Now Peter was sitting outside in the courtyard, and a certain servant-girl came to him and said, “You too were with Jesus the Galilean.” But he denied it before them all, saying, “I do not know what you are talking about.” And when he had gone out to the gateway, another servant-girl saw him and said to those who were there, “This man was with Jesus of Nazareth.” And again he denied it with an oath, “I do not know the man.” And a little later the bystanders came up and said to Peter, “Surely you too are one of them; for the way you talk gives you away.” Then he began to curse and swear, “I do not know the man!” And immediately a cock crowed. And Peter remembered the word which Jesus had said, “Before a cock crows, you will deny Me three times.” And he went out and wept bitterly. (26:69-75)

The single greatest gift God could conceivably give to mankind is forgiveness of sins. Without forgiveness, there could be no salvation from sin, no reconciliation with God, no spiritual life, no victory over death, no prospect of heaven.

The Lord revealed Himself to Moses as “the Lord, the Lord God, compassionate and gracious, slow to anger, and abounding in lovingkindness and truth; who keeps lovingkindness for thousands, who forgives iniquity, transgression and sin” (Ex. 34:6-7). The prophet Micah proclaimed, “Who is a God like Thee, who pardons iniquity?” (Mic. 7:18). The apostle John declared, “If we walk in the light as He Himself is in the light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus His Son cleanses us from all sin. . . . If we confess our sins, He is faithful and righteous to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness” (1 John 1:7, 9).

Peter’s denial of the Lord is usually looked on as a great tragedy, which it obviously was. But viewed in the light of Peter’s repentance and the Lord’s gracious forgiveness, the story also brings great encouragement.

In all the history of redemption, few saints have fallen to the depths of sin and unfaithfulness that Peter did in denying Jesus. Yet few saints have been so powerfully used by God as Peter was after he repented and was restored. The account of his denial is a sobering testimony to the weakness of the flesh, but it is also an encouraging testimony to the power of God’s grace. Even in the extremity of His children’s sin, the Lord is there to forgive and to restore.

Every Christian at times comes before the Lord overwhelmed and broken by the awareness of his sinfulness. A person who never has such an experience either is very cold spiritually or is not a Christian at all. Nothing is more shattering to a believer than suddenly realizing he has denied the Lord by what he has said or not said, done or not done. And yet nothing is more exhilarating to him than knowing God’s gracious forgiveness of the unfaithfulness after it is confessed.

Peter’s denial was not merely a spontaneous response to unexpected danger or embarrassment. He had already laid the groundwork for defection. Or, to use another metaphor, he had taken many steps toward denying Christ before he entered the courtyard of Caiaphas.

The first step was his boasting that “even though all may fall away because of You, I will never fall away” (Matt. 26:33). In speaking those words Peter not only revealed unfounded confidence in himself but directly contradicted His Lord’s prediction that all the disciples would fall away that very night (v. 31). Based on his feelings of self-confidence and devotion to Jesus, Peter considered himself incapable of disloyalty. He could imagine nothing that would cause him to waver, and not even the Lord’s explicit prediction could convince him otherwise. He was certain he had come to the place of spiritual maturity, with his priorities straight, his convictions steadfast, and his faithfulness invulnerable. It was therefore inconceivable to him that he could be capable of defecting from the Lord.

Peter’s second step toward denial was insubordination, manifested in his defiantly persisting to reject Jesus’ assessment of him. Even when the Lord singled him out and predicted he not only would flee like the rest but would deny Him three times before the next morning dawned, Peter blatantly contradicted Him and continued to defend his own faithfulness. Intensifying his previous assertion, he declared, “Even if I have to die with You, I will not deny You,” and his unjustified but impressive-sounding verbiage prompted the other disciples to say “the same thing” (v. 35). Mark reports that Peter repeatedly insisted on his loyalty (Mark 14:31).

Peter did not take seriously the voice of the living God he confessed with his mouth, and he rejected and resented His reproof. Like many believers since, he proudly refused to submit Himself to God’s Word and Spirit.

