While Peter was in the courtyard below, one of the servant girls of the high priest came down
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Greek — tap a word ↓
Kai tou Petrou ontos en tē aulē katō mia tōn paidiskōn tou archiereōs erchetai
The Fallible · Synthetic · Study Bible
Peter Denies Jesus
Mark 14:66–72 — Peter Denies Jesus. Each verse below carries the full apparatus: the Berean Standard Bible, the vocalized original (tap any word), and a parsed breakdown of every term transcribed from the interlinear. Synthesized commentary, canonical threads, and the reading of Christ gather at the end, over the whole unit.
While Peter was in the courtyard below, one of the servant girls of the high priest came down
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Greek — tap a word ↓
Kai tou Petrou ontos en tē aulē katō mia tōn paidiskōn tou archiereōs erchetai
and saw him warming himself there. She looked at Peter and said, “You also were with Jesus the Nazarene.”
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Greek — tap a word ↓
kai idousa ton Petron thermainomenon emblepsasa autō legei sy Kai ēstha meta tou Iēsou tou Nazarēnou
But he denied it. “I do not know or even understand what you are talking about,” he said. Then he went out to the gateway, and the rooster crowed.
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Greek — tap a word ↓
de Ho ērnēsato Oute oida oute epistamai ti sy legeis legōn kai exēlthen exō eis to proaulion kai alektōr ephōnēsen
There the servant girl saw him and again said to those standing nearby, “This man is one of them.”
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Greek — tap a word ↓
Kai hē paidiskē idousa auton ērxato palin legein tois parestōsin hoti Houtos estin ex autōn
But he denied it again. After a little while, those standing nearby said once more to Peter, “Surely you are one of them, for you too are a Galilean.”
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Greek — tap a word ↓
de Ho ērneito palin Kai meta mikron hoi parestōtes elegon palin tō Petrō Alēthōs ei ex autōn gar kai ei Galilaios
But he began to curse and swear, “I do not know this man of whom you speak!”
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Greek — tap a word ↓
de Ho ērxato anathematizein kai omnynai hoti Ouk oida touton ton anthrōpon hon legete
And immediately the rooster crowed a second time. Then Peter remembered the word that Jesus had spoken to him: “Before the rooster crows twice, you will deny Me three times.” And he broke down and wept.
Berean Standard Bible · CC0
Greek — tap a word ↓
kai euthys alektōr ephōnēsen ek deuterou Kai ho Petros anemnēsthē to rhēma hōs ho Iēsous eipen autō hoti Prin alektora phōnēsai dis aparnēsē me tris kai epibalōn eklaien
The verse-by-verse work is done. What follows gathers the whole unit. All three layers below are machine-generated (⚙). Weigh them; they have no authority.
AI synthesis — woven from the public-domain voices above and the original text; generated and fallible.
⚙ The unit opens on an adverb. κάτω (katō, below) is the sort of word a translation can absorb without noticing, and JFB refuses to let it go: he calls it one of our Evangelist's graphic touches and builds the entire topography of the scene on it, the trial chamber above, open to the court, the fire burning in the middle of the quadrangle beneath. Cambridge draws the consequence in one sentence: during the sad scene enacted in the hall of trial above, an almost sadder moral tragedy had been enacted in the court below. Mark has just written 14:62, where Jesus, under the high priest's adjuration, says I am. Now, one floor down, the man who named him Christ at Caesarea Philippi prepares to say I do not know.
What breaks him arrives with no power at all. παιδισκῶν (paidiskōn, G3814) is a diminutive of a diminutive, a young female slave, and Poole draws the blade: how contemptible means God often useth to take down our pride and self-confidences, a great apostle humbled by the means of two maids. She does not accuse; she looks. ἐμβλέψασα (emblepsasa, G1689) is rare, 11 verses in all, and means to look into. Cambridge glosses it as a fixed and earnest gaze; Pulpit says she looked at him in the light of the fire so as to see his features distinctly. The thing that exposes Peter is the thing he came for. θερμαινόμενον (thermainomenon, G2328) is rare too (5 verses), and Henry has already named the trap: those who think it dangerous to be in company with Christ's disciples will find it much more dangerous to be in company with his enemies.
