52 Dean B. Deppe of Jesus”29. Lightfoot calls attention to the following parallels30: 8:23a = 8:27a “Outside the village” and “to the villages around Caesarea Philippi.” 8:23b = 8:27b “Do you say anything?” and “Who do people say that I am?” 8:24 = 8:28 The blind man’s response and the disciples’ response to the question. 8:25 = 8:29a Jesus once more puts his hands on the man’s eyes and Jesus once more asks a question about his own identity. 8:25b = 8:29b The blind man’s sight is restored and Peter confesses Jesus as the Messiah 8:26 = 8:30 Jesus forbids the blind man to go into the village and Jesus warns the disciples not to tell anyone. However, the initial unclear vision of the blind man does not corres- pond to the incorrect answers of Jesus’ contemporaries concerning his identity, but to the half-blindness of Peter. The following parallels clarify more clearly the comparison of the two-stage healing of the blind man and the required double profession of Jesus as both Messiah and suffering Son of Man. 8:22 = 8:27-28 The introduction of a blind man and the question to the disciples indica- ting they are blind with regard to the identity of Jesus. 8:23-24 = 8:29-30 The blind man can see but not clearly (people look like walking trees) and Peter confesses the identity of Jesus as Messiah (half-sightedness). 8:25a = 8:31-33 The blind man requires a second touch and Peter needs an additional Christological insight to see Jesus as a suffering servant Son of Man. 8:25b = 8:32a The blind man sees everything clearly just as Jesus now speaks plainly. 8:25 = 8:34ff The second touch = the acceptance of the implications of a suffering ser- vant Messiah which is taught in the discipleship catechism (8:34-10:52). Just as the blind man required a second touch before he could see per- fectly, so Peter needs a second touch. Peter becomes the blind man. After the first touch of Jesus the blind man can see, just as Peter’s confession of Jesus as Messiah is a positive confession of insight into Jesus’ identity. However, the blind man cannot see clearly, just as Peter’s confession does not allow Peter to envision Jesus clearly. Therefore, the title “Messiah” R. H. Lightfoot, History and Interpretation of the Gospels (London: Hodder and 29 Stoughton 1935) 90-91. Likewise, the theological point according to Matera “Incomprehen- sion”, 165 is that “Previous to Peter’s confession, the disciples are like the blind man to whom men appear like trees walking .... After Peter’s confession, the disciples see clearly what has been the main focus of this section, and the first half of the gospel: Jesus is the Shepherd Messiah”. The advantage of this proposal is the coordination between the partial healing by 30 Jesus and the insufficient answer of the disciples about Jesus’ identity contrasted with the complete healing after Jesus’ second touch and the satisfactory answer of “Messiah” in Peter’s confession. In addition, the secrecy motif cleverly concludes each narrative (8:26,30). With this interpretation Peter’s confession points backward to 6:14-16 where Herod wrestles with Jesus’ identity in a similar vein as the apostles do here.