Matthew - 16:20



20 Then he commanded the disciples that they should tell no one that he was Jesus the Christ.

Verse In-Depth

Explanation and meaning of Matthew 16:20.

Differing Translations

Compare verses for better understanding.
Then he enjoined on his disciples that they should say to no man that he was the Christ.
Then he charged his disciples that they should tell no man that he was Jesus the Christ.
Then did he charge his disciples that they may say to no one that he is Jesus the Christ.
Then He urged His disciples to tell no one that He was the Christ.
Then he gave orders to the disciples to give no man word that he was the Christ.
Then he commanded the disciples that they should tell no one that he is the Messiah.
Then he instructed his disciples that they should tell no one that he is Jesus the Christ.
Then he charged his disciples not to tell anyone that he was the Christ.

*Minor differences ignored. Grouped by changes, with first version listed as example.


Historical Commentaries

Scholarly Analysis and Interpretation.

Then charged - That is, he commanded them.
Mark 8:30 and Luke Luke 9:21 say (in Greek) that he strictly or severely charged them. He laid emphasis on it, as a matter of much importance. The reason of this seems to be that his time had not fully come; that he was not willing to rouse the Jewish malice, and to endanger his life, by having it proclaimed that he was the Messiah. The word "Jesus" is wanting in many manuscripts, and should probably be omitted: "Then he charged them strictly to tell no man that he was the Christ or Messiah."

Then charged he his disciples - ΔιεϚειλατο, he strictly charged them. Some very good MSS. have επετιμησεν, he severely charged - comminatus est, - he threatened. These are the readings of the Cod. Bezae, both in the Greek and Latin.
The Christ - The common text has Jesus the Christ; but the word Jesus is omitted by fifty-four MSS., some of which are not only of the greatest authority, but also of the greatest antiquity. It is omitted also by the Syriac, later Persic, later Arabic, Slavonic, six copies of the Itala, and several of the fathers. The most eminent critics approve of this omission, and Griesbach has left it out of the text in both his editions. I believe the insertion of it here to be wholly superfluous and improper; for the question is, Who is this Jesus? Peter answers, He is, ὁ ΧριϚος, the Messiah. The word Jesus is obviously improper. What our Lord says here refers to Peter's testimony in Matthew 16:16 : Thou art the Christ - Jesus here says, Tell no man that I am the Christ, i.e. the Messiah; as the time for his full manifestation was not yet come; and he was not willing to provoke the Jewish malice, or the Roman envy, by permitting his disciples to announce him as the Savior of a lost world. He chose rather to wait, till his resurrection and ascension had set this truth in the clearest light, and beyond the power of successful contradiction.

(7) Then charged he his disciples that they should tell no man that he was Jesus the Christ.
(7) Men must first learn, and then teach.

Then charged he his disciples,.... When Peter had so freely and fully confessed him to be the Messiah, and which was the sense of all the disciples; and when Christ had expressed his approbation of his confession, and had promised such great and excellent things upon it, he gave a strict charge unto his disciples,
that they should tell no man that he was Jesus the Christ. The word Jesus is not in some copies; and is left out in the Syriac, Arabic, and Persic versions; nor does it seem absolutely necessary; it was enough to charge them to tell no man that he was the Messiah: his reasons for it might be, lest his enemies, the Scribes and Pharisees, should be the more provoked and incensed against him, and seek his death before his time; and lest the jealousy of the Romans should be stirred up, who might fear he would set up himself against Caesar, as king of the Jews, which might lead them to take measures obstructive of his further designs; and lest some persons, hearing of this, should rise and proclaim him king of the Jews, who were big with the notion of the Messiah being a temporal prince: and moreover, because the disciples were to attest the truth of this after his resurrection; and he chose, for the present, that the people should collect this from his own ministry and miracles, which were sufficient to lead them into the knowledge of it, without any declarations of their's: and though they were possessed of true faith in him, as such, for themselves, as yet they had not the gifts and abilities to defend those doctrines respecting his person, and his offices, they had after the Spirit was poured down upon them.

Then charged he his disciples that they should tell no man that he was Jesus the Christ--Now that He had been so explicit, they might naturally think the time come for giving it out openly; but here they are told it had not.
Announcement of His Approaching Death and Rebuke of Peter (Matthew 16:21-28).
The occasion here is evidently the same.

Then charged he his disciples to tell no one that he was the Christ - Jesus himself had not said it expressly even to his apostles, but left them tb infer it from his doctrine and miracles. Neither was it proper the apostles should say this openly, before that grand proof of it, his resurrection. If they had, they who believed them would the more earnestly have sought to take and make him a king: and they who did not believe them would the snore vehemently have rejected and opposed such a Messiah.

*More commentary available at chapter level.


Discussion on Matthew 16:20

User discussion of the verse.






*By clicking Submit, you agree to our Privacy Policy & Terms of Use.