⚙ Mark narrates the collapse through verbal aspect, and the English smooths it flat. The first denial is aorist, ἠρνήσατο: one act, hedged behind a double negative, neither oida nor epistamai. Cambridge reads it as evasion, that Peter, thrown off his guard, replied at first evasively; Pulpit reads every word as emphatic total repudiation. The Greek allows both, and what follows decides it. The second denial is imperfect, ἠρνεῖτο: a denying that goes on, answered by an imperfect chorus, ἔλεγον, they kept saying. JFB calls it more vehement than the first. The third is ἤρξατο with two present infinitives, something begun that does not stop.
Between the first and second, Mark alone records a crowing Peter does not hear. He has moved to the προαύλιον (proaulion, G4259), which Ellicott identifies as not Matthew's word but literally the space before the palace; JFB reads the move as flight from a fire-place grown too hot, possibly with the hope of escaping. He is convicted in the end not by evidence but by accent: Gill notes he used words and phrases peculiar to the Galileans and pronounced as they did, and Cambridge adds that the Galilean burr was rough enough that Galileans were barred from reading aloud in the synagogues. JFB puts it best: if Peter had held his peace, this peculiarity had not been observed.
Then the vocabulary turns terrible. ἀναθεματίζειν (anathematizein, G332) is not bad language. JFB glosses it exactly: to anathematize, or wish himself accursed if what he was now to say was not true. Gill: to wish the most dreadful things upon himself, and to swear by the living God. The verb occurs in four verses of the whole New Testament, and everywhere else it is the oath of men plotting murder (Acts 23:12, 14, 21). Peter has now bound himself under the fiercest form of curse available in the language, and the condition of that curse, that his words be false, is met as he speaks. He also refuses the name: τὸν ἄνθρωπον τοῦτον, this man here. The confessor of 8:29 is down to a demonstrative and a generic noun.
⚙ The turn is not achieved; it is received. ἀνεμνήσθη (anemnēsthē, G363) is aorist passive: Peter was reminded. Mark does not name the agent. Luke does, with the very verb the servant girl's look carried in v. 67: the Lord turned and looked at Peter (Luke 22:61, ἐμβλέψας). JFB will not be restrained here, asking who can tell what lightning flashes of wounded love and piercing reproach shot from that look through the eye of Peter into his heart, and connecting it back to Luke 22:32, I prayed for thee, that thy faith fail not. What returns is a ῥῆμα (G4487), a specific spoken sentence, and it carries a verb heavier than anything the narrative reported: ἀπαρνήσῃ, the intensive compound, thou shalt utterly disown me, where Mark had used the plain arneomai for what Peter actually did.
The last clause is the most honest uncertainty in the unit. ἐπιβαλὼν (epibalōn, G1911) means having thrown upon, and nobody knows upon what. Ellicott calls the word somewhat peculiar and thinks the English rendering probably right while conceding there is not enough authority for any other interpretation to justify a change. Benson lays out the whole quarrel, Whitby and Campbell for setting the mind upon it, Macknight and Elsner for throwing a garment over the head, Raphelius for flinging himself out of the company. Gill argues from Maimonides and the Targum on Esther that the true sense is that he covered himself, veiling himself as mourners did. Cambridge lists four options and declines to choose. One thing is not in doubt: ἔκλαιεν is imperfect, and Pulpit fixes on precisely that, that the word implies a long and continued weeping. The chapter ends with the weeping still going.
⚙ This is the tool's own fallible reading, offered to be tested against the text. Mark has built this scene so that two men are on trial at once, and the Evangelist gives them the same question. Above, the high priest asks, Art thou the Christ? and Jesus answers with the divine I am (14:62), knowing it will cost him his life. Below, a slave girl asks, Wast thou with the Nazarene? and Peter answers with a sworn I am not, knowing it will save his skin. The confession that condemns and the denial that acquits are spoken in the same house within the same hour, and Mark places them on two floors of it.
