my life for Thee," it was a great emotional outburst. When later, amid the darkness, he went out into the night weeping bitterly, the same thing is seen. And again, it is clearly manifest in that conversation which he had with our Lord by the Sea of Tiberias.
Moreover, he was a man of tremendous will power. There are moments when that seems as though it were not so; and yet the whole outlook proves it. He left all to follow Jesus. He went over the side of the boat to walk to Him on the waters. He dared to protest against Jesus openly. He drew the sword and smote the servant of the high priest. Of course we are in danger of speaking carelessly about will. On more than one occasion a man has told me in excuse for some persistent sin, that he has no will power, as for instance when a man said concerning his drinking of whiskey, "I cannot help it. I have no will power." To such a man I replied, "You have great will power, as is proven by the fact that you will drink whiskey." Will power may be exercised in a wrong direction.
Thus all the elements of great personality were found in Simon, and yet he was a weak man. He lacked an element welding the elemental things into consistency and strength. Some years ago, Mr. Gardiner wrote a book, "Prophets, Priests, and Kings," and in the course of it, in a sketch on William Jennings Bryan, he said of him he was a great man, but he lacked preciousness. That statement showed Gardiner's Scriptural background, and may I say his familiarity with the writings of Peter. Peter later, speaking of relationship with Christ, declared that He was precious, and that to those related to Him the preciousness was communicated. What is preciousness? We speak of jewels as precious stones, and it is an apt word. Every true jewel is a combination of elements welded into strength. This is what Simon lacked. All this would mean that he was a trial to his friends, in spite of their love of him; and further, he was certainly a trial to himself. One can imagine a man like this, after the failure of the day, torturing his own soul with his weakness, and vowing never to repeat the foolishness over which he mourned; and yet on the next day probably repeating every one of them.
Now we turn to observe our Lord dealing with him. Necessarily the account begins with the action of Andrew. An old Puritan writer once said that he thought the reason why Andrew hurried out to find his brother was that Simon had been such a difficulty in the family life. I do not know that I agree with this writer, or if I do, I would add something to it. If Andrew recognized what a difficult man he had been, if he knew, as he probably did, that there were elements of weakness in him, he also knew that there were elements of strength in him, and therefore he found him, and brought him face to face with Jesus.
The first thing we read, then, is that our Lord looked upon him. We halt here, because the word employed for that looking is not a usual one. It may be at once said that the same word is employed in describing His look at Peter in the judgment hall. The word indicates a look of penetration. The look was not a mere glance, courteous and attentive, but rather one that brought the consciousness of investigation and knowledge. The sense of it might be expressed by reading it, not, "He looked upon him," but He looked through him.
Then He told him in effect that He knew him, and knew his father, "Thou art Simon, the son of John." Then came the amazing word, "Thou shalt be called Cephas, thou shalt be called Peter."
It may be asked, what was there amazing about that? And the reply is that it is only as we recognize the truth about the man that we shall understand. Here one may observe at once that the remarkable thing in the account is that Simon made no reply. Anyone familiar with Simon will see how remarkable a fact that is. He was not given to silences of that kind. There can be no doubt that the reason of his silence was his utter astonishment. When the Lord told him that he should be called Rock, or Stone, it sounded incredible. It is best that we bear in mind that all geologists agree that rock is really the result of processes, and the exhibition of principle. Here was a man who lacked that very thing. The elements were there, but they were not mastered by principle. Our Lord looked at this man with all his intellectual powers, emotional force, volitional strength, still lacking that which made him dependable, that upon which men could build; and He told him he could become exactly what in that way, he was not.
The method of Jesus, then, was that of believing in the possibilities of this man, when no one else did, and when probably Simon did not. By this word our Lord captured him. It is a constant way of the Master. This was Someone Who did believe in Peter, and believes in him because He Is able to make him exactly what he was not. That is the whole account of the beginning of our Lord's dealing with Simon. From that moment He never lost him. Even when it seemed as though he had almost committed spiritual suicide, He looked at him, and broke his heart. He prayed for him that his faith should not fail, and his faith never did, even though his courage did.
At this point we find He took Simon Peter to travel with Him, and serve with Him. Then in some moment of vacillation Simon went back to his fishing nets. Again our Lord found him, showed His ability in the realm of fishing, and then told him that he was called to a higher vocation, that of catching men alive.
How we might go through these Gospel accounts, dwelling upon every incident, which of course is not possible; but if we did, we should see how all the way our Lord was dealing with this man, and keeping him near to Himself. We will glance at four crises in the history.
The first came when He had been saying such things as they had never heard concerning the eating of His flesh and the drinking of His blood, and many had left Him, because of the difficulty of these sayings, Jesus had said to the group, "Will ye also go away?" It was Simon who uttered the words: "Lord to whom shall we go? Thou hast the words of eternal life.”
Then at Caesarea Philippi our Lord, after a general question asked His disciples, Who they said He was. Then came from the lips of Peter the great confession: "Thou art the Messiah, the Son of the living God."
Immediately the third followed, when our Lord brought him face to face with the Cross. Peter was then brought suddenly face to face with something utterly beyond His comprehension. He protested, and he protested angrily, falling into language that was almost that of profanity. At this moment our Lord, shall I not say, in the most dramatic and drastic way, rebuked him. Peter had taken Him that is taken Him aside to utter his protest. Then the evangelist tells us that the Lord fumed, that is, fumed from Peter, fumed His back upon him, and uttered His rebuke.
