If you would please turn within your Bibles to the Gospel of John, chapter 18, beginning at verse 12. John writes, ‘So the band of soldiers and their captain and the officers of the Jews arrested Jesus and bound him. First they led him to Annis for he was the father-in-law of Caiaphas who was high priest at you. It was Caiaphas who had advised the Jews that it would be expedient that one man should die for the people.
And Simon Peter followed Jesus, and so did another disciple. Since that disciple was known to the high priest, he entered with Jesus into the courtyard of the high priest. But Peter stood outside at the door. So the other disciple who was known to the high priest went out and spoke to the servant girl who kept watch at the door and brought Peter in.
The servant girl at the door said to Peter, ‘You also are not one of this man’s disciples, are you?’ He said, ‘I am not.’ Now the servants and officers had made a charcoal fire because it was cold and they were standing and warming themselves. Peter also was with them standing and warming himself. The high priest then questioned Jesus about his disciples and his teaching.
Now Simon Peter was standing and warming himself. So they said to him, ‘You also are not one of his disciples, are you?’ He denied it and said, ‘I am not.’ And one of the servants of the high priest, a relative of the man whose ear Peter had cut off, asked, ‘Did I not see you in the garden with him?’ Peter again denied it, and at once a rooster crowed.
Then they led Jesus from the house of Caiaphas to the governor’s headquarters. From there, we turn back to the Gospel of Matthew in chapter 26, beginning at verse 69. Now Peter was sitting outside in the courtyard. And a servant girl came up to him and said, ‘You also were with Jesus the Galilean.’ But he denied it before them all, saying, ‘I do not know what you mean.’
And when he went out to the entrance, another servant girl saw him, and she said to the bystanders, ‘This man was with Jesus of Nazareth.’ And again, he denied it with an oath. ‘I do not know the man.’ After a little while, the bystanders came up and said to Peter, ‘Certainly you too are one of them, for your accent betrays you.’
Then he began to invoke a curse on himself and to swear, ‘I do not know the man.’ And immediately the rooster crowed. And Peter remembered the saying of Jesus, ‘Before the rooster crows, you will deny me three times.’ And he went out and wept bitterly.
This is the word of the Lord. Let us pray.
Heavenly Father, you’ve spoken to us in the past. You’ve given us your word so that we may hear you speak to us now and in the present. We ask that you open our hearts and open our ears to hear you and to receive your word for us. We pray this in Jesus’s name. Amen.
So after being arrested in the garden of Gethsemane, Jesus was hauled off under armed guard and taken to the Jewish high priest. First, he was examined by Annis, a formerly appointed high priest. Then Jesus was brought to stand trial before Caiaphas, the presently appointed high priest, and the president of the Sanhedrin, the religious council of 71 elders.
Ultimately, Jesus was falsely accused, convicted, and condemned by these religious elites. Meanwhile, the synoptics describe Jesus’s disciples as having fled the scene of his arrest after a short skirmish, while John explains that they were permitted to leave at Jesus’s request. Both understandings are reasonably true since the disciples were fearful and they really could not know or expect that they would not be pursued.
There’s another universal detail here found within the overarching passion narrative which concerns Peter’s response to Jesus’s arrest. John tells us that after Jesus was led away, Simon Peter followed Jesus and so did another disciple. Since that disciple was known to the high priest, he entered with Jesus into the courtyard of the high priest. But Peter stood outside at the door.
So, the other disciple who was known to the high priest went out and spoke to the servant girl who kept watch at the door and brought Peter in. The devoted Peter followed behind the angry mob to see what would become of his rabbi and friend, apparently risking his life to do this. Peter risked arrest alongside Jesus as one of his followers, although the likelihood of that dramatically decreased after Jesus was in custody, but he couldn’t know that.
Peter also risked arrest for his own violent assault against Malchus despite there being no lasting or provable harm. But here, now unique to John’s gospel, we’re told that when Peter followed Jesus to the high priest’s residence, he was not alone. Another disciple followed with him. This other disciple is not named but is generally assumed to be the evangelist John himself. However, the identity of this unnamed disciple is less important than what they accomplished: which was getting Peter inside.
Peter’s initial difficulty is noteworthy because it shows that Peter was not yet closely identified with Jesus as one of his principal or foremost disciples. It shows that Peter was still just an inconsequential, unimportant, and socially irrelevant person. Showing that Peter was really just a nobody from nowhere as far as the world was concerned.
See the difficulty that Peter had gaining entrance. It emphasizes just how low Peter’s personal risk and his imminent danger was because the powers that be were not interested in him. They were unconcerned about him and whatever he may or may not have done. He was beneath their notice.