Notice what actually defeats Peter. Not torture; a question. Not a court; a doorkeeper. He had already survived the garden with a sword in his hand. What he cannot survive is being recognised, and the thing that recognises him is not a witness but his own accent, the one part of himself he cannot deny. The man who could renounce his Lord could not renounce Galilee. That is the diagnosis: Peter does not lack courage, he lacks self-knowledge, and the text is merciless about where the self-knowledge finally comes from. ἀνεμνήσθη is passive. He does not repent his way back; he is reminded. The memory is done to him, by a bird he had been told about and a word he had refused to believe.
And so the grammar contains the gospel in miniature. Jesus' prophecy used the heavy verb, aparnēsē, utterly disown, the same root he had used in 8:34 when he said, let a man deny himself and take up his cross. Peter was commanded to perform that denial on Peter. He performed it on Christ instead, and Christ absorbed it and went on to the cross Peter would not carry. The prophecy that broke Peter is proof that Jesus knew all of this at supper and washed the man's feet and went anyway. That is why Peter weeps rather than hangs himself: the word that convicts him is the same word that shows he was foreseen, foretold, and not abandoned. Poole names the difference without sentiment, that Judas repented unto death and Peter repenteth unto life, and Mark, honest to the end, leaves the tense open. The weeping has not stopped when the chapter does.
The line set beside this reading is the tool's own sentence, not Scripture and not any commentator's.
The rock did not crack under the weight of the cross; it cracked under the weight of a slave girl's question, and the Lord had already said so, and had gone to the cross anyway.
AI-generated connections. Each carries a verification badge with a recorded basis; contested links are flagged.
Mark 14:72 does not allude to 14:30; it repeats it. Peter is reminded of the ῥῆμα and Mark then quotes the sentence back in full, before a cock sounds twice, thrice thou wilt utterly deny me. The Verifier records three shared lexemes, two of them rare: ἀλέκτωρ (G220, in 11 verses) and τρίς (G5151, in 11 verses), with φωνέω (G5455, in 39 verses). Mark alone preserves the double crowing in both places, and Cambridge, citing Lange, credits Peter himself with not lessening his fault by letting it stand that one crowing did not suffice.
Mark 14:30
basis: Verifier: shared Greek lexemes G220 alektōr (in 11 vv, rare), G5151 tris (in 11 vv, rare), G5455 phōneō (in 39 vv); and 14:72 explicitly quotes the saying of 14:30 as direct speech. Both refs are Greek, so shared Strong's numbers are a valid verbal basis.
ἐμβλέπω (G1689) is rare, appearing in 11 verses. Mark uses it at 14:67 of the slave girl fixing her look on Peter, the gaze Cambridge calls fixed and earnest and Pulpit places in the firelight. Luke 22:61 uses the same verb of the Lord turning and looking at Peter after the second crowing. The Verifier confirms the shared lexeme (with G4074 Petros, in 150 vv, as the common subject). Mark records no look at all; JFB observes that our Second Evangelist makes no mention of it and dwells instead on the warning about the double crowing, and judges Luke's look the most precious link in the chain. The verbal link is real; the identification of the two gazes as one dramatic sequence is a harmonisation, honestly flagged as such by JFB himself.
Luke 22:61 · Mark 14:67
basis: Verifier: shared Greek lexeme G1689 emblepō (in 11 vv, rare), plus G4074 Petros (in 150 vv, common). Both refs Greek. The lexical link is verbal; the narrative synchronisation of the two looks is harmonising inference, not text.
