Peters denials and the cocks crows

 

 Waldemar Janzen 29.03.2008

 

While reflecting on my chronological Gospel synchronization book “A Vida de Jesus nunca antes contada assim” and listening to a critique that I did not contemplate in it that Jesus talked at two different occasions about Peter denying him, I developed the following solution about this controversial issue:

 

The key phrases in the four Gospels:

 

Matthew 26:31-35;

 

 they went out into the Mount of Olives.

 

34.    this night, before the cock crow, thou shalt deny me thrice.

 

Mark 14:27-31;

 

…they went out into the Mount of Olives

 

30.    this night, before the cock crow twice, thou shalt deny me thrice.

 

Luke 22:31-34

 

17. ...with me on the table. 20. ... after supper

 

... the cock shall not crow this day, before that thou shalt thrice deny that thou knowest me.

 

John 13:36-38

 

28.    ... at the table...

 

The cock shall not crow, till thou hast denied me thrice.

 

                                                          THE FOLLOWING TABLE ILUSTRATES WHEN THE PHRASES MUST HAVE BEEN SAID

 

                                                   ...At the table

                          (when) they went out into the mount of Olives

Matt.

before the cock crow

thou shalt deny me thrice

 

 

Mark

 

thou shalt deny me thrice

before the cock crow twice

 

Luke

the cock shall not crow this day, before that

 

 

thou shalt thrice deny that thou knowest me

John

The cock shall not crow, till

thou hast denied me thrice.

 

 

 

 

 

None of the writers gives the complete version.

None renders that it was spoken twice nor in two different places.

None renders that it were two different formulations: “deny me” and “deny that thou knowest me”.

We have other such cases in the Gospels, for example: Mark writes “Then Jesus beholding him loved him” after he had said: “all these have I observed from my youth.” Matthew, however, informs us that the rich young man added: “what lack I yet?”

It is clear that this, too, was said by the young man, but not written down by Mark nor Luke, and must have been the reason that Jesus loved him.

 

Likewise, other passages, and now this one in particular. Matthew and John registered the complete wording at the Lords supper. Mark and Luke wrote down part of what was said at the Lords supper and part what was said on the way to the Mount of Olives, one in reversed order of the other one.

 

When Peter said that he was not his disciple, as he did two times, he was denying the Lord but not denying that he knew not the Lord. On the other hand, when he was denying that he knew not the Lord he also was denying him.

 

Having it straight this way and the Gospels synchronized, as I have it in my book, we could follow it up this way:

Peter denied that he was his disciple – 1st denial of Jesus

Peter denied that he knew Jesus – 2nd denial of Jesus and 1st denial that he knew Jesus

Peter denied that he was his disciple – 3rd t denial of Jesus

The cock crows for the first time

Peter denies two more times he knew Jesus – 2nd and 3rd  denials that he knew Jesus

The cock crows the second time.

 

Peter lies more than that: he says he is not a Galilee and he knows not about what they are talking, but they don’t apply to the specific prophecy of Jesus.

 

In this way the complete controversy is removed and there is no contradiction in these passages.

 

Retornar

 

free web site hit counter
estatisticas