{"id":24806,"date":"2022-09-24T10:46:14","date_gmt":"2022-09-24T15:46:14","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/exegetical-and-hermeneutical-commentary-of-mark-1466\/"},"modified":"2022-09-24T10:46:14","modified_gmt":"2022-09-24T15:46:14","slug":"exegetical-and-hermeneutical-commentary-of-mark-1466","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/exegetical-and-hermeneutical-commentary-of-mark-1466\/","title":{"rendered":"Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Mark 14:66"},"content":{"rendered":"

And as Peter was beneath in the palace, there cometh one of the maids of the high priest: <\/i><\/b><\/h3>\n

66 72<\/strong>. The Denial of our Lord by St Peter<\/p>\n

66<\/strong>. And as Peter<\/em> ] During the sad scene enacted in the hall of trial above, an almost sadder moral tragedy had been enacted in the court below.<\/p>\n

Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

Mar 14:66<\/span><\/p>\n

And as Peter was beneath in the palace.<\/em><\/p>\n<\/p>\n

The High Priests palace<\/strong><\/p>\n

The palace of the High Priest was in all probability built much in the Roman style. There was what was called the vestibulum, <\/em>an entrance adorned with pillars; in this was the ostium, <\/em>or <\/em>entrance hall, closed with doors. On one side lived the porter. This hall gave admission to the atrium, <\/em>called in a Greek house the aule, <\/em>a square or oblong apartment, open in the middle to the sky, with, in Roman houses, a small water tank in the middle, and beside it the image of the tutelary god and a small altar on which incense was burnt. At the further end of this great hall was a large and handsome room, opening to it by steps, called the tablinum. <\/em>It was the grand reception room, and was richly adorned. In the tablinum, <\/em>which was sometimes square, sometimes semi-circular, the court was held in the house of Caiaphas. Without, below the marble steps in the atrium, <\/em>were the servants of the house. There was no image of a god there, but there was a brazier in the place of the altar of incense. That there was an impluvium <\/em>or tank is likely enough; as so much importance was ascribed to washings, and water had been conveyed throughout Jerusalem by means of subterranean canals and aqueducts. Out of the tablinum <\/em>sometimes a door opened into a small bedroom, which was without a window. It was in this little room that the false witnesses were kept concealed till summoned to appear. They were perfectly in the dark, and could not be seen, whereas Christ was visible distinctly because of the torches held, as Jewish law required, before Him to make His face clearly distinguishable. In the tablinum <\/em>were also seats or benches, of marble, of alabaster, or costly woods. On these benches sat the council. Whilst the trial was going on in the tablinum, <\/em>another trial was going on in the atrium, <\/em>a step or two below the tablinum. <\/em>The Master was tried in the upper court, and found guilty, though innocent. The disciple was tried in the lower court, and found guilty by his own conscience, or rather, let me say, by that Master who was receiving sentence a few steps above him. Both were irradiated by the red light of fire in the midst of the prevailing darkness. Probably the only lights then burning were the fire of charcoal in the brazier on the edge of the water tank, and the torches held aloft by the serjeants of the guard before Jesus. Very generally, the tablinum <\/em>opened into a garden behind, so that those in the atrium <\/em>or hall looked through it into the garden, which was surrounded by a colonnade. When this was the case, the seats were between the steps from the atrium <\/em>and the garden door, and the little bedroom door was opposite the seats. Now, perhaps, you can picture the scene. In the foreground are the servants and soldiers moving about the hall, women bringing bundles of thorn, or shovels of charcoal to the fire in the brazier. Beyond, raised like a low stage of a theatre, is the tablinum, <\/em>with the judges seated on the right. On the left, peering out of the dark door, are the evil faces of the hired spies and witnesses. A little forward, on a small raised platform, is Christ, with bound hands, and on either side stands an officer holding a flaring torch. Behind, like the scene in a theatre, is the garden, with the setting moon casting long shadows from the black cypresses over the gravel and high aloft in the sky twinkles one star. (S. Baring Gould, M. A.<\/em>)<\/p>\n

Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

All four evangelists give us an account of this history of Peters denial of his Master. We have considered what they all say, to complete the history, in our notes on Mat 26:69-75<\/span>; to which I see no reason to add any thing but the observation, <\/P>

1. How contemptible means God often useth to take down our pride and self-confidences. Peter, a great apostle, is here humbled by the means of two maids. <\/P>

2. How naturally one sin draws on another. Peter first tells a lie, then to lying addeth swearing and cursing. <\/P>

3. How necessary it is for those that would keep from sin to keep out of sinners company. I am<\/I> (saith David) a companion of them<\/I> that fear thee, <\/I>Psa 119:63<\/I><\/span>. <\/P>

4. How profitable words from God are for the time to come, though at present we find not the use and advantage of them. <\/P>

5. How different the sinnings of reprobates and saints are, as to the consequences and issues. <\/P>

Judas sins, repents, and hangs himself; Peter goeth out and weepeth bitterly. Judas repented unto death; Peter repenteth unto life. See more with reference to this history in our notes on Mat 26:75<\/span>. Thus far we have heard Christs trial before the ecclesiastical court of the Jews. Thus far what he said Mar 10:33<\/span> is made good. He is delivered to the chief priests, and the<\/I> scribes, and they have<\/I> (as we have heard) condemned him to<\/I> death.<\/I> But he also said there, and they shall deliver him<\/I> to the Gentiles: and they shall mock him, and shall scourge him, and shall spit upon him, and shall kill him.<\/I> We must see those words verified in the ensuing part of the history, in the next chapter. <\/P> <\/p>\n

Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

66. And as Peter was beneath in thepalace<\/B>This little word “beneath<\/I>“one of ourEvangelist’s graphic touchesis most important for the rightunderstanding of what we may call the topography of the scene. Wemust take it in connection with Matthew’s word (Mt26:69<\/span>): “Now Peter sat without<\/I> in the palace”orquadrangular court, in the center of which the fire would be burning;and crowding around and buzzing about it would be the menials andothers who had been admitted within the court. At the upper end ofthis court, probably, would be the memorable chamber in which thetrial was heldopen to the court,<\/I> likely, and not farfrom the fire<\/I> (as we gather from Lu22:61<\/span>), but on a higher level;<\/I> for (as our verse says) thecourt, with Peter in it, was “beneath” it. The ascent tothe Council chamber was perhaps by a short flight of steps. If thereader will bear this explanation in mind, he will find the intenselyinteresting details which follow more intelligible. <\/P>

there cometh one of the maidsof the high priest<\/B>“the damsel that kept the door”(Joh 18:17<\/span>). The Jews seem tohave employed women as porters of their doors (Ac12:13<\/span>).<\/P><\/p>\n

Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible <\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

And as Peter was beneath in the palace<\/strong>,…. Not at the lower and further end of the room, but in the lower part of it; that part in which Jesus and the sanhedrim were, being upon an advanced ground, with steps ascending to it:<\/p>\n

there cometh one of the maids of the high priest<\/strong>; the same that kept the door, and let him in. The Ethiopic version renders it, “a daughter of the high priest”.<\/p>\n

Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

Peter’s Fall.<\/SPAN><\/SPAN><\/I><\/span><\/P> <\/TD> <\/TR>


<\/P>


<\/P> <\/TD> <\/TR> <\/TABLE>

      66 And as Peter was beneath in the palace, there cometh one of the maids of the high priest:   67 And when she saw Peter warming himself, she looked upon him, and said, And thou also wast with Jesus of Nazareth.   68 But he denied, saying, I know not, neither understand I what thou sayest. And he went out into the porch; and the cock crew.   69 And a maid saw him again, and began to say to them that stood by, This is one<\/I> of them.   70 And he denied it again. And a little after, they that stood by said again to Peter, Surely thou art one<\/I> of them: for thou art a Galilan, and thy speech agreeth thereto.<\/I>   71 But he began to curse and to swear, saying,<\/I> I know not this man of whom ye speak.   72 And the second time the cock crew. And Peter called to mind the word that Jesus said unto him, Before the cock crow twice, thou shalt deny me thrice. And when he thought thereon, he wept.<\/P>

      We have here the story of Peter’s denying Christ.<\/P>

      1. It began in keeping at a distance<\/I> from him. Peter had followed afar off<\/I> (v.<\/I><\/span> 54<\/span>), and now was beneath in the palace,<\/I> at the lower end of the hall. Those that are shy<\/I> of Christ, are in a fair way to deny<\/I> him, that are shy of attending on holy ordinances, shy of the communion of the faithful, and loth to be seen on the side of despised godliness.<\/P>

      2. It was occasioned by his associating with the high priest’s servants, and sitting among them. They that think it dangerous to be in company with Christ’s disciples, because thence they may be drawn in to suffer for him,<\/I> will find it much more dangerous to be in company with his enemies, because there they may be drawn in to sin against him.<\/I><\/P>

      3. The temptation was, his being charged as a disciple of Christ; Thou also wert with Jesus of Nazareth,<\/I> v.<\/span> 67<\/span><\/U><\/I><\/span>. This is one of them<\/I> (v.<\/I><\/span> 69<\/span>), for thou art a Galilean,<\/I> one may know that by thy speaking broad, v.<\/I><\/span> 70<\/span>. It doth not appear that he was challenged<\/I> upon it, or in danger of being prosecuted<\/I> as a criminal for it, but only bantered<\/I> upon it, and in danger of being ridiculed as a fool for it. While the chief priests were abusing the Master, the servants were abusing the disciples. Sometimes the cause of Christ seems to fall so much on the losing side, that every body has a stone to throw at it, and even the abjects gather themselves together against<\/I> it. When Job was on the dunghill, he was had in derision of those that were the children of base men,<\/I> Job xxx. 8<\/I><\/span>. Yet, all things considered, the temptation could not be called formidable;<\/I> it was only a maid<\/I> that casually cast her eye upon him, and, for aught that appears, without design of giving him any trouble, said, Thou art one of them,<\/I> to which he needed not to have made any reply, or might have said, “And if I be, I hope that is no treason.”<\/P>

      4. The sin was very great; he denied Christ before men,<\/I> at a time when he ought to have confessed and owned him, and to have appeared in court a witness for him. Christ had often given notice to his disciples of his own sufferings; yet, when they came, they were to Peter as great a surprise and terror as if he had never heard of them before. He had often told them that they must suffer<\/I> for him, must take up their cross,<\/I> and follow him; and yet Peter is so terribly afraid of suffering, upon the very first alarm of it, that he will lie and swear, and do any thing, to avoid it. When Christ was admired and flocked after, he could readily own him; but now that he is deserted, and despised, and run down, he is ashamed of him, and will own no relation to him.<\/P>

      5. His repentance was very speedy. He repeated his denial thrice, and the third was worst of all, for then he cursed<\/I> and swore,<\/I> to confirm his denial; and that the third blow, which, one would think, should have stunned him,<\/I> and knocked him down, startled him,<\/I> and roused him up. Then the cock crew<\/I> the second time, which put him in mind of his Master’s words, the warning he had given him, with that particular circumstance of the cock crowing twice;<\/I> by recollecting that, he was made sensible of his sin and the aggravations of it; and when he thought thereon, he wept. Some observe that this evangelist, who wrote, as some have thought, by St. Peter’s direction, speaks as fully of Peter’s sin as any of them, but more briefly of his sorrow,<\/I> which Peter, in modesty, would not have to be magnified, and because he thought he could never sorrow enough for great a sin. His repentance here is thus expressed, epibalon eklaie<\/B><\/I>, where something must be supplied. He added to weep,<\/I> so some; making it a Hebraism; he wept, and the more he thought of it, the more he wept; he continued weeping; he flung out,<\/I> and wept; burst out<\/I> into tears; threw himself down,<\/I> and wept; he covered his face,<\/I> and wept, so some; cast his garment about his head, that he might not be seen to weep; he cast his eyes<\/I> upon his Master, who turned, and looked upon him; so Dr. Hammond supplies it, and it is a probable conjecture. Or, as we understand it, fixing his mind upon it,<\/I> he wept. It is not a transient thought of that which is humbling, that will suffice, but we must dwell upon it. Or, what if this word should mean his laying a load<\/I> upon himself, throwing a confusion into his own face? he did as the publican<\/I> that smote his breast, in sorrow for sin; and this amounts to his weeping bitterly.<\/P><\/p>\n