ἀναθεματίζω (G332, to declare or vow under penalty of execration) occurs in only four verses of the New Testament. One is Mark 14:71. The other three are Acts 23:12, 14 and 21, where more than forty men bind themselves under a curse to eat nothing until they have killed Paul, and go to the ἀρχιερεύς (G749) to say so. JFB glosses the Markan use precisely: to anathematize, or wish himself accursed if what he was now to say was not true. The rarest and most violent oath formula the Greek New Testament possesses is used twice, once by murderers plotting an apostle's death and once by an apostle saving his own life.
Acts 23:12 · Acts 23:14 · Acts 23:21
basis: Verifier: shared Greek lexeme G332 anathematizō (in 4 vv, very rare), with G749 archiereus (in 119 vv) shared at Acts 23:14. All refs Greek, so a shared Strong's basis is valid. No quotation is claimed; the link is the rare lexeme itself.
θερμαίνω (G2328) appears in only five verses of the New Testament, and four of them are this night: Mark 14:54 and 14:67, John 18:18 and 18:25. Mark makes it the hinge of exposure, since it is Peter warming himself that the girl sees. Henry states the moral without needing the lexicon: those who think it dangerous to be in company with Christ's disciples will find it much more dangerous to be in company with his enemies. The Verifier also links Mark 14:54 through αὐλή (G833, in 12 verses), the same open court, so that the whole of Peter's following at a distance and his denying happen in one place at one fire.
John 18:18 · John 18:25 · Mark 14:54
basis: Verifier: shared Greek lexeme G2328 thermainō (in 5 vv, very rare) at John 18:18 and 18:25; G833 aulē (in 12 vv, rare) and G749 archiereus (in 119 vv) at Mark 14:54. All refs Greek. Parallel narration, not quotation.
⚙ Mark has already quoted Zechariah 13:7 in this chapter, at 14:27, on Jesus' own lips: I will strike the shepherd, and the sheep shall be scattered. Peter's answer there was that though all should fall away, he would not (14:29 to 31). This unit is what the quoted oracle looks like when it lands on one named sheep. The link between the prophecy and the courtyard is Mark's own framing of his narrative, not a second citation; the tier is structural rather than verbal because the Zechariah text is Hebrew and this unit is Greek, so no shared Strong's lexeme is available in principle. Proverbs 16:18, pride goeth before destruction, names the same movement in wisdom form, and the Verifier is silent on both for the same reason.
Zechariah 13:7 · Mark 14:27 · Proverbs 16:18
basis: Cross-Testament Greek to Hebrew, so shared Strong's numbers are impossible and no verbal tier is available. Basis is Mark's own explicit citation of Zechariah 13:7 at 14:27 within this same chapter, and the shared motif of self-confidence preceding collapse in Proverbs 16:18. No quotation is claimed in 14:66 to 72 itself.
⚙ Two wisdom texts describe with precision what Mark narrates. Proverbs 29:25, the fear of man bringeth a snare, is the mechanism: Peter is trapped by a question, not a threat. Jeremiah 17:9, the heart is deceitful above all things, who can know it, is the diagnosis of 14:31, where Peter spoke more vehemently than all. The Geneva note calls the passage a grievous example of the frailness of man together with a most comfortable example of the mercy of God. This is a thematic reading, not a citation: Mark makes no reference to either text, and the link is motif only, without any possible lexical basis across the language barrier.
Proverbs 29:25 · Jeremiah 17:9 · Mark 14:31
basis: Cross-Testament Greek to Hebrew: no shared Strong's lexeme is possible, so no verbal tier. Basis is shared motif (fear of man as snare; self-ignorance of the heart) set against Mark's own record of Peter's boast at 14:31. The Gospel makes no citation of either proverb.
⚙ Psalm 38:11 and Psalm 88:8 record the experience of the afflicted righteous whose friends and kinsmen stand aloof from his stroke, and who is made an abomination to his acquaintance. Mark's Peter is neither stranger nor enemy; he is the friend who came as far as the courtyard and no further, which is the exact posture those psalms describe from the sufferer's side. Read this way the unit is the lament turned into narrative around the one to whom the psalms of the righteous sufferer point. That reading is figural, and the connection is a pattern, not a citation. Mark quotes neither psalm, and no lexical basis is available across Hebrew and Greek.