The fear that Peter undoubtedly felt, the fear that mentally justified the responses that he was about to give was a completely irrational, unnecessary, and unfounded fear.
Once he was allowed into the courtyard, the servant girl at the door said to Peter, ‘You also are not one of this man’s disciples, are you?’ To which he said, ‘I am not.’ Although the question is functionally the same, the way that John records it is subtly different from the synoptics because Matthew records her stating about Peter, ‘You also were with Jesus the Galilean,’ implying some kind of relationship of presence and proximity to Jesus.
Peter denied it, replying, ‘I do not know what you mean.’ But John records her as asking him, ‘You also are not one of this man’s disciples, are you?’ Specifically asking Peter about the quality of his relationship to Jesus, his discipleship, a quality which he now firmly denied, answering her with, ‘I am not.’
However, the phrasing of her question also implies something about that other disciple present, the disciple who was known to the high priest. When she asked Peter, ‘You also are not one of this man’s disciples, are you?’ she was actually asking Peter, ‘Are you also a disciple of Jesus like that disciple over there?’
This means that the other disciple, the one known to the high priest was publicly known as a disciple and a follower of Jesus. So like Peter, we might naturally assume that she was suggesting that if he did have such a relationship with Jesus that it might be frowned upon, that it would be a social negative for Peter.
But that really is not necessarily true because remember she just allowed Peter to enter at the request of this other known disciple of Jesus. This clue suggests that Peter’s fear and his worried concern really was unfounded.
The difference between the two similar questions is simply a difference of remembrance; that’s not the way I remember it happen. Besides, if Peter and the evangelist writer were the only disciples there present, then it really would be one man’s word against the other.
Since we’re reasonably confident that Peter really was the primary apostolic first-tier eyewitness source for the Gospel of Mark and that the other gospel writers Matthew and Luke would have needed to rely on his testimony on the testimony of the people who were there, it’s really not surprising that Peter’s version would be preferred because he was the one most involved in the moment and ultimately his was the most self-deprecating.
But between the two versions told of the story, at first glance, John’s account actually seems to put Peter into the less favorable perspective, which is what Mark usually does. While Peter’s denial of having a relationship with Jesus Christ is the main point of the story in all four gospels, the synoptics emphasize Peter’s denial as being a matter of cowardice, while John emphasizes how irrational and unnecessary Peter’s denial actually was, emphasizing how he had no reason to be fearful for himself in that moment.
Nevertheless, after his first denial, Peter came into the courtyard and was welcomed by those present. As he says, now the servants and officers had made a charcoal fire because it was cold and they were standing and warming themselves, and Peter also was with them standing and warming himself.
Then after some amount of time passed, Annas then sent Jesus bound to Caiaphas the high priest, while outside Peter was standing and warming himself.
Now, scripture does not tell us about who all was present there in the court. Nor does it tell us how many people there were. But obviously, there must have been at least four: Peter and his three interrogators. Regardless, no matter how many there were, there were enough for Peter to feel concerned and nervous while standing among them.
Within this courtyard, there were people standing around this fire pit, keeping warm. Shadows would dance in the firelight. Faces would become variably clear or obscured as darkness and light alternated and mixed. So, it’s reasonable for us to expect that even familiar people, like family or close friends, might appear as strangers in these early morning hours.
The recollections and remembrances of people would be hazy at best. Identities would be uncertain. People might question themselves asking, ‘Do I know this person?’ Even if that someone thought they knew them, there would still be enough doubt that it could be worthwhile to repeat a question and ask, ‘You also are not one of his disciples, are you?’
First, the servant girl had asked Peter this question, and now here’s some random person from the formerly angry and armed mob asking Peter if he was a disciple of Jesus. That question from them was probably Peter’s worst fear being realized. I mean, he likely worried and wondered, ‘Do they recognize me? Do they know who I am? Are they going to arrest me now?’
So, once again, he denied it and said, ‘I’m not.’ Similarly, and though it is worse for Peter in Matthew’s telling, someone from the crowd here accused him of being a compatriot of Jesus, saying, ‘This man was with Jesus of Nazareth.’ He denied it with an oath. The second time, Peter’s denial became more emphatic, as he not only denied knowing Jesus, but also knowingly swore against it with a false oath, technically violating the third commandment.
In his third and last denial, one of the servants of the high priest, a relative of the man whose ear Peter had cut off, someone interested, asked him, ‘Did I not see you in the garden with him?’ And Peter again denied him. Well, Matthew records, ‘After a little while, the bystanders came up and said to Peter, ‘Certainly you too are one of them, but your accent betrays you.”