Fuente: Matthew Henry’s Whole Bible Commentary<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

Beneath in the court <\/B> ( <\/SPAN><\/span>). This implies that Jesus was upstairs when the Sanhedrin met. Mt 22:69<\/span> has it<\/P>

without in the court <\/B> ( <\/SPAN><\/span>). Both are true. The open court was outside of the rooms and also below. <\/P> <\/p>\n

Fuente: Robertson’s Word Pictures in the New Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

Beneath. In relation to the chambers round the court above.<\/P> <\/p>\n

Fuente: Vincent’s Word Studies in the New Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

<\/strong><\/p>\n

PETER DENIES HIS LORD – THE COCK CROWS, V. 66-72<\/p>\n

<\/strong><\/p>\n

1) “And as Peter was beneath in the Palace,”<\/strong> (kai ontos tou Petrou kato en te aule) “And as Peter was below in the court,” indicating the trial was in an upper chamber of the palace of Caiphas, Mat 26:57<\/span>; Mat 26:69<\/span>. There he sat, waiting by the fire, for the outcome of the trial, Mar 14:53<\/span>; Luk 22:55<\/span>; Joh 18:25<\/span>.<\/p>\n

2) “There cometh one of the maids of the high priest,” <\/strong>,erchetai mia ton paidiskon tou archiereos) “There came one of the maidservants, a portress of the High Priest,” at such a late hour of the night, also called, a damsel of Caiphas, Mat 26:69<\/span>. How Peter got there is told by John, Joh 18:15-16<\/span>.<\/p>\n

Fuente: Garner-Howes Baptist Commentary<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

4. PETERS DENIALS 14:66-72<\/strong><\/p>\n

TEXT 14:66-72<\/strong><\/p>\n

And as Peter was beneath in the court, there cometh one of the maids of the high priest; and seeing Peter warming himself, she looked upon him and saith. Thou also wast with the Nazarene, even Jesus. But he denied, saying, I neither know, nor understand what thou sayest: and he went out into the porch; and the cock crew. And the maid saw him and began again to say to them that stood by. This is one of them. But he again denied it. And after a little while again they that stood by said to Peter, Of a truth thou art one of them; for thou art a Galilean. But he began to curse, and to swear, I know not this man of whom ye speak. And straightway the second time the cock crew. And Peter called to mind the word, how that Jesus said unto him, Before the cock crow twice, thou shalt deny me thrice. And when he thought thereon, he wept.<\/p>\n

THOUGHT QUESTIONS 14:66-72<\/strong><\/p>\n

850.<\/p>\n

Please attempt a picture in mind of the Court of Caiaphaswhat is meant by the expression beneath the court or below in the courtyard?<\/p>\n

851.<\/p>\n

Why had Peter followed Jesus? What were his feelings about Jesus at this time?<\/p>\n

852.<\/p>\n

Since it was dark (in the early morning hour) how could the maid recognize Peter?<\/p>\n

853.<\/p>\n

Read Joh. 18:16<\/span>could we identify this maid with the one mentioned by John?<\/p>\n

854.<\/p>\n

What tasks were performed by these maids of the high priest?<\/p>\n

855.<\/p>\n

Why was Peter so quick in his denial? Wouldnt it have been easier to ignore the accusation? Discuss.<\/p>\n

856.<\/p>\n

Of what did Peter have to be ashamed in his association with Jesus?<\/p>\n

857.<\/p>\n

What was the porch or vestibule into which Peter went? Where was the cock? Why go into the vestibule?<\/p>\n

858.<\/p>\n

Read Mat. 26:29-75<\/span>; Luk. 22:55-62<\/span> and discuss who the second maid was in the second denial by Peter.<\/p>\n

859.<\/p>\n

Who accused Peter in his third denial? Why? Cf. Luk. 22:59<\/span>.<\/p>\n

860.<\/p>\n

What caused the by-standers to join in the verbal attack? Cf. Mat. 26:73<\/span>.<\/p>\n

861.<\/p>\n

Please attempt a careful explanation as to what is involved in curse and to swearit is not profanity.<\/p>\n

862.<\/p>\n

Read Luk. 22:61<\/span> for a reason for the weeping of Peter.<\/p>\n

863.<\/p>\n

What is meant by the word having thought thereon? i.e. in what manner did Peter think thereon?<\/p>\n

864.<\/p>\n

Why was Peter willing to defend his Lord in Gethsemaneface a mob armed with swords and clubs and yet wilt before a maid who pointed her finger at him?<\/p>\n

865.<\/p>\n

Attempt an explanation of the depth of repentance in the weeping of Peter.<\/p>\n

COMMENT<\/strong><\/p>\n

Time.Early Friday morning, April 7, A.D. 30, between one and six oclock.<\/p>\n

Place.The palace of Caiaphas, the high priest in Jerusalem. The exact location of the palace of Caiaphas is unknown, but it was probably not far from the temple.<\/p>\n

Parallel Accounts.Mat. 26:69-75<\/span>; Luk. 22:55-62<\/span>; Joh. 18:15-18<\/span>; Joh. 18:25-27<\/span>.<\/p>\n

Outline.1. The first denial, Mar. 14:66-68<\/span>. 2<\/span>. The second denial, Mar. 14:69-70<\/span> a. 3<\/span>. The third denial, Mar. 14:70<\/span> b Mar. 14:71<\/span>. 4<\/span>. Peters repentance, Mar. 14:72<\/span>.<\/p>\n

ANALYSIS<\/strong><\/p>\n

I.<\/p>\n

THE FIRST DENIAL, Mar. 14:66-68<\/span>.<\/p>\n

1.<\/p>\n

The place of the denialbeneath in the courtyard.<\/p>\n

2.<\/p>\n

The accuser in the denialthere cometh one of the maids of the high priest.<\/p>\n

3.<\/p>\n

The light for the denialthe fire of the enemies of Jesusseeing Peter warming himself.she looked upon him.<\/p>\n

4.<\/p>\n

The accusation of the denialThou also wast with the Nazarene, even Jesus.<\/p>\n

5.<\/p>\n

The hasty, embarrassed denialI neither know, nor understand what thou sayest.<\/p>\n

6.<\/p>\n

Peters retreathe went out into the porch.<\/p>\n

7.<\/p>\n

The sermon of the cockand the cock crew.<\/p>\n

II.<\/p>\n

THE SECOND DENIAL, Mar. 14:69-70<\/span> a.<\/p>\n

1.<\/p>\n

Either the same maid or another one again accused Him. Cf. Mat. 26:71<\/span>; Luk. 22:58<\/span>.<\/p>\n

2.<\/p>\n

He again denied it.<\/p>\n

III.<\/p>\n

THE THIRD DENIAL, Mar. 14:70<\/span> b Mar. 14:71<\/span>.<\/p>\n

1.<\/p>\n

Made by those who stood byperhaps aroused by the words of the maid.<\/p>\n

2.<\/p>\n

Peter bound himself under an oath that he did not know Jesus.<\/p>\n

IV.<\/p>\n

PETERS REPENTANCE, Mar. 14:72<\/span>.<\/p>\n

1.<\/p>\n

The second crowing of the cock immediately after the third denial.<\/p>\n

2.<\/p>\n

The promise of Jesus called to mind.<\/p>\n

3.<\/p>\n

The meaning of what he had done broke his heart.<\/p>\n

EXPLANATORY NOTES<\/strong><\/p>\n

I.<\/p>\n

THE FIRST DENIAL.<\/p>\n

Mar. 14:66<\/span>. beneath in the palace.) Or below in the court. Matthew, without in the hall. The chamber in which the Sanhedrim met was an upper room.<\/p>\n

Mar. 14:68<\/span>. neither understand I.) Mark is careful to give every word; even this slight addition aggravates Peters sin.<\/p>\n

And he went out into the porch.) The exact place designated was a small forecourt in the open air. There the crowing of the cock might be heard more easily than in the inner court; this crowning was about one or two oclock,see note on Mar. 14:30<\/span>some three or four hours before the second crowing, giving therefore some intimation as to the length of the proceedings. According to the late Jewish tradition cocks were not kept in Jerusalem, being considered unclean; but there are distinct proofs to the contrary in the Talmud.<\/p>\n

And the cock crew.) This is omitted by B, but is found in MSS of the highest authority, and in most ancient versions. It should certainly be retained.<\/p>\n

II.<\/p>\n

THE SECOND DENIAL.<\/p>\n

Mar. 14:69<\/span>. And a maid.) This might give an impression that the same maid is meant; but Peter was then near the gate or outer door, and the person who would naturally see him was the portress. We know from John, chapter Joh. 18:16<\/span>, that a female kept the door. She could speak positively to his identity. Then came the second denial. There was an interval, it might be of two hours, between this and the preceding denial: another interval of about an hour (Luke Mar. 14:59<\/span>) passes and the bystanders, who had been present at the arrest, one recognizing him as the smiter of Malchus, unanimously charged him.<\/p>\n

III.<\/p>\n

THE THIRD DENIAL.<\/p>\n

Mar. 14:71<\/span>. curse and to swear. Matthew has the same strong, expression, which Luke, the Pauline Evangelist, omits. But Mark adds a few sharp painful words, this (contemptuous), and the expression, whom ye speak of, as though he knew Him only from their statement.<\/p>\n

The oldest MSS have immediately before the second time, which one omits.<\/p>\n

IV.<\/p>\n

PETERS REPENTANCE.<\/p>\n

Mar. 14:72<\/span>. the second time. This was about an hour before dawn. The trial was then just over: our Lord was now in the court passing towards the porch, bound and in the hands of the attendants, and turned, as Luke alone tells, to cast a look on the denier, That look Peter could not forget, but he could hardly bear to speak of it; it told too of unbroken affection, and that in relating his own great sin he might scarcely dare to record. What he does relate is the sudden reaction at the second cock-crowing, and when he thought thereon he wepthe will not even dwell on the bitterness of his anguish, which the other Synoptists record with natural sympathy. He omits also the words, he went out. He will say nothing of himself save what concerned the greatness of his fall, and the simple fact of his grief (a long weeping,) on the awakening of conscience. The rendering when he thought thereon, is correct; the Greek word implies exactly that when he turned his thought and recalled those words, he began to weep, and continued weeping. Other explanations are doubtful and unsatisfactory. N. B. Grimm (Lex. s.v.) gives good authority for this (Antonin. 10, 30; Plut. Plac. Philippians 4, 1<\/span>), and adds, absol. sc. quum perpendisset effatum Christi. Rather, quum animum advertisset ad effatum Jesu.<\/p>\n

Thus terminates the preliminary inquiry. The sentence of death is not pronounced in a formal and legal way, but the decision that death was the proper penalty has been given; the only question that remains is how it is to be executed. On the illegality of the whole proceeding, see note on Matt. xxvii. I. (F. C. Cook)<\/p>\n

FACT QUESTIONS 14:66-72<\/strong><\/p>\n

1069.<\/p>\n

What slight addition in the report by Mark aggravates Peters sin?<\/p>\n

1070.<\/p>\n

What intimation do we get of the length of the proceedings?<\/p>\n

1071.<\/p>\n

What was the total time involved in the three denials?<\/p>\n

1072.<\/p>\n

How is the word this used in Mar. 14:71<\/span>?<\/p>\n

1073.<\/p>\n

How do we learn of the unbroken affection between Jesus and Peter?<\/p>\n

1074.<\/p>\n

On what did Peter think that made him weep?<\/p>\n

Fuente: College Press Bible Study Textbook Series<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

(66) And as Peter was beneath.<\/strong>See Notes on Mat. 26:69-75<\/span>.<\/p>\n

Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

‘And as Peter was beneath in the court there comes one of the maids of the high priest, and seeing Peter warming himself she looked on him and says, “You also were with the Nazarene, with Jesus”.’<\/p>\n

Mark’s interweaving continues. We must always remember that Peter was there. No one else was. His bravery was unquestioned. But it failed him at the last. We can imagine him standing there, shaking inside, apprehensive, hoping to avoid being noticed, but determined to see it through. He would stand by Jesus to the end and find out what happened. But he had not reckoned on himself and the constant effects of tension and of the danger of being recognised. As we have suggested above there appears to be a deliberate contrast of his experiences with the trial of Jesus. Peter too was ‘on trial’.<\/p>\n