Peter’s third step toward denying Christ was prayerlessness. Like his boasting and insubordination, his prayerlessness was a manifestation of sinful self-confidence.

When Jesus took Peter, James, and John farther into the garden and left them to watch and pray while He spoke intimately with His Father, all three of the disciples fell asleep. When He found them asleep, Jesus addressed Peter as leader and spokesman of the Twelve, saying, “So, you men could not keep watch with Me for one hour? Keep watching and praying, that you may not enter into temptation” (Matt. 26:40-41). The Lord went away to pray privately two more times, and each time Peter and the others fell back to sleep (vv. 43, 45). Jesus had just warned them that “the spirit is willing, but the flesh is weak” (v. 41), but they felt no weakness and saw no need to be watchful or prayerful. Because they did not take seriously the Lord’s warnings about their deficiencies and frailties, they did not take seriously His admonition to be prepared and strengthened. Self-confidently trusting their own judgment above the Lord’s, they were indifferent to His call to prayer.

Peter’s fourth step toward denial was his independent, self-generated impulsiveness. Sensing no need to ask the Lord’s advice or help, he took matters into his own hands. As soon as the officers laid hands on Jesus, Peter “reached and drew out his sword, and struck the slave of the high priest, and cut off his ear” (Matt. 26:51: cf. John 18:10). Although Jesus had repeatedly taught the disciples that it was the Father’s plan for Him to suffer, die, and be raised (Matt. 16:21; 17:22-23; 20:18-19), Peter refused to believe Him. And because it was not in Peter’s plan for his Master to be harmed, he was willing to defy both human and divine authority in drawing his sword against those who came to arrest Jesus.

A fifth step toward Peter’s denial of Christ was his compromise in allowing himself to be in a place of spiritual danger—such as the courtyard of the high priest—where his faith might be tested above his ability to resist. The Lord’s promises not to allow His children “to be tempted beyond what [they] are able” (1 Cor. 10:13) and “to rescue the godly from temptation” (2 Pet. 2:9) do not apply to willful disobedience.

Peter could not accept the word of the Lord because he was so controlled by his ego and self-sufficiency that he felt infallible. And perhaps because he had just seen the entire multitude suddenly fall at Jesus’ feet (John 18:6), he also felt invincible as long as the Lord was nearby. If Jesus could miraculously save him from drowning when he tried to walk on the water (Matt. 14:31), He could protect him now.

But again Jesus had to tell Peter he was out of God’s will and pointed out to him how foolishly presumptuous he was to think that He, Jesus, needed to depend on Peter for safety (Matt. 26:52-53). Well-meaning and humanly courageous as he was, Peter continually placed his self-centered human understanding above the Lord’s divine revelation. His own human will was a barrier to obeying the Lord’s will.

It was therefore inevitable that Peter would collapse when his bravado proved hollow and his self-sufficiency came up deficient.

PETER’S COLLAPSE

Now Peter was sitting outside in the courtyard, and a certain servant-girl came to him and said, “You too were with Jesus the Galilean.” But he denied it before them all, saying, “I do not know what you are talking about.” And when he had gone out to the gateway, another servant-girl saw him and said to those who were there, “This man was with Jesus of Nazareth.” And again he denied it with an oath, “I do not know the man.” And a little later the bystanders came up and said to Peter, “Surely you too are one of them; for the way you talk gives you away.” Then he began to curse and swear, “I do not know the man!” And immediately a cock crowed. And Peter remembered the word which Jesus had said, “Before a cock crows, you will deny Me three times.” (26:69-75a)

At first reading, the gospels seem to give contradictory accounts of the first phases of Jesus’ trial. John reports that He was first taken to the house of Annas, the former high priest (John 18:13), whereas Matthew speaks of His being taken to the house of Caiaphas, the son-in-law of Annas and the ruling high priest at the time (Matt. 26:57).