He begins to invoke a curse on himself and swear, ‘I do not know the man.’ Well, Matthew differs on the specific question, asking Peter based on his Galilean accent versus recognizing Peter. The substance of the third denial remains the same.
These two questions are not a contradiction. They’re just different presentations. Both statements easily fit into the same conversation. If they actually were contradictions, one gospel would have to say the man said XYZ while another gospel would have to say that the man did not say XYZ. Those positive statements could both be true without contradiction.
Ultimately, three times Peter denied being a disciple of Jesus, a follower of Christ. Three times Peter denied knowing Jesus or having any relationship to him. Three times Peter denied even being in Jesus’s presence. Then immediately after his third denial, John tells us that at once a rooster crowed, as Matthew adds, ‘And he went out and wept bitterly.’
This is not a moment for us to say, ‘Poor Peter.’ His feelings were Peter’s own fault. He had no one to blame but himself. While we can empathize with Peter, we may withhold sympathy because he did deny Jesus willingly without cause and in spite of Jesus’s prophetic warning to him.
We can only imagine the thoughts that may have been going through Peter’s mind in that moment. While Matthew specifically tells us that Peter remembered the saying of Jesus, ‘Before the rooster crows, you will deny me three times,’ he tells us that Peter was certainly dwelling on Jesus’s prophecy.
Peter was remembering how just a few short hours ago he was filled with confident bluster, boldly telling Jesus, ‘I will lay down my life for you.’ To which Jesus responded, ‘Will you lay down your life for me? Truly, truly, I say to you, the rooster will not crow till you’ve denied me three times.’ And now he’s failed both Jesus and himself with these denials.
I cannot imagine the sheer guiltiness he felt having proven Jesus’s prophecy correct. I cannot imagine the degree of self-ramification, the level of self-reproach. I expect that in that moment he was so consumed by self-loathing. I also cannot help but wonder if Peter was beating himself up, accusing himself for his weakness, upset that he did not hold out for just another two minutes because of the immediacy of the crow.
Though I really don’t think two minutes would have helped Peter. Beyond dwelling upon Jesus’s prophetic word here, I would suspect that other things Jesus had said throughout his ministry were surfacing in Peter’s immediate recollection.
He might have remembered Jesus saying, ‘Everyone who acknowledges me before men, I also will acknowledge before my Father who is in heaven. But whoever denies me before men, I also will deny before my Father who is in heaven.’ So if so, then he probably thought that he had just blown it in the worst way possible, especially considering that he had placed himself into the perfect situation to affirm his relationship with Christ instead of running away and abandoning Jesus to his fate like the other disciples.
Peter had found a perfect opportunity to prove his faith and loyalty to Jesus and blew it. But if Peter was thinking clearly and logically in that moment, which he surely was not, as it was understandably an emotional time for him, recognizing the accuracy of Jesus’s prophecy, he should have been encouraged.
It would have been one thing if Jesus had generally said, ‘Oh, yeah. You believe that you would die for me? I bet by morning you’re going to deny me three times.’ But Jesus was very specific and very definite; ‘The rooster will not crow till you’ve denied me three times.’ He was definite on the number of denials and he was definite about the before, when such perfect accuracy could only be understood as positive evidence of Jesus being a prophet.
Such accuracy should have encouraged Peter to more readily believe and trust everything else that Jesus had said that night. If Jesus was right about this small, impossible to predict incident, then surely Jesus was right about everything else he promised.
Such accuracy should have prompted Peter to more firmly trust the hope. Because if Jesus was right about something so impossibly small, then he should also be right about something so impossibly big as being brought into the close family of God. Such accuracy should have helped Peter to believe and know that Jesus is Christ the Lord, especially because of how personally involved he was with this prophecy.
He definitely was not invested in ensuring the fulfillment of it. But that would only be if Peter was able to think clearly or understand the full story about what was really happening in those morning hours.
After Peter had denied Christ three times, and after the rooster had crowed, then they led Jesus from the house of Caiaphas to the governor’s headquarters. And it was early morning. Just think about it: 12 hours before, Jesus and his disciples were preparing to celebrate the Passover meal, the most joyful occasion in the Jewish calendar.
Six days before Jesus had been welcomed into Jerusalem to the roaring acclamation of the Jewish crowd. And now here’s Jesus unjustly condemned by the Jewish council as a blasphemer. And now he was being taken away to the Roman authorities for punishment.
Isn’t it amazing how quickly circumstances can change and how quickly people will turn against one another? Now, that was Peter. What about us? How do we relate to him? And what should we learn from his example and from his failure?