His luck had run out. One of the maids recognised him and came up and looked at him closely. She may have listened to Jesus preaching in the temple and noticed his disciples, especially big, bluff Peter. She may have followed the arresting party for excitement. But whatever the reason for her knowledge, from the glow of the fire on his face she had recognised him. Her comment need not have been accusatory, just and expression of interest, and even girlish excitement. But it was the final straw.<\/p>\n

‘With the Nazarene, Jesus.’ Possibly contemptuous, but possibly a little excited. After all ‘the Nazarene’ merited the attention of the Sanhedrin and a large arresting party. So he must be dangerous.<\/p>\n

Fuente: Commentary Series on the Bible by Peter Pett<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

The Denial of Peter.<\/p>\n

<\/strong> The first denial:<\/p>\n

v. 66<\/strong>. And as Peter was beneath in the palace, there cometh one of the maids of the high priest.<\/strong><\/p>\n

v. 67<\/strong>. And when she saw Peter warming himself, she looked upon him and said, And thou also wast with Jesus of Nazareth.<\/strong><\/p>\n

v. 68<\/strong>. But he denied, saying, I know not, neither understand I what thou sayest. And he went out into the porch; and the cock crew.<\/p>\n

<\/strong> Beneath in the court Peter was; the session of the Sanhedrin was held in an upper room. He was sitting at the fire, where the light from the flames brought out his features very plainly. Now one of the maids of the high priest, the janitress that had admitted Peter into the vestibule, walking past the fire and seeing Peter sitting there and warming himself, had a good chance to observe his features. She promptly pointed him out to the rest of the servants, accusing him of belonging to the party of this Jesus of Nazareth. The matter rather took Peter by surprise; he may have thought himself secure, since he had been admitted to the court. But he thinks himself quick-witted in feigning lack of understanding: I neither know nor understand what thou sayest. It was a lie and a denial of his Lord, as Peter should have felt at once. As a matter of fact, his conscience seems to have been a little uneasy, for he now left his place by the fire and went out into the arched doorway, in the shadow of the portico.<\/p>\n

Fuente: The Popular Commentary on the Bible by Kretzmann<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

Mar 14:66-72<\/span> . See Mat 26:69-75<\/span> . Comp. Luk 22:56-62<\/span> .<\/p>\n

] below<\/em> , in contrast to the buildings that were situated higher, which surrounded the court-yard (see on Mat 26:3<\/span> ).<\/p>\n

Mar 14:68<\/span> . , ] (see the critical remarks) I neither know nor do I understand<\/em> . Thus the two verbs that are negatived are far more closely connected (conceived under one<\/em> common leading idea) than by . See Klotz, ad Devar.<\/em> p. 706 f. On the manner of the denial in the passage before us, comp. Test. XII patr.<\/em> p. 715: . The doubling<\/em> of the expression denotes earnestness;<\/em> Bornemann, Schol. in Luk.<\/em> p. xxxi. f.<\/p>\n

] Somewhat otherwise in Mat 26:71<\/span> . See in loc.<\/p>\n

<\/em><\/p>\n

. .] and a cock crew;<\/em> peculiar to Mark in accordance with Mar 14:30<\/span> .<\/p>\n

Mar 14:69<\/span> . ] consequently the same;<\/em> a difference from Mat 26:71<\/span> . It is still otherwise in Luk 22:58<\/span> .<\/p>\n

] would, if it belonged to (as taken usually), stand before these words, since it would have logical emphasis in reference to , Mar 14:67<\/span> . Comp. subsequently . Hence it is, with Erasmus, Luther, Grotius, and Fritzsche, to be attached to , on which account, moreover, C L have placed it only after . So Tischendorf. Still the word on the whole is critically suspicious, although it is quite wanting only in B M, vss.: the addition of it was natural enough, even although the here is not addressed again to Peter.<\/p>\n

] graphic.<\/p>\n

Mar 14:70<\/span> . ] Tempus adumbrativum (as so often in Mark). The second introduces a renewed address, and this, indeed, ensued on the part of those who were standing by. Hence it is not: ., but: . .<\/p>\n

. ] for thou art also a Galilean; i.e. for, besides whatever else betrays thee, thou art, moreover, a Galilean. They observed this from his dialect, as Matthew, following a later shape of the tradition, specifies.<\/p>\n

] not: coepit flere (Vulg. It. Goth. Copt. Syr. Euthymius Zigabenus, Luther, Castalio, Calvin, Heinsius, Loesner, Michaelis, Kuinoel, and others), as D actually has , which certainly also those versions have read; expressed with , it must have run , and this would only mean: he threw himself on, set himself to, the weeping (comp. Erasmus and Vatablus: “prorupit in fletum;” see also Bengel); nor yet: cum, se foras projecisset (Beza, Raphel, Vater, and various others), since might doubtless mean: when he had rushed away, but not: when he had rushed out, an alteration of the meaning which Mat 26:75<\/span> , Luk 22:62<\/span> , by no means warrant; [172] nor yet: veste capiti injecta<\/em> flevit (Theophylact, Salmasius, de foen. Trap.<\/em> p. 272; Calovius, L. Bos, Wolf, Elsner, Krebs, Fischer, Rosenmller, Paulus, Fritzsche, and others [173] ), which presupposes a supplement not warranted in the context and without precedent in connection with , and would, moreover, require the middle voice; neither, and that for the same reason, is it: after he had cast his eyes upon Jesus<\/em> (Hammond, Palairet); nor: addens<\/em> , i.e. praeterea<\/em> (Grotius), which is at variance with linguistic usage, or repetitis vicibus<\/em> flevit (Clericus, Heupel, Mnthe, Bleek), which would presuppose a weeping as having already previously occurred (Theophrastus, Char.<\/em> 8; Diodorus Siculus, p. 345 B). Ewald is linguistically correct in rendering: Breaking in with the tears of deep repentance upon the sound of the cock arousing him. See Polyb. i. 80. 1, xxiii. 1. 8; Stephani Thes.<\/em> , ed. Hase, III. p. 1526; Schweighuser, Lex. Polyb.<\/em> p. 244 f. Thus we should have to conceive of a loud weeping, answering, as it were, to the cock-crowing. From a linguistic point of view Casaubon is already correct ( ); then Wetstein, Kypke, Glckler, de Wette, Bornemann (in the Stud. u. Krit.<\/em> 1843, p. 139), Buttmann, neut. Gr.<\/em> p. 127 [E. T. 145]: when he had attended thereto<\/em> , namely, to this of Jesus, when he had directed his reflection to it. See the examples for this undoubted use of with and without or , in Wetstein, p. 632 f.; Kypke, I. p. 196 f. The latter mode of taking it (allowed also by Beza) appears more in accordance with the context, because . . . precedes, so that corresponds to the as the further mental action that linked itself thereto, and now had as its result the weeping. Peter remembers<\/em> the word, reflects<\/em> thereupon, weeps!<\/p>\n

<\/em><\/p>\n

[172] <\/em> Lange: “ he rushed out thereupon<\/em> ,” namely, on the cock crowing<\/em> as the awakening cry of Christ. First a rushing out as if he had an external purpose, then a painful absorption into himself and weeping. Outside he found that the cry went inward and upward, and now he paused, and wept.” A characteristic piece of fancy.<\/p>\n

[173] So also Linder in the Stud. u. Krit.<\/em> 1862, p. 562 f., inappropriately comparing , and appealing to 2Ki 8:15<\/span> (where the word, however, does not at all stand absolutely) and to Lev 13:45<\/span> (where the middle voice is used).<\/p>\n

Fuente: Heinrich August Wilhelm Meyer’s New Testament Commentary<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

(66) And as Peter was beneath in the palace, there cometh one of the maids of the high priest (67) And when she saw Peter warming himself, she looked upon him, and said, And thou also wast with Jesus of Nazareth. (68) But he denied, saying, I know not, neither understand I what thou sayest. And he went out into the porch; and the cock crew. (69) And a maid saw him again, and began to say to them that stood by, This is one<\/em> of them. (70) And he denied it again: and a little after, they that stood by said again to Peter, Surely thou art one<\/em> of them: for thou art a Galilean, and thy speech agreeth thereto.<\/em> (71) But he began to curse and to swear, saying,<\/em> I know not this man of whom ye speak. (72) And the second time the cock crew. And Peter called to mind the word that Jesus said unto him, Before the cock crow twice, thou shalt deny me thrice, And when he thought thereon, he wept.<\/p>\n<\/p>\n

For the history and effect of Peter’s denial, I refer to Luk 22:54<\/span> , etc.<\/p>\n

Fuente: Hawker’s Poor Man’s Commentary (Old and New Testaments)<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

66 And as Peter was beneath in the palace, there cometh one of the maids of the high priest: <\/p>\n<\/p>\n

<\/strong><\/p>\n

Ver. 66. See Trapp on “<\/em> Mat 26:69 “<\/em> <\/p>\n

Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

66 72.<\/strong> ] OUR LORD IS THRICE DENIED BY PETER. Mat 26:69-75<\/span> .Luk 22:56-62<\/span>Luk 22:56-62<\/span> . Joh 18:17-18 ; Joh 18:25-27<\/span> . See the comparative table, and notes, on Matt.<\/p>\n

Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

66.<\/strong> ] <\/strong> ,<\/strong> because the house was built round the , and the rooms looked down into it. See note on Mat 26:69<\/span> .<\/p>\n

Fuente: Henry Alford’s Greek Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

Mar 14:66-72<\/span> . Peter’s denial<\/em> (Mat 26:69-75<\/span> , Luk 22:54-62<\/span> ).<\/p>\n

Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

Mar 14:66<\/span> . . . ., below<\/em> in the court, implying that the trial of Jesus had taken place in a chamber on a higher level. , etc., cometh one of the maids of the high priest a servant in his palace, on some errand that night when all things were out of their usual course. That a maid should be astir and on duty at that unseasonable hour was itself a sign that something extraordinary was going on.<\/p>\n

Fuente: The Expositors Greek Testament by Robertson<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

NASB (UPDATED) TEXT: Mar 14:66-72<\/p>\n

66As Peter was below in the courtyard, one of the servant-girls of the high priest came, 67and seeing Peter warming himself, she looked at him and said, “You also were with Jesus the Nazarene.” 68But he denied it, saying, “I neither know nor understand what you are talking about.” And he went out onto the porch, and a rooster crowed. 69The servant-girl saw him, and began once more to say to the bystanders, “This is one of them!” 70But again he denied it. And after a little while the bystanders were again saying to Peter, “Surely you are one of them, for you are a Galilean too.” 71But he began to curse and swear, “I do not know this man you are talking about!” 72Immediately a rooster crowed a second time. And Peter remembered how Jesus had made the remark to him, “Before a rooster crows twice, you will deny Me three times.” And he began to weep.<\/p>\n

Mar 14:66 “one of the servant-girls of the high priest came” Joh 18:17 says that she was the gate keeper. Matthew, as usual, has two persons, while Mark only has one servant (cf. Mat 26:69-71). Peter must have told John Mark this embarrassing story or he used it in one of his sermons in Rome and John Mark heard it.<\/p>\n

Mar 14:67 “seeing Peter” It was a full moon (at Passover). She could clearly see Peter by the firelight (cf. Mar 14:54; Mar 14:67; Joh 18:18; Joh 18:25) and the moonlight.<\/p>\n

“‘Jesus the Nazarene'” The Jews who grew up in Galilee (cf. Mat 26:69) had a distinct accent. This linked Jesus to his disciples (cf. Mar 14:70). See Special Topic at Mar 10:47.<\/p>\n

Mar 14:68 “‘I neither know nor understand what you are talking about'” The exact order of these three accusations differs from Gospel to Gospel. The fact that Peter denied Jesus three times with successive emphasis is common to all of the accounts.<\/p>\n

“And he went out onto the porch” Apparently Peter tried to leave. The ancient Greek uncial manuscripts are evenly divided over whether the phrase “and the rooster crowed” should be included at Mar 14:68 (MSS A, C, D as well as the Vulgate, Peshitta translations include it, while , B, L, and W omit it). It clearly explains “the second time a cock crowed” of Mar 14:72. Some modern translations (cf. NASB, NIV) omit it, but several include it with a footnote (cf. NKJV, NRSV, TEV, NJB). The UBS4 cannot decide which is original.<\/p>\n