The seeming discrepancy, however, is easily explained. In the ancient world it was common for several generations of a family to live under the same roof. It is therefore likely that the palatial mansion of the high priest had been enlarged over the years to accommodate Annas’s five sons, who had successively served as high priests, and now Caiaphas and his family. Large homes of that day backed to the street, with living areas facing a private, inner courtyard. With such a layout, Annas and Caiaphas would have had separate “houses,” or wings, of the manor while sharing a common courtyard. Consequently, the courtyard of Annas, of which John speaks (18:15-16), and the courtyard of Caiaphas, which Matthew mentions (26:57-58), were the same place. When Jesus was transferred from Annas’s house to Caiaphas’s, He was simply taken through the common courtyard or perhaps through a connecting passageway.

Peter had followed Jesus and His captors as far as the gate of the high priests’ mansion, but he was not allowed to enter the courtyard until another “disciple, who was known to the high priest, went out and spoke to the doorkeeper, and brought in Peter” (John 18:16). It seems most likely that the other disciple was John, since he liked to refer to himself anonymously, but there is no indication from the New Testament or from other sources as to how he had come to know the high priest. Nor is there any indication as to how long John was in the courtyard or what he did while there. He was used of the Lord to gain Peter’s entrance, and after that he disappeared from the scene.

Peter wanted to see the outcome of Jesus’ trial, although he should have known what it would be, because the Lord had told the disciples of it so often. He was afraid, yet he could not keep from following the Lord at a distance, even into the very lair of His enemies. His love for Christ was weak, but it was real. As he kept vigil, he hoped to go unnoticed in the large crowd of minor officials, soldiers, servants, and other onlookers who had assembled in the large courtyard.

By the time Jesus appeared before Caiaphas, it was probably about 1:00 A.M. While Peter was sitting outside in the courtyard, “with the officers, and warming himself at the fire” (Mark 14:54), a certain servant-girl came to him and said, “You too were with Jesus the Galilean.” The term Galilean was frequently used as an epithet of derision by citizens of Jerusalem, who felt themselves superior to their less sophisticated neighbors to the north. To refer to someone as a Galilean was to suggest he was backward and unprogressive.

The words of the servant-girl are slightly different in the various gospels, which suggests she made the same basic statement several times, and the fact that Peter denied it before them all indicates that many people in the crowd had heard her accusation. The order of the denials also seems to vary among the four gospels, which could be explained by the writers’ reporting different aspects of the three incidents of denial, each of which may have lasted several minutes or longer and involved considerably more dialogue than is recorded in Scripture.

Apparently Peter first said to the girl, “Woman, I do not know Him” (Luke 22:57), and then to the others (them all) who had been listening, “I do not know what you are talking about.” Peter had been called by Christ, lived with Him, learned from Him, and witnessed thousands of miracles performed by Him. He was not a young or new convert but the veteran of three years of intensive discipleship and the leader of the Twelve. Yet this intimate friend who only a few hours earlier had vowed to die before he would forsake Christ now denied even knowing Him.

Had Jesus commanded Peter to physically stand beside Him and defend Him whatever the cost, perhaps Peter could have mustered the courage for such a heroic display. He had, after all, drawn his sword and started to take on the entire retinue of soldiers and Temple police singlehandedly. But he stumbled when a much less dangerous demand was made of him. He may have planned how he would defend himself if confronted by soldiers in the courtyard, but he was totally unprepared when caught off guard by the much less threatening challenge that now faced him. He was prepared to do battle on his own terms but not on Satan’s and much less on Christ’s. Because of his self-assurance, he had neglected the Lord’s admonition to be on guard and to pray. Consequently he was vulnerable to a blind-side attack from a source he never expected.

In much the same way, Christians can plan detailed strategy for evangelism or for the defense of a cherished doctrine or moral standard, only to be confronted by an issue or circumstance they had never considered and for which they are totally unprepared. Like Peter, we often carefully prepare on the basis of our own wisdom and resources while neglecting the guidance of God’s Word and the empowering and leading of His Spirit which He provides through prayer.