Psalm 38:11 · Psalm 88:8
basis: Cross-Testament Greek to Hebrew: no shared Strong's lexeme possible, so never verbal. Figural reading of the righteous sufferer psalms as pattern fulfilled in the passion narrative, an ancient and widely held hermeneutic in the Church, though neither psalm is cited in Mark 14. ⚙ The specific application to Peter's distance in the courtyard is the tool's own, offered to be tested.
⚙ Leviticus 5:4 legislates for the man who swears rashly with his lips, whether to do evil or to do good, and is guilty when he knows it: he must bring a guilt offering. Peter does exactly this twice over, first at supper (14:31) and then under oath in the courtyard. The point of the link is the sequel that Leviticus supplies and the courtyard does not: the offering for such an oath is being prepared in the chamber above Peter's head while he swears. The connection is typological and is the tool's own construction. No citation exists, the languages differ, and the Verifier offers no basis.
Leviticus 5:4 · Mark 14:31
basis: Cross-Testament Greek to Hebrew: no shared lexeme is possible, so never verbal. Legal category (the rash oath requiring a guilt offering) read figurally against the narrative. ⚙ Novel application by this tool; no commentator in this brief draws it, and Mark makes no reference to Leviticus.
All four Gospels carry the prophecy and the denials, and they do not agree in detail. The Verifier links Matthew 26:34 and 26:74, Luke 22:34 and 22:60, and John 13:38 and 18:27 through the same rare cluster, ἀλέκτωρ (G220, in 11 verses), τρίς (G5151, in 11 verses), ἀρνέομαι (G720, in 30 verses) and φωνέω (G5455). Only Mark has two crowings. JFB states the difficulty rather than hiding it: there is a verbal difference among the Evangelists which, without some information which has been withheld, cannot be quite extricated. Geneva attempts a harmony and concedes the second challenger is a maid in Mark and a man servant in Luke. The lexical link is certain; the harmonisation is not.
Matthew 26:34 · Matthew 26:74 · Luke 22:34 · John 13:38 · John 18:27
basis: Verifier: shared Greek lexemes G220 alektōr (in 11 vv, rare), G5151 tris (in 11 vv, rare), G720 arneomai (in 30 vv), G5455 phōneō (in 39 vv), G4074 Petros (in 150 vv). All refs Greek. The prophecy is quoted verbatim in each Gospel, though in differing forms; the differences are recorded, not resolved.
AI-generated reading; weigh it against the text.
⚙ Mark's κάτω in v. 66 makes the whole unit a diptych. In the chamber above, under the adjuration of the high priest, Jesus answers I am (14:62) and is condemned for it. In the court below, under the question of a slave girl, Peter answers with οὐκ οἶδα and goes free. Cambridge sees the pairing and calls the lower scene an almost sadder moral tragedy than the one above. The sole faithful witness in the house is the accused, and his faithfulness is what kills him. Every word Peter refuses to say costs Jesus something, and Jesus is at that moment saying it for him. The reading that the true confessor stands in the place of the failed one is the apostolic account of the atonement itself, and Geneva names the same double movement, frailness of man and mercy of God, in one sentence.
Mark 14:62 · Mark 14:71
The strongest redemptive note in the unit is grammatical: ἀνεμνήσθη (G363) is aorist passive. Peter is reminded; he does not remember. JFB ties the whole reversal to Luke 22:31 and 32, Satan hath desired to have you, but I prayed for thee that thy faith fail not, and asks whether that prayer did not fetch down all that there was in the Lord's look to pierce and break the heart of Peter, to keep it from despair, and at length to restore his soul. The difference between Peter and Judas, in this reading, is not the quality of their remorse but the fact of an intercessor. Poole states the outcome flatly: Judas repented unto death, Peter repenteth unto life. John, as JFB notes, is the one Evangelist who omits the repentance and the only one who records the restoration at John 21:15 to 17, where the threefold denial is met by a threefold question.