Mar 14:70 “after a little while” Luk 22:59 has “about an hour.”<\/p>\n

“Galilean” Either Peter’s dialect or possibly his clothing gave him away.<\/p>\n

Mar 14:71 “began to curse and swear” The term “curse” (anathematiz) originally referred to something devoted to God (anathma), but came to refer to a curse (cf. Act 23:12; Act 23:14; Act 23:21). It was a way of asserting the trustworthiness of a statement by calling down the judgment of God on oneself if not telling the truth.<\/p>\n

Peter, in the strongest cultural ways (i.e., an oath and swearing) perjured himself before God! Judas did nothing worse than Peter! Peter denied His Lord in repeated, emphatic, and binding terms publicly (cf. Mat 26:34; Mat 26:74).<\/p>\n

SPECIAL TOPIC: CURSE (ANATHEMA) <\/p>\n

“‘I do not know this man'” It is possible the phrase “this man” was a derogatory Semitic idiom referring to Jesus.<\/p>\n

Mar 14:72 “a rooster crowed a second time” Peter remembered Jesus’ words (cf. Luk 22:31-32). Luk 22:61 says Jesus looked at him. Apparently Jesus was being moved from Annas’ to Caiaphas’ part of the High Priest’s palace.<\/p>\n

The phrase “a second time” is omitted in some Greek manuscripts. The problem scribes faced was that the other three Gospels (i.e., Matthew, Luke and John) only mention one rooster crowing, while Mark apparently has two (cf. MSS A, B, C2, D and W), so some manuscripts omit the phrase (cf. MSS , C and L).<\/p>\n

“And he began to weep” Peter was fulfilling prophecy in his denials and giving hope for all believers who have denied Jesus with their tongue, with their lives and with their priorities. There is also hope for anyone who turns back to Him in faith (cf. John 21).<\/p>\n

Fuente: You Can Understand the Bible: Study Guide Commentary Series by Bob Utley<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

66-72.] OUR LORD IS THRICE DENIED BY PETER. Mat 26:69-75. Luk 22:56-62. Joh 18:17-18; Joh 18:25-27. See the comparative table, and notes, on Matt.<\/p>\n

Fuente: The Greek Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

Mar 14:66. , beneath) There seem to have been a flight of steps there.<\/p>\n

Fuente: Gnomon of the New Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

Mar 14:66-72<\/p>\n

11. PETER’S DENIAL<\/p>\n

Mar 14:66-72<\/p>\n

(Mat 26:69-75; Luk 22:55-62; Joh 18:15-18; Joh 18:25-27)<\/p>\n

66 And as Peter was beneath in the court, there cometh one of the maids of the high priest;–Matthew says: “A maid.” It appears from John’s record that she was the maid who kept the door. (Joh 18:16-17.)<\/p>\n

67 and seeing Peter warming himself, she looked upon him, and saith, Thou also wast with the Nazarene, even Jesus.–Literally, This the Nazarene was contemptuous, an epithet among the Jews of Judea. (Mar 1:24.) She may have feared being blamed for admitting him. He seems to have been in no great danger, except as he might be recognized as the one who smote Malchus. Some see in the words “thou also” a reference to John.<\/p>\n

68 But he denied,–Matthew says: “He denied before them all.”<\/p>\n

saying, I neither know, nor understand what thou sayest –That is, he did not see any reason why this question was asked. All this was falsehood; and Peter must have known that it was such. This is remarkable, because Peter had just before been so confident.<\/p>\n

and he went out into the porch;–Peter was embarrassed and confused by the question; and to save his confusion from attracting further notice, he went away from the fire into the porch, where he expected to be unobserved. Yet in vain. By the very movement to avoid detection, he came into contact with another who knew him, and repeated the charge.<\/p>\n

and the cock crew.–True to Mark’s own report of the prediction (verse 30), he here mentions the fact that a cock crowed immediately after the first denial. It was now probably between twelve and one o’clock.<\/p>\n

69 And the maid saw him,–Matthew says: “Another maid.” By comparing the parallel passages the reader will see that after the charge was first made by the porteress, it was repeated by quite a number of others, both male and female, and that Peter made various answers, though all amounted to but three denials.<\/p>\n

and began again to say to them that stood by, This is one of them.–That is, one of his disciples. “Art thou also one of his disciples?” (Joh 18:25.)<\/p>\n

70 But he again denied it. And after a little while again they that stood by said to Peter, Of a truth thou art one of them; for thou art a Galilaean.–Matthew says: “Thy speech maketh thee known.” Peter and the other Galileans spoke the same language as the Jews of Jerusalem, but they had some peculiar pronunciations like the provincialisms of our own country, by which they were distinguished. From his being a Galilean, they inferred that he was a follower of Jesus–an illogical conclusion, and yet a correct one.<\/p>\n

71 But he began to curse, and to swear, I know not this man of whom ye speak.–This is Peter’s third denial. This was an advance upon his second. He not only, with an oath, repeats what he had said in the second, that he knew not of whom they spake, but he affirms it with imprecations of divine wrath on himself if he spake not the truth.<\/p>\n

72 And straightway the second time the cock crew.–The second crowing of the cock is around three o’clock. This is a fulfillment of the prediction of the Master, which shows his divinity.<\/p>\n

And Peter called to mind the word, how that Jesus said unto him, Before the cock crow twice, thou shalt deny me thrice.–Luke tells us that when the cock crew Jesus turned and looked upon Peter, and that then he remembered his words. They were in the same room–Jesus at the upper end of the hall, elevated for a tribunal, and Peter below with the servants; so that Jesus could look down upon Peter standing near the fire.<\/p>\n

And when he thought thereon, he wept.–Matthew says “He went out, and wept bitterly.” Overwhelmed and forced to tears over his fall, he went out to hide his bitter weeping and himself from his Master’s eyes. He went alone into the darkness of the night and wept bitterly. It is worthy of note that the fact that the fall of Peter is recorded by all the evangelists is high proof of the honesty and candor of our sacred historians. They were willing to mention their own faults without attemping to appear to be better than they were. An uninspired historian would have omitted the fall of Peter and mentioned only his good qualities This shows the difference between an inspired and an uninspired historian and is strong evidence that the Bible is from God.<\/p>\n

Fuente: Old and New Testaments Restoration Commentary<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

CHAPTER 70<\/p>\n

Peters Fall and Restoration<\/p>\n

And as Peter was beneath in the palace, there cometh one of the maids of the high priest: And when she saw Peter warming himself, she looked upon him, and said, And thou also wast with Jesus of Nazareth. But he denied, saying, I know not, neither understand I what thou sayest. And he went out into the porch; and the cock crew. And a maid saw him again, and began to say to them that stood by, This is one of them. And he denied it again. And a little after, they that stood by said again to Peter, Surely thou art one of them: for thou art a Galilaean, and thy speech agreeth thereto. But he began to curse and to swear, saying, I know not this man of whom ye speak. And the second time the cock crew. And Peter called to mind the word that Jesus said unto him, Before the cock crow twice, thou shalt deny me thrice. And when he thought thereon, he wept. <\/p>\n

(Mar 14:66-72)<\/p>\n

The verses before us record the painful, but very instructive, story of Peters terrible denial of the Lord Jesus. This sad story is recorded in detail in all four gospel narratives. Yet, neither Matthew, Mark, Luke, nor John make any excuse for or defense of their friend, Peter. They all wrote their histories, not as mere men writing about men, but as instruments of divine inspiration. This story of Peters fall was written by the inspiration of God the Holy Spirit for our learning and admonition. May the Spirit of God, who gave us this story four times, now inscribe its lessons upon our hearts by his almighty grace, for Christs sake.<\/p>\n

Try to picture the scene and the events which transpired on that cold, bitter night. It was a solemn, solemn night. Our Lord Jesus himself called it, the judgment (crisis) of this world. The disciples had just observed the last passover meal of the legal dispensation and the first communion service of the gospel age. The Lord Jesus told them plainly of his certain, imminent betrayal and death. Peter, James and John had spent the night with the Son of God in Gethsemane. On that sacred evening, our Savior preached that marvelous sermon that is recorded in John 14, 15, 16. It was on this night, earlier in the evening, that our Master, our great High Priest, offered that great prayer for us recorded in John 17. The soldiers came, like a mob of lynch men, into the garden to arrest the Lord of glory, led by his own familiar friend, Judas Iscariot. Judas betrayed him with a kiss. And Peter denied the Lord Jesus, denied him again, and denied him a third time, cussing like a sailor.<\/p>\n

Why is this record given four times in the New Testament? Surely the Holy Spirit means for us to give it special attention. There at least four reasons why this sad tale is told in such detail by all four gospel writers.<\/p>\n

1.Peters denial of the Lord Jesus must have greatly increased the pain and sufferings of our tender-hearted Savior.<\/p>\n

2.The Holy Spirit would set before us in a most emphatic way the greatness of our Saviors saving power, the majesty of his unconditional grace, and the immutability of his faithfulness.<\/p>\n

3.The divine Comforter knew that we would all be subject to these same temptations.<\/p>\n

4.This fourfold record of Peters fall is intended to be a startling, instructive lesson for us concerning the frailty of the best of men, and especially a startling reminder of our own frailty.<\/p>\n

The Word of God does not tell us very much even about the very best of men who lived in Bible times. The histories of Gods saints in Scripture are very scanty. Yet, the Word of God very particularly records the faults and falls of the most eminent saints. It seems that the Holy Spirits purpose is to remind us incessantly that all flesh is grass! The best of men are only men at best. And he incessantly reminds us that Salvation is of the Lord! Peter was not the infallible bishop of Rome, as the papists pretend. He was just a frail, fallible, fickle, sinful man. In fact, about the only thing the pope has in common with Peter is his denial of Christ.<\/p>\n

Peters fall seems to say to us all, You, too, are weak. You, too, will fall, if left to yourself. Do not ever trust yourself. Trust Christ entirely. Lean on him incessantly. Do not rely upon your great experiences or the imaginary strength and firmness of your faith. Satan has desired to have you that he may sift you as wheat. Christ alone can hold you up. Christ alone can keep you. We must ever watch and pray! We must each diligently watch over our own souls and prayerfully seek the Lords preserving grace, if we would live for the honor of his name.<\/p>\n

I want to live for the honor of Christ. I want to honor and magnify him in my living, as well as in my preaching and writing. I know that you who love him want the same thing. My heart shudders, my soul trembles at the thought of bringing reproach upon the name of him who loved me and gave himself for me. Yet, I know this: Unless Christ himself preserves me from the evil that is in me, and preserves you from the evil that is in you, we will, most certainly, profane his name.<\/p>\n

The Circumstances of Peters Fall<\/p>\n

How did such a great man come to commit such a grievous evil? This portion of Holy Scripture is not talking about a lost man, but a saint, a child of God, redeemed by blood, justified in Christ, saved by grace, and sanctified by the Spirit. Peter was a faithful giant among faithful giants. Few before him and few after him could stand shoulder to shoulder with him. He was a man strong in faith, firm in conviction, bold in preaching and unrelenting in his zeal for Christ.<\/p>\n

This man was eminent even among the apostles, a leader among leaders, an example among examples. But this man, great as he was, was just a man. Like you and me, he was a man whose heart, by nature, was full of sin, whose flesh was weak. On that dark, dark night in the High Priests palace, this mans evil heart broke out in a horrible display of ungodliness, in an act as evil and vile as any in human history. The godly apostle Peter blasphemously denied the Son of God with foul oaths!<\/p>\n

How can we account for this thing? As we look at the circumstances of Peters fall, I remind you, there were no extenuating circumstances to excuse or even mitigate his guilt. Indeed, everything recorded in the inspired gospel records aggravates his offense. Peters fall was very strange because he was one of the Lord Jesus most highly favored and most highly honored disciples. The greater our privileges and the higher our honors, the greater our responsibilities are and the more horrible our offenses.<\/p>\n