Peter was like Elijah, who was brave when facing the 850 prophets of Baal and Asherah, but who, after he left the mountaintop of victory, foundered in fear over what one woman, Jezebel, might do to him. Peter was a living illustration of Paul’s admonition “Let him who thinks he stands take heed lest he fall” (1 Cor. 10:12). In the courtyard his valiant protestations were no longer heard, and the arrogant hero shriveled into a cringing coward. His self-preserving instincts prevailed, and his boldness evaporated.

A person’s involuntary response to the unexpected is a more reliable indicator of his character than his planned reaction to a situation he anticipates. It is when we are caught off guard that our true character is most likely to show itself. Peter’s proud self-confidence was his Achilles’ heel, and that, of course, was precisely where Satan aimed his arrow of temptation. Peter’s stubborn trust in himself and his unwillingness to fully trust in the Lord made him vulnerable to the simple taunt of a young servant girl.

To escape embarrassment, Peter inconspicuously “went out onto the porch” (Mark 14:68), which apparently was near the gateway. He probably walked away slowly so as not to attract attention or give the impression he was running away after being caught in a lie. The porch, or vestibule, was the second warmest place in the courtyard, protected by a wall in back and a roof overhead. Perhaps Peter wanted to be nearer the exit in case a Temple officer tried to arrest him. It was also darker there, and he would less likely be recognized than by the fire. But despite his precautions, “a little later” (Luke 22:58), another servant-girl saw him.

Obviously seeking to humiliate Peter, this servant-girl did not address him directly but rather said to the other bystanders who were there, “This man was with Jesus of Nazareth.” An unidentified man also joined in the accusation, saying, “You are one of them too!” (Luke 22:58a). To the girl, Peter denied . . . with an oath, “I do not know the man,” and to the other person he said with growing irritation, “Man, I am not!” (Luke 22:58b). This time he not only lied but did so with an oath, hoping to reinforce the deceit. A Jewish oath was always assumed to be made in God’s presence, whether or not His name was invoked. In effect, therefore, Peter called God as a witness to his lie. Angry, frustrated, embarrassed, trapped, and frightened, Peter desperately tried to hide his identity and especially his association with Jesus.

Going against the very grain of his nature as a child of God, Peter vehemently refused to acknowledge his relationship to his Savior and Lord. Because he was relying on his own wisdom and resources, he did not have the courage to confess Christ publicly. Although he was perplexed and weak, he continued to resist the Lord’s truth and the Lord’s help. Even when his exposure was obvious, Peter persisted in arrogant self-reliance.

Like many Christians who know the Bible well, are experienced in the things of God, and are active in the church, Peter felt himself to be spiritually complete. As Peter would soon discover, however, that is when a believer is most vulnerable of all.

Determined to stay near his Lord despite the embarrassment and danger, Peter perhaps drifted across the courtyard toward Caiaphas’s wing of the mansion, hoping perhaps to discover how the proceedings were going. By this time Jesus had been declared a blasphemer and was being beaten, spat upon, and taunted (see Mark 14:64-65). Because at one point Jesus was able to look at Peter (Luke 22:61), it is possible that much of Jesus’ abuse was witnessed by Peter and the others in the courtyard.

Probably incited by the events they saw transpiring in Caiaphas’s chambers, the crowd intensified its dogging of Peter. A little while later, which Luke specifies as being “after about an hour” (22:59), the bystanders came up and said to Peter, “Surely you too are one of them; for the way you talk gives you away.” Peter’s Galilean accent was readily recognized, and he was cornered again.

We learn from John that Peter was also recognized by sight. One member of the crowd was a slave of the high priest and a relative of Malchus, the man “whose ear Peter cut off.” Having been among the multitude who came to arrest Jesus, he said to Peter, “Did I not see you in the garden with Him?” (John 18:26).