Luke 22:31 · Luke 22:32 · John 21:15
⚙ The verb of the prophecy is ἀπαρνέομαι (G533, to deny utterly, to disown), the intensive compound, and Mark has used the same root once before in a decisive place: if any man would come after me, let him deny himself and take up his cross and follow me (Mark 8:34). Peter was called to disown Peter. In the courtyard he disowned Christ instead, with the same verb Jesus had chosen for the prophecy. What he could not do to himself, Christ did in his stead: he took the cross Peter would not carry and bore the anathema Peter had called down on his own head in v. 71. The lexical observation stands on the shared root; the theological application, and the specific pairing of the anathema of 14:71 with the cross, is the tool's own and is offered to be tested.
Mark 8:34 · Mark 14:72 · Mark 14:71
The biblical text is the Berean Standard Bible (BSB), public domain (CC0). Hebrew/Greek text, transliteration, morphology and Strong’s are transcribed from the Berean interlinear (CC0) + Strong’s lexicons (PD); the literal renderings, divergence notes, word notes and all synthesis are this tool’s own work (⚙) — fallible; verify them.
Named voices, quoted verbatim from public-domain works:
Text. Two real textual questions touch this unit and neither is settled. Ellicott reports on v. 70 that the clause rendered "and thy speech agreeth thereto" is wanting in many of the best manuscripts and may be an interpretative addition; Cambridge notes it is omitted by Lachmann, Tischendorf and Tregelles. The Berean interlinear supplied in this brief does not carry the clause, which is why no word index in v. 70 corresponds to it. Ellicott's further suggestion that Mark himself added it in a revised edition of his Gospel is his own conjecture and is recorded here as such. On v. 68, Gill notes that the phrase "neither understand I" is omitted in the Syriac and Persic versions.
The word in v. 72. ἐπιβαλών (G1911) is genuinely undecided, and this synthesis does not decide it. Benson sets out four readings with their advocates: Whitby and Campbell for the sense of setting the mind upon it, Macknight, Elsner, Salmasius, Bos and Waterland for throwing a garment over the head, Raphelius and others for flinging oneself out of the company, and the margin for weeping abundantly. Gill argues from Maimonides and the Targum on Esther for the mourner's veiling. Ellicott thinks the English rendering probably right while conceding there is not enough authority for any other interpretation to justify a change. Cambridge lists the options without choosing. BSB's "he broke down" is a reasonable modern resolution of a word the sources do not resolve.
Harmonisation. The four Gospel accounts of the denials differ in who challenges Peter, how many challengers there are, and how many crowings are recorded. JFB is the most honest witness on this: he writes that there is a verbal difference among the Evangelists which, without some information which has been withheld, cannot be quite extricated, and at another point that the matter is of no real importance. Geneva's harmony concedes that Luke has a man servant where Mark has a maid. The threads above tier the parallels on the lexical evidence the Verifier supplies and do not claim the harmonisations as fact.
What Mark does not say. Mark records no look from Jesus. The look is Luke's (22:61), and it is Luke who supplies the intervening hour (22:59) that Gill and JFB import into v. 70, where Mark writes only meta mikron, after a little. Matthew supplies the bitterness of the weeping (26:75). Where this synthesis leans on those details, it names the Evangelist who supplies them.
Sources. Barnes and Poole refer the reader to their notes on Matthew 26 for this whole paragraph rather than commenting here, so Barnes contributes nothing quotable to this unit and Poole is cited from his one substantive note at 14:66. Benson likewise treats the paragraph at 14:66. Commentary is verbatim public domain, cited by author; every Strong's number, parse and thread basis comes from the sourced brief. Everything marked ⚙ is this tool's fallible synthesis and may be wrong.
✦ = human, public-domain source, quoted and named. ⚙ = machine synthesis, to be verified. Flagged cross-references are left visible on purpose — the verifier working in the open. “Search the Scriptures daily, whether those things were so.” (Acts 17:11)