The Lord had done so much for Peter. He was one of the very first to whom the Son of God made himself known while he was in the world, one of the first to be saved by the power of his Word (Joh 1:40-42). Peter was in the inner circle of the Masters most intimate friends. He seems to have been the chief spokesman for the early church.<\/p>\n

Peters fall is especially sad, because he was plainly and faithfully warned of his great danger (Luk 22:31-34). Our Lord Jesus told Peter in the plainest language possible exactly what was going to happen to him. He even gave him the details. Peter was told of the danger to which he was about to be exposed. Satan desired to have him. His faith would be fiercely attacked. Therefore, he must watch and pray that he enter not into temptation. But Peter walked headlong into danger. He rejected the light God had given him. He ignored the revelation of Gods Word.<\/p>\n

Peters guilt is aggravated by the fact that it came so soon after he had confidently declared his loyalty to Christ (Mat 26:31-35; Luk 22:33). Just a few short hours after proudly and confidently boasting of his love for Christ, Peter cussed and denied him three times. How fickle we are!<\/p>\n

Peters fall did not come at once, but by degrees. He followed the Lord afar off. Then, he sat in the seat of scorners, seeking the comfort and warmth their fire provided. Next, he denied the Lord Jesus by degrees. At first, he pretended not to understand the maidens words. Then, he denied that he knew the man. He denied his own confession of faith and, by implication if not outright, denied the Saviors divinity (Compare Mat 16:18 and Joh 6:69). At last, he took the profane language of base, ungodly men to prove that he was no follower of the holy Lamb of God. There are many, many ways by which men and women deny the Lord Jesus Christ; but usually the falls of Gods saints are not sudden. Normally, great falls are preceded by much smaller inconsistencies.<\/p>\n

It takes very little to make a great saint fall into great sin, if God leaves him to himself. Peters trial was nothing but the word of a weak young woman, who said, Thou also wast with Jesus of Nazareth. <\/p>\n

Here is another very great aggravation of Peters sin: All this was done very close to the place where his Lord and Master was at that time suffering for him, bearing his reproach! The Lord Jesus Christ was standing right in front of Peter, hearing every word!<\/p>\n

What was the reason for Peters fall? How can we account for this? How did this man, so great, so unique in so many ways, come to commit such a horrible offense? Peter was far too proud of himself, far too confident of his own strength. He was overcome by the fear of man; in this case, by the fear of a woman who had no obvious power against him. He neglected watchfulness over his own heart and soul (Pro 4:23). I suspect that, like mother Eve, Peter had begun to doubt the Saviors word.<\/p>\n

The Means of Peters Recovery<\/p>\n

Peter fell; but he didnt perish. His faith weakened; but it did not die. He sinned; but he was not cast off or forsaken. He denied the Lord; but the Lord did not deny him. Peter belonged to Christ; and Christ can never lose one of his own. The good Shepherd can never lose one of his sheep. Peter fell; but Christ graciously raised him up. The righteous fall seven times a day; but the Lord raises them up (Pro 24:16). How did the Lord Jesus restore his fallen servant? I see four things the Lord used to restore his fallen child.<\/p>\n

First, he used a work of providence. The cock crew! God has many ways of reaching a mans conscience. He can make asses speak as easily as prophets and roosters to crow on cue.<\/p>\n

Second, he used a work of grace. The Lord turned and looked on Peter (Luk 22:61). What a look that must have been! The Lord Jesus turned to Peter. Peter did not turn to the Lord. He looked upon Peter, not in anger and disgust, but in mercy, love and grace! That look was a look of tenderness, compassion and faithfulness. With that look, the Lord spoke silently, but effectually, to the heart of his fallen son. He seems to have said, I have loved thee with an everlasting love. Ye have not chosen me; but I have chosen you. I gave unto you eternal life; and you shall never perish. I will never leave thee nor forsake thee. I, even I, am he that blotteth out thy transgressions. Fear not, for I have redeemed thee. In me thy righteousness is found. I am thy strength. I am the Lord, I change not; therefore ye sons of Jacob are not consumed. Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends. Return unto me, return unto me; and I will pardon. Let not your heart be troubled: ye believe in God, believe also in me.<\/p>\n

Third, he used a work of the word. – Peter called to mind the word that Jesus said unto him (Mar 14:72). At the appointed time, the Word of God graciously and effectually brought Peter to repentance.<\/p>\n

Fourth, Peter was restored by a work of our blessed Advocate, the Lord Jesus, who told him even before his fall, I have prayed for thee (Luk 22:32). As a great High Priest and Intercessor, the Lord Jesus Christ prayed for Peters preservation in faith and restoration by grace, even before he fell! That same great High Priest is our Advocate on high. He intercedes for us now, and has interceded for us from eternity (1Jn 2:1-2).<\/p>\n

These thoughts thrill my heart and flood my soul with joy! The Lord Jesus Christ is full of tenderness and mercy. His faithfulness is great. And his compassions never fail. He who is our God and Savior is a faithful, unfailingly faithful God and Savior!<\/p>\n

If you are a believer, if truly you trust Christ alone as your Lord and Savior, nothing shall ever separate you from him, not even your sins (Rom 4:8). Nothing can separate us from his mercy, love and grace. Nothing can separate us from his tender care and saving power (Rom 8:35-39).<\/p>\n

The Signs of Peters Restoration<\/p>\n

The Lords works for and upon Peter were effectual. They accomplished their intended design. And Peter was graciously restored by the very Savior he so vehemently denied.<\/p>\n

His trial and fall were not accidents. Satan ran Gods child through his rough sifter; but he lost nothing in the process, but chaff. Peter came out of this thing a much better man than he was before (Acts 2, 4). Even this tragic affair was under the control of Gods sovereign providence and according to his purpose of grace.<\/p>\n

Let us ever remember that the devil is Gods devil. That fiend of hell is the unwilling, unwitting vassal of the Almighty (Isa 14:12-27). The dragon of hell is as much included in all things working together for good to Gods elect as the angels of light (Rom 8:28).<\/p>\n

Immediately after the Lord looked upon him, Peter went out of the place (Luk 22:62). Once fire was restored in his soul, he no longer needed the warmth of that fire which the Lords enemies had kindled. He immediately forsook those who had turned his heart from his Lord.<\/p>\n

As he left the high priests house, Peter wept bitterly (Mar 14:72; Luk 22:62). Convulsive weeping overcame him. He couldnt stand himself. His very heart was crushed within him. Oh, blessed is that man whose heart is broken before God. Christ Jesus heals the broken-hearted! The sacrifices of God are a broken spirit: a broken and contrite heart, O God, thou wilt not despise! Do you know anything about repentance?<\/p>\n

The Lessons for Us Today<\/p>\n

What are we to learn from this tragic event in Peters life? How can we benefit from it? What lessons are taught by this mans fall and restoration? Certainly, these things are recorded by the Spirit of God to teach us something about ourselves. We must never be presumptuous about ourselves. We are all very much like Peter in his weakness. We are all fickle, sinful wretches by nature. There is no evil in this world of which we are not capable (1Co 10:12; 1Co 4:7). May God the Holy Spirit teach us and give us grace never to be severe with our erring brethren.<\/p>\n

Peters fall and restoration is an emphatic declaration that Salvation is of the Lord. It is altogether the work of Gods free grace in Christ. It is unconditional, immutable and indestructible! What blessed security our souls have in Christ! Nothing can ever sever us from our Savior! Once in Christ, in Christ forever! O how great is the faithfulness of our great God and Savior! He abideth faithful! Faithful is he that calleth you! Great is thy faithfulness!<\/p>\n

He will never, never leave us,<\/p>\n

Nor will let us quite leave Him.<\/p>\n

Keep yourselves in the love of God. Trust Christ alone. Live always at the cross. Cling to your crucified Savior tenaciously. As often as you fall, return to him. He will receive you. He will forgive you. He will be gracious to you. He will forget the wrong you have done!<\/p>\n

Fuente: Discovering Christ In Selected Books of the Bible<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

as: Mar 14:54, Mat 26:58, Mat 26:69, Mat 26:70, Luk 22:55-57 <\/p>\n

One: Joh 18:15-18 <\/p>\n

Reciprocal: Mat 14:30 – when Mar 14:30 – before Mar 14:69 – a maid Mar 15:43 – and went Mar 16:7 – tell Luk 22:56 – a certain maid Joh 13:38 – The cock Joh 18:17 – the damsel<\/p>\n

Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

Chapter 14.<\/p>\n

The Great Denial<\/p>\n

“And Jesus saith unto them, All ye shall be offended because of Me this night: for it is written, I will smite the shepherd, and the sheep shall be scattered. But after that I am risen, I will go before you into Galilee. But Peter said unto Him, Although all shall be offended, yet will not I. And Jesus saith unto him, Verily I say unto thee, That this day, even in this night, before the cock crow twice, thou shalt deny Me thrice. But He spake the more vehemently, If I should die with Thee, I will not deny Thee in any wise. Likewise also said they all. And Peter followed Him afar off, even into the palace of the high priest: and he sat with the servants, and warmed himself at the fire. And as Peter was beneath in the palace, there cometh one of the maids of the high priest: And when she saw Peter warming himself, she looked upon him, and said, And thou also wast with Jesus of Nazareth. But he denied, saying, I know not, neither understand I what thou sayest. And he went out into the porch; and the cock crew. And a maid saw him again, and began to say to them that stood by, This is one of them. And he denied it again. And a little after, they that stood by said again to Peter, Surely thou art one of them: for thou art a Galilean, and thy speech agreeth thereto. But he began to curse and to swear, saying, I know not this man of whom ye speak. And the second time the cock crew. And Peter called to mind the word that Jesus said unto him, Before the cock crow twice, thou shalt deny Me thrice. And when he thought thereon, he wept.”-Mar 14:27-31, Mar 14:54, Mar 14:66-72.<\/p>\n

The Story of the Fall.<\/p>\n

The first thing to be done in studying the pitiful account of Peter’s fall is to reconstruct the actual story. For there are considerable differences in the Gospel narratives; though when sceptical writers try, by magnifying these differences, to cast doubt upon the whole episode, they clean over-reach themselves. There is perhaps no event in the whole of the Gospel story which is more clearly and fully attested. The evangelists tell the story from their own special points of view, and with slight variations; but upon the fact that, in the high priest’s palace, Peter did three times deny his Lord they are all agreed. The variations can practically all be harmonised, and in any case they detract nothing from the reliability of the narrative, they rather add to it. They only show how wide-spread and familiar the story was in the very earliest days of the Christian Church.<\/p>\n

The Boldness of Peter and John.<\/p>\n

Comparing Gospel with Gospel, the course of events seems to have been something like this. First there is the Lord’s solemn announcement, “All ye shall be offended because of Me this night,” followed by Peter’s confident assurance of his own loyalty. Then the prophecy of Peter’s fall, and his vehement protest. The Agony in the Garden of Gethsemane is swiftly followed by the arrest. After this, sudden panic seems to have seized the disciples. “They all left Him and fled.” But in the case of at any rate two out of the eleven, the panic does not seem to have lasted very long. Peter and John seem to have recovered some measure of courage, and instead of running away, they followed the procession as it made its way to the house of Annas. They followed “afar off” says Mark, no doubt keeping themselves in the shadow of the houses and the trees in order to avoid detection. When the procession arrived at the house of Annas (where many hold that the denial took place) John passed in with Jesus and the soldiers into the high priest’s hall. John was in some way or other known to the high priest, and had the entree into his house. But Peter had no such privilege, and when the procession passed through the gateway, he remained without. John, Peter’s inseparable comrade, did not like to think of his friend being left outside there in the darkness. So he went and spoke to the portress and persuaded her to open the door and let him in. It was done with the best motives in the world, but John, unthinkingly, did a disservice to Peter that night. He introduced his friend without knowing it into a perfect furnace of temptation. “The best of friends,” says Dr Stalker, “may do this sometimes to one another, for the situation into which one man may enter without peril may be dangerous to another.” John saw no risks in the high priest’s palace; Peter wellnigh lost his soul.<\/p>\n