Honestly, when we think about it, Peter probably is the most relatable of apostles for ordinary Christians like us. I mean, he was a working man, right? Small business owner operating a fishing concern with his brother Andrew in Capernaum. He was a competitor of James and John with their family business. He was a family man; Matthew and Paul both describe Peter as being married, with Matthew telling us that his mother-in-law was part of his own household.
He was impetuous and hasty, always ready to leap without thinking first. Remember, Peter asked Jesus to call him out to walk to him on the water, and he was the first one to openly confess Jesus as the Christ. Peter was also rebuked by Jesus for suggesting that Jesus not do what he’d been sent by the Father to do with Jesus telling Peter, ‘Get behind me, Satan.’
But then he was also quick to rise up and defend Jesus with violence when they arrested him. And here Peter denies Jesus three times. Peter was also trusted by Jesus. He received special and unique revelations. Peter was invited to witness Jesus’s transfiguration. He was often approached as Jesus’s pointman, as a gatekeeper of access to Jesus.
Peter was invited to join Jesus in watching and praying earlier that night before his betrayal and arrest. Yet when he failed Jesus in that moment, he wasn’t alone, because his other two companions failed. Despite all his personal failings, Peter was one of the first to rush to see the empty tomb on the morning of the resurrection.
But then he would also be one of the first people to try and go back to life as usual after the resurrection before Pentecost. While he would eventually rise to prominence in the early Jewish Jerusalem church and he would be one of the first to bring the gospel to the Gentiles, although he was one of the twelve apostles, he still thought of himself as merely being a fellow elder and a witness of the sufferings of Christ, not claiming primacy for himself over others in the church.
Ultimately, Scripture shows us that as Peter grew in his Christlikeness and matured with time, he did learn from his mistakes and apparently increased in humility. So no matter who you are or what your life of Christian faith is like, there should be something about Peter that you can connect with and relate to.
Because, like Peter, you might act or speak without thinking first. You might be quick-tempered. You might feel like a failure in business, with your family, to yourself, or to Jesus. You might feel like your faith is weak. Or you might feel as if your faith is strong and unstoppable. You might have made a profession of faith in Christ but have seen very little in your life change.
You might be someone that people come to for spiritual counsel or guidance, or you might remember that you are a Christian just like every other Christian and be satisfied with it because you are no better or worse than any other. You are a sinner redeemed by Jesus Christ through God’s unconditional grace and mercy.
While some or all of those examples may be true for you, the part of Peter that every one of us can relate to, if we’re truly honest with ourselves, is the willingness and ease with which we each deny Christ before the world. Even consistent churchgoers and active church members are liable to be guilty of this charge.
We may even bear greater guilt for it because we do it without realizing. Just consider the world, society, and culture that we live in. Have you ever been seriously asked, ‘Are you a Christian? Are you a disciple or follower of Jesus Christ?’ And if you were asked that, how do you think you would answer?
The correct answer — and the answer you should want to expect yourself to give — is yes, of course I am. But when I just asked what your answer would be, if your first immediate inclination or response was anything along the lines of ‘it depends,’ then you would also be denying Christ just like Peter did.
Because your faithful answer does not depend. Your answer does not depend on whether the person asking you is a friend, a family member, or a perfect stranger. Your answer does not depend on whether you have known the person asking you for 30 years or whether you’ve only just met.
Your answer does not depend on whether or not the person asking you is a Christian. Your answer does not depend on who else is around within earshot who might overhear. Your answer does not depend on who you think the person means by ‘Christian.’ Your answer does not depend on the weather.
Your answer does not depend on how you feel that day. And your answer does not depend on whether or not you’re hungry. Your answer should either be yes or no, firmly and without equivocation. Because if your answer is not a hard yes, then it’s automatically a soft no.
Now whether or not that no answer is true is a completely different story. Such equivocation is not a sign of being unregenerate. It does not mean that a person has lost their assurance of salvation, and it does not mean that you have apostasized yourself or rejected your Christian faith.
But such an answer might be a sign that your faith is weaker than it could or should be. So pray that Christ would forgive you this failing, and then pray that he would strengthen your faith. Pray that he would give you more courage to be publicly faithful.
Or it may be a sign of your willingness to consider the potential social consequences of public faith and allowing those to influence your response. So pray that your fear of or concern for worldly opinion would be lessened.
Or it may be a sign of you unconsciously prioritizing your present worldly concerns over your concern for life in the world to come. So pray that you might better focus your gaze on Christ and avoid the temptations of worldly distractions.