At this point Peter hit rock bottom. Still refusing either to claim or to rely on Jesus, he dug himself still deeper into the denial as he began to curse and swear, “I do not know the man!” Katanathematiz (to curse) is a very strong term that involved pronouncing death upon oneself at the hand of God if one were lying. In perhaps the most serious taking of the Lord’s name in vain that is conceivable, Peter said, in essence, “May God kill and damn me if I am not speaking the truth.” Omnumi (to swear) was a less extreme pledge of truthfulness but was nevertheless a strong affirmation.

Peter had lost all sense of reality and seemingly all awareness of God. Comparison of the gospel accounts reveals that there were three periods or incidents of accusation and denial and that each incident involved repeated accusations by members of the crowd and repeated denials by Peter. As the accusations became more specific and incriminating, Peter’s denials became more intense and extreme.

Even “while [Peter] was still speaking” (Luke 22:60), immediately a cock crowed “a second time” (Mark 14:72). At this time also “the Lord turned and looked at Peter” (Luke 22:61), apparently through a window overlooking the courtyard. The look must have penetrated the disciple’s very soul, burning deep into his heart and conscience the evil of his sin. Seeing his Lord standing there with His hands bound and His face covered with spit and bruises was more than Peter could bear.

As if that visual indictment were not enough, while he stood transfixed, suffering the most excruciating pain of his life as he looked into his Lord’s eyes, Peter also remembered the word which Jesus had said, “Before a cock crows, you will deny Me three times.” As Jesus’ remembered words augmented His gaze, Peter’s already unbearable anguish was made still more unbearable.

PETER’S REPENTANCE

And he went out and wept bitterly. (26:75b)

The true Peter is not seen in his denial but in his repentance, the first stage of which was deep remorse. Finally realizing the grievousness of his sin, he turned from it in revulsion. Like Judas, he fled into the night; but unlike Judas, he returned to the Lord in faith. His faith had slipped and weakened, but it was genuine faith, and Jesus Himself had prayed that it would not fail (Luke 22:32).

When the magnitude of what he had done finally dawned on Judas, he experienced great regret and a kind of remorse. He probably wished he could live the last three years, and especially the last few hours, of his life over again. But he had no change of heart. He had never repented of his sins and received Jesus as Lord and Savior, and therefore, contrary to Peter, Judas had no faith to weaken. Jesus could not hold Judas because Judas never belonged to Him.

Overwhelmed by His Savior’s love and grace and by his own sin and unfaithfulness, Peter went out and wept bitterly. We are not told where he went or how long he stayed there. He may have returned to the Garden of Gethsemane, where earlier he had felt no need to pray. Wherever it was, it became a private place of confessing sin and seeking forgiveness.

Peter’s tragic experience in the garden teaches a profound lesson about self-trust and unpreparedness and about God’s forgiveness and restoration of a sinning saint. Although the awareness probably did not come to the disciple until his anguish subsided, he had learned never to distrust Jesus’ word again. It finally dawned on him that what the Lord said would happen would happen.

It was not until Peter saw the Lord’s face and remembered the Lord’s words that he came to his senses, acknowledged his sin and helplessness, and repented. His sin did not make him repent. Many people are very much conscious of sin in their lives, readily admitting its reality and its consequences. But until it is surrendered to Christ for forgiveness and cleansing, the mere acknowledgement of it will only drive a person deeper into despair and hopelessness and even deeper into sin. Forgiveness and restoration come only from turning from sin to God. That is why true preaching and teaching of the gospel is not simply calling people to turn from their sin. It is lifting up the Lord Jesus Christ so that, in His righteousness and grace, sinful men not only will discover the heinousness of their sin but also the only hope for its removal.

The Lord made good His promise that Peter’s faith would not fail. After appearing to the disciples several times after His resurrection, Jesus three times questioned Peter about his love for Him, just as Peter had three times denied that love. And just as he had thrice denied his love for Christ, Peter then thrice affirmed it (John 21:15-17).

Many years later, near the end of his life, Peter no doubt still remembered vividly that experience in the courtyard. The tragic event was probably in his mind as he admonished fellow believers: “Beloved, knowing this beforehand, be on your guard lest . . . you fall from your own steadfastness, but grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ” (2 Pet. 3:17-18).