The Danger Zone.<\/p>\n

In order to understand the sequence of events, observe the arrangement of a great house such as that into which Peter entered. The houses of the rich in the East are built quadrangular fashion, and the windows all look in upon the courtyard in the middle. Facing the road there is often just a blank wall, with a great gate in it, through which admission is gained. The gate opens upon a passage leading to the courtyard which is open to the sky. Round the courtyard, and raised a little above it, are the reception rooms and the living rooms. When Jesus was brought in by the traitor band, He was taken promptly to one of these rooms off the courtyard, there to be examined by Annas. But the soldiers and the servants who had been the instruments of the arrest, stayed in the open courtyard, and as the night seems to have been bitterly cold, for their greater comfort they kindled a fire. Now that was the disposition of things when John begged the portress to admit Peter. Jesus was in one of the private rooms undergoing examination, the soldiers and servants were gathered in a noisy group about the fire.<\/p>\n

Suspicion Aroused.<\/p>\n

When the portress let Peter in she scrutinised him, and something in his manner made her a trifle suspicious. However, the probability is, she said nothing at the moment, but allowed Peter to pass unchallenged. He at once made for the group sitting round the fire, partly because he, too, wanted to share in the grateful warmth, and partly because he thought that by mingling with the crowd he would be less likely to bring suspicion upon himself. John seems to have passed on immediately to the room in which Jesus was undergoing examination.<\/p>\n

The First Challenge.<\/p>\n

But the place which Peter imagined promised him safety, proved his undoing. As I said, something in Peter’s manner had aroused the suspicion of the girl at the gate as he passed in. But it was not till the light of the fire fell full upon Peter’s face that her suspicion was changed into something like certainty. Leaving the gate for a moment and running to the group around the fire, she challenged Peter and said, “Thou also wast with the Nazarene Jesus.” The challenge took him clean by surprise. He felt himself in a trap. Besides, he had compromised himself. For while he had been sitting there at the fire he had tried to pass himself off as one of the crowd. I daresay they had been jesting about Jesus, making coarse jokes about Jesus, and Peter had listened to it all without protest, and perhaps affected to laugh with the rest. What could he do now he was thus challenged? What could he do but try to keep up the deception? And so he pretended that he did not understand. The agitation, the sheer terror of the man is reproduced in his answer, as it is rendered in the margin of the R.V. “I neither know, nor understand; thou, what sayest thou?”<\/p>\n

The Second Challenge.<\/p>\n

At the moment Peter does not seem to have been pressed any further. But he came to the conclusion that the glare of the fire was a thing he ought to avoid. And so he took the first opportunity of withdrawing into the shade of the porch, perhaps intending to slip out as soon as ever the great door should open. But in the porchway, the same maid, or another maid to whom she had communicated her suspicions, or possibly both together, returned to the charge and said to the servants lounging near, “This man is one of them.” And again Peter denied, and to escape the attention of the maid, sought once more to hide himself in the crowd at the fireside.<\/p>\n

The Final Challenge.<\/p>\n

But the whole company was now on the alert, and Peter’s agitation and distress were obvious. He had no sooner taken his place amongst the servants by the fire, than a man took up the work of baiting the Apostle. He had plunged into the conversation in order to give an impression of ease, and to divert suspicion. But it only made matters worse. “Of a truth,” said this man, “without doubt thou art one of them, for thou art a Galilean.” Peter’s rough accent betrayed his Galilean origin. And what should a Galilean be doing there in that company if he was not one of the Galilean followers of Jesus! And then to bring things to a climax, another of the servants, a kinsman of Malchus, scrutinising Peter’s face, remembered he had beneath the flash of torches seen those features in the Garden. “Did I not see thee in the Garden with Him?” he said.<\/p>\n

The Denial and the Reminder.<\/p>\n

Peter was now fairly in the toils, and, frantic with fright, he began to curse and to swear that “he knew not the Man of Whom” they spake. And possibly this final denial had its effect-for these soldiers and servants knew at any rate as much as this about the servants of Jesus, that profane speech never issued out of their mouths. They did not believe Peter’s assertion, as Dr Stalker puts it, but they could not help believing his sins. This cursing and blaspheming man could be no disciple of Him Who was holy, harmless, undefiled, separate from sinners. The “swearing” was probably only the resurrection of a bad old habit that had lain dormant for the last two or three years. But it silenced Peter’s accusers, and they made no attempt to stop him when he rose to go. Then at that moment something happened, or rather two things happened. “Straightway the second time the cock crew.” And Peter remembered! Remembered his own proud and foolish boasting; remembered the Lord’s tender and solemn warning. And the remembrance filled him with contrition and shame.<\/p>\n

Conviction and Remorse.<\/p>\n

And then something else happened. It chanced that at that very moment Jesus was being conducted, with hands pinioned behind His back, through the courtyard on His way to the judgment hall of Caiaphas. Perhaps He had heard these wild and frantic curses with which Peter accompanied his last denial. Anyhow, He knew what had happened, knew the depths of shame and apostasy to which His chosen Apostle had sunk-knew it all. And as He was led through the courtyard He turned round and looked full in the face of His conscience-stricken Apostle. The cock-crowing had made him realise his sin; the Lord’s look broke his heart. “When he thought thereon,” when he remembered his Lord’s warning, and realised the meaning in that look, “he began to weep.” Or, as the Greek might be translated to bring out its exact force, “he wept and he wept,” “he kept on weeping.” He wept as if he could never stop. Peter as he flung himself shame-stricken and heartbroken out of the house of Annas in the early dawn of that tragic day could have taken those familiar lines of Toplady’s hymn into his lips and they would have expressed the feelings of his guilt-laden soul<\/p>\n

“Could my zeal no respite know,<\/p>\n

Could my tears for ever flow,<\/p>\n

All for sin could not atone,<\/p>\n

Thou must save and Thou alone.”<\/p>\n

Lessons of the Story.<\/p>\n

Warning to the Strong.<\/p>\n

Now sceptics and cynics have poured floods of cheap scorn over what they are pleased to call the cowardice of Peter. But I agree entirely with Bishop Chadwick-this is not the story of the breakdown of a coward. We miss its significance if we do not realise this is the story of the breakdown of one of the bravest and the best. This story is a warning, not to the weak, but to the strong. It is addressed not simply to the Fearings, but to the Great-hearts of the Christian host. For spite of this calamitous failure, Peter was a brave man. His boast that he was ready to die with Christ was no vain and empty boast. Remember how he drew sword in the Garden, and would have defended his Lord, one man against a multitude! If Peter had had his way in the Garden, the soldiers would only have laid hands on Jesus over his own dead body. This is not the story of the failure of the coward; it is a story of the breakdown of the brave. And the solemn warning it sounds across the centuries is this: “Let him that thinketh he standeth take heed lest he fall.”<\/p>\n

-And against Self-Confidence.<\/p>\n

Now the initial mistake that Peter made, the fons et origo of all these calamitous denials was this, he was so absolutely sure of his own steadfastness and strength. Self-confidence is always the peril of the strong man. It was Peter’s peril. You remember how he boasted of it, only a few hours before. He could conceive of all his fellow disciples turning traitor, but he could not imagine himself turning coward. “Though all should deny Thee, yet will not I.” He was so absolutely sure of himself that he had felt no need of watching and praying in the Garden. And that self-confidence led directly to his fall. For it was self-confidence that made him enter the high priest’s hall in the first instance. He deliberately thrust himself into temptation. He ventured into the danger-zone and he fell. There is one verse in Peter’s first Epistle which always seems to me to be written not with common ink but with the Apostle’s own life-blood, for it embodies the lesson learnt from the most humbling and shameful experience of his life. It is this, “Be sober, be watchful, your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about seeking whom he may devour.” It is the warning of a strong man who fell through over-confidence to other strong men against committing the same fatal mistake.<\/p>\n

The Danger of Compromise.<\/p>\n

Now, notice what a series of calamitous blunders Peter committed since he put himself in the way of temptation by entering Annas’ house. He made his first blunder when he went and joined the group by the fire and tried to pass himself off as one of them. It was fear that made him do it. He sought to divert suspicion from himself by pretending to be just one of the crowd that had joined in the arrest of Christ. But instead of diverting suspicion he fatally compromised himself. For as I suggested a moment ago, the talk around the fireside had all been about Jesus. It had very likely been coarse and scurrilous talk. And Peter had made no protest of any sort. On the other hand he tried to look as like one of the scorners himself as he could. So doing, he put himself between the devil and the deep sea. Either he had openly to confess himself a cheat, or else he had to maintain the deception by denying all knowledge of Jesus. The one safe course for Christian folk to take is boldly to avow themselves as Christ’s followers. The man who begins by being ashamed of Christ is almost sure to end by betraying Him. There is only one way of being a Christian-be strong and very courageous.<\/p>\n

Fuente: The Gospel According to St. Mark: A Devotional Commentary<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

7<\/p>\n

The point to be noted is that being with Jesus was regarded as significant. Association indicates fellowship or participation.<\/p>\n

Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

A SHIPWRECK is a melancholy sight, even when no lives are lost. It is sad to think of the destruction of property, and disappointment of hopes which generally attend it. It is painful to see the suffering and hardship, which the ship’s crew often have to undergo in their struggle to escape from drowning. Yet no shipwreck is half so melancholy a sight as the backsliding and fall of a true Christian. Though raised again by God’s mercy, and finally saved from hell, he loses much by his fall. Such a sight we have brought before our minds in the verses we have now read. We are there told that most painful and instructive story, how Peter denied his Lord.<\/p>\n

Let us learn, in the first place, from these verses, how far and how shamefully a great saint may fall. We know that Simon Peter was an eminent apostle of Jesus Christ. He was one who had received special commendation from our Lord’s lips, after a noble confession of His Messiahship: “Blessed art thou, Simon Barjona:” “I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven.” He was one who had enjoyed special privileges, and had special mercies shown to him. Yet here we see this same Simon Peter so entirely overcome by fear that he actually denies his Lord. He declares that he knows not Him whom he had accompanied and lived with for three years! He declares that he knows not Him who had healed his own wife’s mother, taken him up into the mount of transfiguration, and saved him from drowning in the sea of Galilee! And he not only denies his Master once, but does it three times! And he not only denies Him simply, but does it “cursing and swearing”! And above all, he does all this in the face of the plainest warnings, and in spite of his own loud protestation that he would do nothing of the kind, but rather die!<\/p>\n

These things are written to show the Church of Christ what human nature is, even in the best of men. They are intended to teach us that, even after conversion and renewal of the Holy Ghost, believers are compassed with infirmity and liable to fall. They are meant to impress upon us the immense importance of daily watchfulness, prayerfulness, and humility so long as we are in the body. “Let him that thinketh he standeth, take heed lest he fall.”<\/p>\n

Let us carefully remember that Simon Peter’s case does not stand alone. The word of God contains many other examples of the infirmity of true believers, which we shall do well to observe. The histories of Noah, Abraham, David, Hezekiah, will supply us with mournful proof, that “the infection of sin remains even in the regenerate,” and that no man is so strong as to be beyond the danger of falling. Let us not forget this. Let us walk humbly with our God. “Happy is the man that feareth alway.” (Pro 28:14.)<\/p>\n

Let us learn, in the second place, from these verses, how small a temptation may cause a saint to have a great fall. The beginning of Peter’s trial was nothing more than the simple remark of “a maid of the High Priest.” “Thou also wert with Jesus of Nazareth.” There is nothing to show that these words were spoken with any hostile purpose. For anything we can see, they might fairly mean that this maid remembered that Peter used to be a companion of our Lord. But this simple remark was enough to overthrow the faith of an eminent apostle, and to make him begin to deny his Master. The chiefest and foremost of our Lord’s chosen disciples is cast down, not by the threats of armed men, but by the saying of one weak woman!<\/p>\n

There is something deeply instructive in this fact. It ought to teach us that no temptation is too small and trifling to overcome us, except we watch and pray to be held up. If God be for us we may remove mountains and get the victory over a host of foes. “I can do all things,” says Paul, “through Christ that strengtheneth me.” (Php 4:13.) If God withdraw His grace, and leave us to ourselves, we are like a city without gates and walls, a prey to the first enemy, however weak and contemptible.<\/p>\n

Let us beware of making light of temptations because they seem little and insignificant. There is nothing little that concerns our souls. A little leaven leaveneth the whole lump. A little spark may kindle a great fire. A little leak may sink a great ship. A little provocation may bring out from our hearts great corruption, and end in bringing our souls into great trouble.<\/p>\n