Or it may be a sign that you were just simply caught off guard, surprised in the moment, because you’d never really given serious consideration to how you should answer someone in such a circumstance. So think about it and then pray all of the above because they’re each good things for every Christian to pray.
Or what if you were actually accused of being a Christian? Would someone ask you, ‘Are you sure that you are not a Christian? Because you talk like a Christian and you act like a Christian.’ How do you answer? Might you deny it from a false sense of humility?
Might you consider answering and just simply saying, ‘Oh, I just like being nice. I’m a good person. I try to do what the right thing is.’ Or what if you’re accused of not being a Christian? What if someone says to you, ‘You don’t look like a Christian. You don’t talk like a Christian. You don’t act like a Christian.’ How do you answer?
If your immediate response is to self-justify yourself as being a Christian, then appearances may or may not be your problem. If you’re accused of this and you are a professing and practicing Christian, then this might be an opportunity to respond to them with your own questions.
This may be an opportunity to probe their thoughts and ideas about Christians and Jesus and perhaps disabuse them of wrong or false notions. Perhaps this may be your opportunity to share Jesus with them and witness them being persuaded by the Holy Spirit of the goodness and rightness of the gospel.
You could respond and ask them, ‘Well, how do you think a Christian should look?’ Or, ‘How do you think Christians should talk?’ Or, ‘What should Christians be talking about?’ Or, ‘How do you think Christians should act?’
Remember, maybe they’ve had bad encounters with professed Christians and been hurt by them. Perhaps they’ve felt judged, unloved, and unwelcomed by professing Christians before.
Perhaps this is your opportunity to explain the truth to them and show them how Christians ought to be. Maybe this is your opportunity to tell them about and show them the true love of Jesus Christ.
But also remember Jesus said, ‘For each tree is known by its own fruit,’ and he commanded that you bear much fruit and so prove to be my disciples. So maybe this is also a reminder for you to examine yourself and your spiritual fruit.
Perhaps it’s an opportunity to examine what kind of spiritual fruit you’re producing. Truthfully, everyone produces some kind of spiritual fruit, whether it’s good and healthy fruit, bad and rotten fruit, or no fruit at all.
If they are right and these unbelievers cannot see any good fruit to prove your faith, then the absence of good spiritual fruit is also a denial of the Christ you claim to have faith in.
Other subtle ways that we all consistently deny Christ are found in our continuing acts of disobedience. Our willful continuing sins. Sadly, we deny Christ whenever we intentionally choose the bad rather than the good — whether that’s in our choices of media consumption, our lifestyle choices, our choice of entertainment, or in who we choose to spend time with or those we choose to avoid.
Such denials are unfortunate and sad. Such denials grieve the spirit of Christ within us. Such denials grieve Jesus Christ himself, even though he knows that we do not intend to deny him.
Such denials, whether we’re consciously denying a relationship with Christ as Peter did, or whether we deny him unwittingly, should also cause us to be grieved in our spirit as Peter surely was. Such denials cause us to feel remorse for them.
That remorse and grief over our denials should lead us to contrition and repentance, to come to Christ and ask for forgiveness and ask him for the courage and strength to not fail next time.
Such denials should not cause us to lose our hope, but instead they should cause us to cling more tightly to hope and the merciful, loving, and forgiving Savior.
While Jesus said, ‘For each tree is known by its own fruit,’ we also remember that Peter had asked him, ‘How often will my brother sin against me and I forgive him?’ As many as seven times? Jesus said to him, ‘I do not say to you seven times, but seventy-seven times.’
But seventy-seven was not a discreet or absolute number but a symbol for completeness, a number which really means “every time.” Truly, Jesus answered Peter’s question of how many times he should forgive with every time they ask for forgiveness.
Since we’re all like Peter, guilty of denying our Lord countless times, we also have a loving Savior to whom if we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.
So take heart and be encouraged because remember that you are a sinner redeemed by God’s grace who unfortunately still does things that need to be forgiven.
Remember that if you ask to be forgiven in Jesus’s name, then surely you shall be forgiven for his sake. Remember that although you may and you shall at times deny him with your words and deeds, if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God has raised him from the dead, you will be saved.
For with the heart one believes and is justified, and with the mouth one confesses and is saved. The scripture says, ‘Everyone who believes in him will not be put to shame.’
So confess and believe in Christ the Lord. Refute your denials by word and by deed and believe in your heart.
Ask to be forgiven and know that you are forgiven in the name of Christ. Know that Jesus loves you better and more perfectly than you love him, and know that he shall always forgive you, even your denying of him, every time you ask in faith and in hope. Amen.