But when he had
turned about and looked on his disciples, he rebuked Peter, saying Get thee
behind me, Satan (σατανα), for thou savourest not the things that be of God,
but the things that be of men. (Mark 8:33)
But he turned, and
said unto Peter, Get thee behind me, Satan (σατανα): thou art an offence unto
me: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but those that be of men.
(Matt 16:23)
Some commentators believe that when Jesus
calls Peter “Satan,” he simply means “adversary” and is not associating Peter
with “the” Satan (i.e., the external, supernatural evil being “Satan”).
However, this does not seem to be a satisfactory reading of the term when Jesus
applies it to Peter in the Synoptic Gospels (Matt 16:23/Mark 8:33/Luke 4:8).
Instead, it appears Jesus is invoking the Satan when he calls
Peter σατανα:
The so-called
negative aspect of Peter’s portrait is a standard element in the portrayal of apocalyptic
seers, who were invariably portrayed positively. The negative thrust of the
transfiguration scene comes, however, not only from Peter’s fear, but also from
his odd comment about the tabernacles (Matt 17:4), and from the fact that Jesus
touches his disciples (Matt 17:7) in the same way as in the healing narratives
(Matt 8:3, 15; 9:29; 20:34), which seems to emphasize a type of deficiency
interpreting Peter positively when he claims that Peter’s rebuke of Jesus is an
expression of his “cognitive humanity” and therefore “normal” when viewed in
light of the generic portrayal of apocalyptic seers. Symptomatically, Markley
therefore also translates σατανα (Matt 16:23) with “adversary” (John R. Markley,
Peter – Apocalyptic Seer [2013]:203). The fact that Matthew uses the
word elsewhere as a proper name for the devil (Matt 4:10; 12:26) makes it more
likely, however, that it should be translated as a proper name here also.
If Matthew had wanted to portray Peter’s rebuke of Jesus as an expression of
cognitive humanity, he would probably have avoided the term. But Matthew
retains Mark’s term most likely because he wants his readers to believe that
Peter’s rebuke reflects a Satanic point of view. Peter’s scandal here is
not just that he displays a cognitive humanity as a recipient of revelation.
The scandal is much more serious because Peter has, in contrast to Jesus
(cf. Matt 4:10), been led astray by deception and a demonic spirit (cf. the use
of υπαγη σατανα in both Matt 4:10 and 16:23). (Finn Damgaard, Rewriting Peter as an
Intertextual Character in the Canonical Gospels [London: Routledge, 2016,
2019], 38-39, emphasis in bold added)
Such has many implications, including it
serving as evidence that the authors of the Synoptic Gospels (as well as Jesus)
believed in an external, supernatural Satan, contra Christadelphians
and others.