Finally, let us learn from these verses that backsliding brings saints into great sorrow. The conclusion of the passage is very affecting. “Peter called to mind the words that Jesus said unto him, Before the cock crow thou shalt deny me thrice.” Who can pretend to describe the feelings that must have flashed across the apostle’s mind? Who can conceive the shame, and confusion, and self-reproach, and bitter remorse which must have overwhelmed his soul? To have fallen so foully! To have fallen so repeatedly! To have fallen in the face of such plain warnings! All these must have been cutting thoughts. The iron must indeed have entered into his soul. There is deep and solemn meaning in the one single expression used about him-“when he thought thereon he wept.”<\/p>\n

The experience of Peter is only the experience of all God’s servants who have yielded to temptation. Lot, and Samson, and David, and Jehoshaphat in Bible history-Cranmer and Jewell in the records of our own English Church-have all left evidence, like Peter, that “the backslider in heart shall be filled with his own ways.” (Pro 14:14.) Like Peter, they erred grievously. Like Peter, they repented truly. But, like Peter, they found that they reaped a bitter harvest in this world. Like Peter, they were freely pardoned and forgiven. But, like Peter, they shed many tears.<\/p>\n

Let us leave the passage with the settled conviction that sin is sure to lead to sorrow, and that the way of most holiness is always the way of most happiness. The Lord Jesus has mercifully provided that it shall never profit His servants to walk carelessly and to give way to temptation. If we will turn our backs on Him we shall be sure to smart for it. Though He forgives us, He will make us feel the folly of our own ways. Those that follow the Lord most fully, shall always follow Him most comfortably. “Their sorrows shall be multiplied who hasten after other gods.” (Psa 16:4.)<\/p>\n

Fuente: Ryle’s Expository Thoughts on the Gospels<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

Mar 14:66. Beneath. Below the hall where the trial took place.<\/p>\n

One of the maids. The same one mentioned by Matthew and Luke, possibly, but not necessarily the porteress referred to by John.<\/p>\n

Fuente: A Popular Commentary on the New Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

This last paragraph of the chapter gives us an account of the fall and rising of Peter; of his sin in denying Christ, and of his recovery by repentance. Both are considered distinctly in the notes of Mat 26:69. that which is here farther to be taken notice of, is as followeth. <\/p>\n

Observe, 1. That amongst all the apostles and disciples of Christ, we meet not with any so extraordinary, either for faith or professor, Mat 4:18 and a glorious confessor, Mat 16:16. Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God. Which be the foundation of the gospel church in all ages: and Christ was pleased to put that honour upon Peter, as to use his ministry, in first laying the foundation of a Christian church among the Jews and Gentiles, he being the first preacher to them of that faith which he did here confess.<\/p>\n

To the Jews, Acts 2. where we read of three thousand souls converted and baptized; and to the Gentiles, Acts 10. in the conversion of Cornelius and his friends, whom God directed to send, not to Jerusalem for James, not to Damascus for St. Paul, but to Joppa for Peter; whom Christ had appointed for that work, that he might tell him words by which he and his household should be saved.<\/p>\n

Observe, 2. The great and mighty courage which was found in St. Peter.<\/p>\n

1. At the command of Christ he adventures to walk on the waves of the sea, Mat 14:28. being firmly persuaded, that whatsoever Christ commanded his disciples to do, he would give them strength and ability to perform.<\/p>\n

And, 2. It was a noble courage which enabled him to say, Thou I die with thee, yet will I not deny thee. No doubt the good man really resolved to do as he said, little suspecting that he should, with horrid oaths and bitter imprecautions, deny and abjure his dying Master.<\/p>\n

“Lord! how prone are we to think our hearts better than they are! our grace stronger than it is! Not all the instances we have of human frailty in ourselves, or all the scars, marks, and wounds, upon some of the best and holiest of men, by reason of their sad and shameful falls, will sufficiently convince us of our wretched impotency, and how unable we are to do good or resist evil, by our own shattered and impaired strength.”<\/p>\n

3. An undaunted courage, and heroic greatness of mind, appeared in this apostle, when he told the Jews to their faces that they were guilty of murder, and must never expect salvation any other way, than by faith in that Jesus whom they had ignominioiusly crucified, and unjustly slain. Nor did St. Peter say this in a corner, or behind the curtain, but in the sanhedrin, that open court of judicature, which had so lately sentenced and condemned his Lord and Master.<\/p>\n

Observe, 3. St. Peter’s profound humility and lowliness of mind: it was a mighty honour that Christ put upon him in making use of his ministry, for laying the foundation of a Christian church, both among Jews and Gentiles.<\/p>\n

And, accordingly, Cornelius, Acts 10 would have entertained him with expressions of more than ordinary honour and veneration, falling down at his feet, and ready to adore him; but this humble apostle was so afar from complying with it, that he plainly told him that he was no other than such a man as himself. And when our Lord, by a stupendous act of condescension, stooped so low as to wash his disciple’s feet, St. Peter could by no means be persuaded to admit of it neither could be introduced personally to accept it, till Christ was in a sort forced to threaten him into obedience, and a compliance with it, Joh 13:8.<\/p>\n

Observe, How admirable was his love unto, and how burning his zeal for, his Lord and Master, insomuch that he could and did appeal to his omnisciency for the truth and sincerity of it; Lord, thou knowest all things; thou knowest that I love thee.<\/p>\n

It was love that caused him to draw his sword in his Master’s defence against a band of soldiers, and an armed multitude.<\/p>\n

It was love that caused him to adventure on the greatest difficulties, and to expose his life to the greatest hazards.<\/p>\n

It was love that caused him to engage so deep, as to suffer and die, rather than deny him.<\/p>\n

These were his exemplary virtues. His failings were these:<\/p>\n

First, too great a confidence of his own strength, notwithstanding Christ had particularly told him that Satan had desired to winnow him as wheat. None are so likely to be overcome by a temptation, as those who are least afraid of it; none so ready to fall, as those that think it impossible to fall. It is a dangerous thing to believe, that because we have long kept our innocence, we can never lose it; and to conclude, because we have been once or twice victorious over temptations, we must be ever conquerors, Let him that thinketh he standeth, take heed lest he fall 1Co 10:12 : that is, let him keep a jealous eye upon the weakness and inconstancy of his nature, and with a believing eye look up to the power and promise of God, that he may be preserved from falling, and presented faultless in the day of Christ.<\/p>\n

Secondly, His fears overcame his faith. The insolent affronts offered to his injured Master caused him to forget his former resolutions, and instead of being a valiant confessor, he turns a shameful renegado, renouncing him for whom a little before he resolved to die.<\/p>\n

Learn hence, That slavish fear is a most tumultuous and ungovernable passion; its powerful assaults not only vanquish the strongest reason, but sometimes overcome the strongest faith. It is a weapon which the tempter uses, to the discomfort of some, and destruction of others, and therefore ought to be guarded against by those who set any value on the peace and comfort of their souls.<\/p>\n

Thirdly, One sin drew on another; his sinful equivocation in saying, I know not the man, prepared him for a downright denial, and that for an abjuration of him, with an imprecation and an anathema, swearing that he knew not the man.<\/p>\n

“Ah Peter! is this thy owning thy Lord? Is this thy not being offended, though all should be offended? Is this thy dying with him, rather than deny him? What! hast thou forgot all thy promises and engagements to him, and all the dear and sweet pledges of his love, so lately shown to thee? Surely I have learnt from thy example, that it is as dangerous to trust an heart of flesh, as to rely upon an arm of flesh; for had not thy denied and forsaken Master prayed for thee, and timely succoured thee, Satan would not only have winnowed thee like wheat, but ground thee to powder.”<\/p>\n

Fourthly, Observe how many complicated sins were included in this sin of Peter’s. The highest ingratitude to his Master; unpardonable rashness, in venturing into such company, tarrying there so long, and without a call, making bold with a temptation; and for a time there was impenitence and hardness of heart.<\/p>\n

It is holy and safe to resist the beginnings of sin; if we yield to Satan in one temptation, he will certainly assault us with more and stronger.<\/p>\n

Peter proceeded here from a denial to a lie, from a lie to an oath, from an oath to a curse. Let us resist sin at first: for then have we most power, and sin has least. And the Lord looked on Peter, and Peter remembered the word of the Lord, and went out, and wept bitterly.<\/p>\n

Observe, If Christ had not looked towards Peter, Peter would never more have looked after Christ; nor was it barely the turn of Christ’s bodily eye that wrought this disciple to a sorrowful remembrance of his sin; had not this outward look been accompanied with the inward and secret influences of his Spirit, it had certainly proved ineffectual.<\/p>\n

Christ looked on Judas after his treason; aye, and reproved him too: but neither that look nor that reproof did break his heart. As the sun with the same beams softens wax and hardens clay, so a look from the same Christ leaves Judas hard and impenitent, and melts down Peter to tears.<\/p>\n

Though none can say, that tears are always a sign of true repentance, yet certainly when they flow from a heart duly sensible of sin, and deeply affected with sorrow, it administers matter of hope that there is sincere repentance. Peter, after he had wept bitterly for sin, never more returned to the after-commission of sin; but he that was before timorous as an hare became afterward bold as a lion. He that once so shamefully denied, nay, abjured, his Master, afterwards openly confessed with his blood.<\/p>\n

It is usually observed, that a broken bone once well set, never more breaks again in the same place; a returning backslider, when once restored, contracts such an hatred of former sins, as never more to run into the commission of them.<\/p>\n

Let St. Peter;s fall then be a warning to all professors against presumptuous confidence, and his restoration be an encouragement to all backsliders to renew their faith and repentance. Amen.<\/p>\n

Fuente: Expository Notes with Practical Observations on the New Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

Mar 14:66-72. And as Peter was beneath in the palace This whole paragraph respecting Peters three-fold denial of Christ is explained at large in the notes on Mat 26:69-75. When he thought thereon he wept In the original it is, , which words are interpreted very differently by different commentators. Dr. Whitby thinks our translation of the words may be maintained; for though Casaubon, says he, gave no instance of this signification of the word, Constantine proves, out of Philoponus, Dionysius, and Basil, that it signifies , to consider of, and ponder, or fix the mind upon a thing. So Eustathius; the word , respects either the action, and then it signifies exactly to take it in hand, or the mind, and then it signifies to consider of it, as we are able; or as Phavorinus interprets it, , aptly and wisely to consider of it. Dr. Campbell, also, after a critical examination of the text, and of the different interpretations which learned men have given of it, says, I think, with Wetstein, that the sense exhibited by the English translation is the most probable. Dr. Macknight, however, gives it as his opinion, that the original expression should be rendered, and throwing his garment (that is, the veil which the Jewish men used to wear) over his head, he wept; For the expression, says he, is elliptical, and must be supplied thus, , as is evident from Lev 19:19, LXX. Besides, it was the custom of persons in confusion to cover their heads, Jer 14:3-4. Thus also Elsner, Salmasius, Bos, and Waterland understand the words. It may not be improper to mention one more interpretation of the passage, adopted by Raphelius and some other learned critics, which is, throwing himself out of the company, namely, in a passionate manner, (which it is very probable he did,) he wept. This exposition, it must be acknowledged, makes Marks words agree in sense with those of the other evangelists, who say, He went forth and wept; and plain it is, says Dr. Whitby, that in the book of Maccabees the word often signifies, irruens, or se projiciens, rushing, or, casting ones self out. <\/p>\n

Fuente: Joseph Bensons Commentary on the Old and New Testaments<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

Mar 14:66-72. Peters Denial.Peter had followed into the inner court of the chief priests palace (Mar 14:54). Here he is challenged by a maid-servant. He denies all knowledge and understanding of her meaning. The redundancy of the sentence befits his embarrassment. Later, in the porch that gave access to the courtyard, the maid repeats her challenge. Peter denies again. The third denial is accompanied with oaths. Mk. retains his second cock-crow.<\/p>\n

Mar 14:72. The word rendered when he thought thereon * is obscure. It may also mean answering. Peter recalled the word of Jesus, and his tears were his answer (see Swete). [J. H. Moulton points out that the verb is found in the papyri in the sense to set about doing a thing. So here he set to and wept, which is practically equivalent to RV. See also Allens note.A. S. P.]<\/p>\n