We are driven here to ask, what was wrong in Peter's action and speech? Let us remember that he saw the glory of the wonderful life of his Lord, had been completely possessed by His teaching, and all this so much so that he had come to conviction that He was the Messiah, and the very Son of God. Now he was told that He must fall into the hands of evil men, suffer, and be killed. It was against that he made his protest.
But let it be remembered that when our Lord had told him, and the rest, of these things, He had declared that they were inevitable, that He must go, and had added the words that quite evidently Peter had not apprehended the value of, that He must rise again. Seeing only the Cross, he put his intellectual conception over against the wisdom of the Lord; or as Jesus said, he was “minding the things of men," measuring what his Lord had said by human standards. It may be best to remember here that he never did understand until the Cross was accomplished, and he had found the risen Christ. That is proven when the opening sentences of his letter are read.
"Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, Who according to His great mercy, begat us again unto living hope by the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead."
When he protested, his hope was not living. For this setting of his own thinking against that of his Lord, he was sternly rebuked in the words: "Get thee behind Me, Satan; thou art an offense unto Me."
Then after eight days of comparative silence we see him again on the mount of transfiguration. There he saw his Lord transfigured, metamorphosed. In the presence of that vision he said: "Lord, it is good for us to be here; if Thou wilt, I will make here three tabernacles; one for Thee, and one for Moses, and one for Elijah."
It is impossible to read that without calling to mind the last previous thing recorded as having fallen from his lips……when Jesus had spoken of the Cross, he had said, "That be far from thee." Now, in the glory, he said, "It is good to be here.” Not there in Jerusalem, in suffering, in death, but here in the glory and the beauty. Let it be observed that whereas he suggested building tabernacles for Moses and Elijah also, because he saw them there, they were talking to Jesus about the very thing that Peter was shunning, the decease, the exodus, which He was about to accomplish in Jerusalem. Here it was that he heard the voice of God saying: "This is My beloved Son, in Whom I am well pleased, hear ye Him."
"Hear ye Him," an evident reference to what he had said concerning His Cross, which was the subject of His converse with the heavenly visitors.
Once more, at the very end, talking to this man in the upper room, our Lord told him of the still latent weakness that lurked within him, as He said: "Wilt thou lay down thy life for Me? Verily, verily, I say unto thee, the cock shall not crow, till thou hast denied Me thrice."
But in close connection therewith, including the other disciples, but by no means excluding Peter, He said: "Let not your heart be troubled; ye believe in God, believe also in Me"; and continuing, He told them that He was going to prepare a place for them, and if He went, He would come again, and receive them unto Himself. So far as Peter was concerned, it was a declaration that He was able to realize the best in him, in spite of the worst.
Then a solemn hush falls upon the heart as we think of what followed. Jesus was arraigned in the judgment hall, and Peter first outside, until John gained him admission, and then within is heard denying his Lord, and adding to his denial that false emphasis of language, profane swearing. It is here that once again our eyes are fixed upon the Master. He turned and looked at Simon. It is the same word that was used at the beginning and means that He fixed His eyes upon him, and looked him through and through. He knew that in that hour of reflection there was the underlying desire to be true, in spite of all the cursing and swearing.
I wonder how that look might be interpreted. And yet perhaps there is no need to wonder at all. It is perfectly certain that it was not a look intended to prove the accuracy of the Lord's forecast concerning the man, as though He should say, "I told you so." Neither do I believe the look had in it anything of reproach for the wrong that was being done to the heart of Jesus. It was rather the look of eternal Love and compassion, a look that said in effect, "I told you, Simon, that you should be Rock. I also told you what would happen on this dark night. Trust Me now, and in spite of everything, the original word shall be fulfilled." The result is very clearly declared. The look broke his heart, and he went out into the night, weeping bitterly.
Then came the Cross, followed by the resurrection morning. We ask, Where was Simon, and as we saw in dealing with John, he had been found by him, and taken to his home. There he received a message, telling him of the risen Lord. This message was given by special comment, "Go tell My disciples, and Peter." It is very suggestive and very beautiful. Would not the expression "My disciples" have been enough? No, he had denied his Lord, and at least it is possible that the disciples might be inclined to put him outside their fellowship. Therefore his Lord specially named him.
Further, we gather that he had a private interview with Peter, for when the two came back from Emmaus, the disciples said: "The Lord is risen indeed, and hath appeared unto Simon."
We have no account of that interview. We do not know exactly what was said; and yet we are sure that it was an interview in which there was complete forgiveness and perfect restoration. We can reverently almost imagine Him saying to him, "Simon, in spite of your protests, I have been to the Cross, and as I told you, I am alive from the dead, victorious over sin and death, Because of that, your sin is forgiven, and the fulfillment of your life is possible."
Once more, He met him by Tiberias, challenged him concerning his devotion, and his love, and gave him his work to do.
If we desire to know the issue, we glance on to Pentecost, and there we see this man unified, consistent; all the elements of his personality welded into consistency in his loyalty to Christ. We observe his courage as he faced the crowd, and are amazed at the clarity with which he sets forth the facts concerning his Lord.
Further on we have glimpses of him, and we find that while the principle was at work, bringing in the rock nature, there were still evidences of the old weakness. Paul had to withstand him once to the face, but there was that in him which was submissive; and in one of his letters he referred to Paul as “our beloved brother." As we see him in these varied other glimpses we observe a man of untiring energy, of unbending loyalty, an intellect highly illuminated, an emotion completely yielded to his Lord, and a will that bore him onward in the pathway of fellowship.
No comments:
Post a Comment