Fuente: Peake’s Commentary on the Bible<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

Verse 66 <\/p>\n

Beneath in the palace; that is, in the lower part of the hall in which the priests were assembled. That he was in the same apartment with them is shown from Luke 22:55,61–One of the maids. She had admitted him at John’s request; and it seems she recognized him afterwards. (John 18:16,17.)<\/p>\n

Fuente: Abbott’s Illustrated New Testament<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

THE DENIAL <\/p>\n

66 And as Peter was beneath in the palace, there cometh one of the maids of the high priest: 67 And when she saw Peter warming himself, she looked upon him, and said, And thou also wast with Jesus of Nazareth. 68 But he denied, saying, I know not, neither understand I what thou sayest. And he went out into the porch; and the cock crew. 69 And a maid saw him again, and began to say to them that stood by, This is one of them. 70 And he denied it again. And a little after, they that stood by said again to Peter, Surely thou art one of them: for thou art a Galilaean and thy speech agreeth thereto. 71 But he began to curse and to swear, saying, I know not this man of whom ye speak. 72 And the second time the cock crew. And Peter called to mind the word that Jesus said unto him, Before the cock crow twice, thou shalt deny me thrice. And when he thought thereon, he wept. <\/p>\n

One of the witnesses at O.J. Simpsons murder trial was condemned out of hand for saying that he\/she heard a black person saying something. The basis of the condemnation was that you cannot tell race from the sound of speech. Humm, I always thought that the witness could have been correct. Not that you can ALWAYS tell race from voice, but often you can. It is not voice itself but the terms used, the inflection and the attitude. This passage makes it clear that there is basis for such thinking in that they recognized Peter as Galilean from his speech as well as other things.<\/p>\n

After all can we not recognize someone as being from the south of the United States by their “southern drawl” and the New Yorker from his unique verbal skills? Not always, but often this is the case.<\/p>\n

Peter was one of the twelve and he wanted to be close to the Lord but not too close. He did not want to be killed or condemned but he did want to be close to Him. This may have been love commitment or just curiosity but I would guess the first two were most important to Peter.<\/p>\n

The question for the reader relates to how are you when people begin to question the Lord in public. Are you outward in your support of God and His things or do you just settle into the crowd as an observer? Are you bold in your witness for Him? Are you up front and in the face of opposition or way in the background?It is hard to be a solid defender of God and the Word if you do not know the answers to the critic’s statements\/questions. This is why KNOWING the Word is so very important to the believer. The church is supposed to be training the believer to stand as a witness in this life, but I fear most churches are just teaching the believer to look for what benefit the Lord can bring to them.<\/p>\n

Our pastors and teachers need to be not only teaching the Word of God in detail so that we know what it says, but they should be teaching us the art of apologetics – the giving of an answer for our faith. Knowing the Word is step one and step two is being able to defend the Word. It is not that we need to prove the Word is valid, but we need to answer the critic’s unbelief and incorrect representation of the Word.<\/p>\n

Critics can have good sounding sound bites, but they need to be held accountable for the lack of support to those sound bites. Al Gore has been given the Nobel Peace Prize for his environmental work even though many scientists tell us that it is based on false assumptions and poor data. Anyone can make anything sound great, but to give it legs to stand on is another thing all together.<\/p>\n

The Word can and does stand on its own, but we need to be able to point out the fallacious thinking of the false teachers. If Christians do not stand up to the falsehood in our world it will only grow in strength and stature due to our inability to discredit it. <\/p>\n

There are apologists today that have been condemned for their work against falsehood, yet those condemning them are unable to do that same, needed, work. We cannot just get along in this life; we must be standing alone on the hill as a beacon to the lost. If we are blending in with the lost they can never know the brilliance of this Christ that was so easily condemned by the Jewish leaders.<\/p>\n

Fuente: Mr. D’s Notes on Selected New Testament Books by Stanley Derickson<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

14:66 {16} And as Peter was beneath in the palace, there cometh one of the maids of the high priest:<\/p>\n

(16) A grievous example of the frailness of man together with a most comfortable example of the mercy of God, who gives the spirit of repentance and faith to his elect.<\/p>\n

Fuente: Geneva Bible Notes<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

Peter’s denial of Jesus 14:66-72 (cf. Matthew 26:69-75; Luke 22:55-62; John 18:16-18, 25-27)<\/span><\/p>\n

This event happened below in the courtyard while the hearing just described continued on the floor above. These verses resume what Mark introduced in Mar 14:54. The events were contemporaneous with Jesus’ examination by the Sanhedrin (Mar 14:55-65).<\/p>\n

"The irony inherent in the situation is evident when the force of juxtaposing Mar 14:65 and Mar 14:66-72 is appreciated. At the precise time when the court attendants were heaping scorn and derision upon Jesus’ claim to be the Messiah, the prophecy that Peter would deliberately deny him was being fulfilled." [Note: Lane, p. 541.] <\/span><\/p>\n

Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

Peter’s presence was a testimony to His love for Jesus. Unfortunately his love could not stand the test of fear. [Note: Wessel, p. 771.] <\/span> The girl’s description of Jesus ("that Nazarene, Jesus") made it clear that Peter was among enemies. She had probably seen Peter with Jesus in the temple or the city during that week. Peter denied being one of Jesus’ disciples "using the form common in rabbinical law for a formal, legal denial." [Note: Lane, p. 542.] <\/span> Peter then left the warmth and light of the fire in the center of the courtyard and sought refuge in the shadows of the archway that led into the street.<\/p>\n

Some later manuscripts add "and a cock crowed" at the end of Mar 14:68. Probably scribes added these words in view of Jesus’ prediction in Mar 14:30 and the fulfillment in Mar 14:72.<\/p>\n

Fuente: Expository Notes of Dr. Constable (Old and New Testaments)<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n

CHAPTER 14:66-72 (Mar 14:66-72)<\/p>\n

THE FALL OF PETER<\/p>\n

“And as Peter was beneath in the court, there cometh one of the maids of the high priest; and seeing Peter warming himself, she looked upon him, and saith, Thou also wast with the Nazarene, even Jesus. But he denied, saying, I neither know, nor understand what thou sayest: and he went out into the porch; and the cock crew. And the maid saw him, and began again to say to them that stood by, This is one of them. But he again denied it. And after a little while again they that stood by said to Peter, Of a truth thou art one of them; for thou art a Galilean. But he began to curse, and to swear, I know not this man of whom ye speak. And straightway the second time the cock crew. And Peter called to mind the word, how that Jesus said unto him, Before the cock crow twice, thou shalt deny Me thrice. And when he thought thereon, he wept.” Mar 14:66-72 (R.V.)<\/p>\n

THE fall of Peter has called forth the easy scorn of multitudes who never ran any risk for Christ. But if he had been a coward, and his denial a dastardly weakness, it would not be a warning for the whole Church, but only for feeble natures. Whereas the lesson which it proclaims is this deep and solemn one, that no natural endowments can bear the strain of the spiritual life. Peter had dared to smite when only two swords were forthcoming against the band of Roman soldiers and the multitude from the chief priests. After the panic in which all forsook Jesus, and so fulfilled the prediction “ye shall leave Me alone,” none ventured so far as Peter. John indeed accompanied him; but John ran little risk, he had influence and was therefore left unassailed, whereas Peter was friendless and a mark for all men, and had made himself conspicuous in the garden. Of those who declaim about his want of courage few indeed would have dared so much. And whoever misunderstands him, Jesus did not. He said to him, “Satan hath desired to have you (all) that he may sift you like wheat, but I have prayed for thee (especially) that thy strength fail not.” Around him the fiercest of the struggle was to rage, as around some point of vantage on a battlefield; and it was he, when once he had turned again, who should stablish his brethren (Luk 22:31-32).<\/p>\n

God forbid that we should speak one light or scornful word of this great apostle! God grant us, if our footsteps slip, the heart to weep such tears as his.<\/p>\n

Peter was a loving, brave and loyal man. But the circumstances were not such as human bravery could deal with. Resistance, which would have kindled his spirit, had been forbidden to him, and was now impossible. The public was shut out, and he was practically alone among his enemies. He had come “to see the end,” and it was a miserable sight that he beheld. Jesus was passive, silent, insulted: His foes fierce, unscrupulous and confident. And Peter was more and more conscious of being alone, in peril, and utterly without resource. Moreover sleeplessness and misery lead to physical languor and cold, [8] and as the officers had kindled a fire, he was drawn thither, like a moth, by the double wish to avoid isolation and to warm himself. In thus seeking to pass for one of the crowd, he showed himself ashamed of Jesus, and incurred the menaced penalty, “of him shall the Son of man be ashamed, when he cometh.” And the method of self-concealment which he adopted only showed his face, strongly illuminated, as St. Mark tells us, by the flame.<\/p>\n

If now we ask for the secret of his failing resolution, we can trace the disease far back. It was self-confidence. He reckoned himself the one to walk upon the waters. He could not be silent on the holy mount, when Jesus held high communion with the inhabitants of heaven. He rebuked the Lord for dark forebodings. When Jesus would wash his feet, although expressly told that he should understand the act hereafter, he rejoined, Thou shalt never wash my feet, and was only sobered by the peremptory announcement that further rebellion would involve rejection. He was sure that if all the rest were to deny Jesus, he never should deny Him. In the garden he slept, because he failed to pray and watch. And then he did not wait to be directed, but strove to fight the battle of Jesus with the weapons of flesh. Therefore he forsook Him and fled. And the consequences of that hasty blow were heavy upon him now. It marked him for the attention of the servants: it drove him to merge himself in the crowd. But his bearing was too suspicious to enable him to escape unquestioned.<\/p>\n

The first assault came very naturally, from the maid who kept the door, and had therefore seen him with John. He denied indeed, but with hesitation, not so much affirming that the charge was false as that he could not understand it. And thereupon he changed his place, either to escape notice or through mental disquietude; but as he went into the porch the cock crew. The girl however was not to be shaken off: she pointed him out to others, and since he had forsaken the only solid ground, he now denied the charge angrily and roundly. An hour passed, such an hour of shame, perplexity and guilt, as he had never known, and then there came a still more dangerous attack. They had detected his Galilean accent, while he strove to pass for one of them. And a kinsman of Malchus used words as threatening as were possible without enabling a miracle to be proved, since the wound had vanished: “Did I myself not see thee in the garden with Him?” Whereupon, to prove that his speech had nothing to do with Jesus, he began to curse and swear, saying, I know not the man. And the cock crew a second time, and Peter remembered the warning of his Lord, which then sounded so harsh, but now proved to be the means of his salvation. And the eyes of his Master, full of sorrow and resolution, fell on him. And he knew that he had added a bitter pang to the sufferings of the Blessed One. And the crowd and his own danger were forgotten, and he went out and wept.<\/p>\n

It was for Judas to strive desperately to put himself right with man: the sorrow of Peter was for himself and God to know.<\/p>\n

What lessons are we taught by this most natural and humbling story? That he who thinketh he standeth must take heed lest he fall. That we are in most danger when self-confident, and only strong when we are weak. That the beginning of sin is like the letting out of water. That Jesus does not give us up when we cast ourselves away, but as long as a pulse of love survives, or a spark of loyalty, He will appeal to that by many a subtle suggestion of memory and of providence to recall His wanderer to Himself.<\/p>\n

And surely we learn by the fall of this great and good apostle to restore the fallen in the spirit of meekness, considering ourselves lest we also be tempted, remembering also that to Peter, Jesus sent the first tidings of His resurrection, and that the message found him in company with John, and therefore in the house with Mary. What might have been the issue of his anguish if these holy ones had cast him off?<\/p>\n

Fuente: Expositors Bible Commentary<\/b><\/i><\/h4>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

And as Peter was beneath in the palace, there cometh one of the maids of the high priest: 66 72. The Denial of our Lord by St Peter 66. And as Peter ] During the sad scene enacted in the hall of trial above, an almost sadder moral tragedy had been enacted in the court … Continue reading “Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Mark 14:66”<\/span><\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-24806","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-commentary"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/24806","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=24806"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/24806\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=24806"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=24806"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.biblia.work\/bible-commentary\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=24806"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}