<p>22:60 <i>But Peter said: Man, I do not know what you say. And immediately, as he spoke, the cock crew</i>- The problem is that Mark says that the cock crowed after the first denial; and it is Mark who says that the Lord&rsquo;s warning was that &ldquo;Before the cock crows&nbsp;<i>twice</i>, you shall deny Me three times&rdquo;. Matthew and the others seem to speak of only one cock crow. There are various solutions. One is that we give full weight to the fact we are dealing with three episodes or groups of denials. If the first &lsquo;denial&rsquo; involved three separate denials, then this fulfilled the prediction that there would be three denials before the cock crew. And the third episode of denials occurred before the second cock crow, this fulfilling the Lord&rsquo;s word as recorded by Mark &ldquo;Before the cock crows&nbsp;<i>twice</i>, you shall deny Me three times&rdquo;.&nbsp; Another is to go with the NIV footnotes on Mk. 14:30,72, which claim that earliest manuscripts omit the word &ldquo;twice&rdquo; and &ldquo;second time&rdquo;.&nbsp; Another textual approach is to reflect that the record of the cock crowing after the first denial (Mk. 14:68) is omitted by most later translations after the AV. The text also could be suspect at that point. But I am distinctly uneasy at resolving apparent difficulties by claiming that verses are spurious and uninspired. Issues of translation, however, are of another order. I submit that Mk. 14:72 is capable of another translation. Most versions have to the effect that &ldquo;Before the cock crows twice, you shall deny Me three times&rdquo;. But it could equally be translated &lsquo;You shall deny Me three times for each two crows of the cock&rsquo;. This would make a total of six denials. I suggest therefore that there were three denials from Peter during the first denial episode, before the first crowing of the cock; then another one or two denials during the second denial episode, and then another one or two during the third denial episode- and then the cock crew a second time. Another possible reconstruction was offered by Michael Cortright:</p><p><b>First denial:</b>&nbsp;<br />A girl at the door to the courtyard (John&nbsp;18:17).<br /><b>Second denial:</b>&nbsp;<br />A servant girl, by the fire in the courtyard (Matthew&nbsp;26:69, Mark&nbsp;14:66, Luke&nbsp;22:56).<br /><b>Third denial:</b>&nbsp;<br />A man by the fire in the courtyard (Luke&nbsp;22:58).<br /><b>First crow.</b>&nbsp;<br />Mark&nbsp;14:68 (King James Version).<br /><b>Fourth denial:</b>&nbsp;<br />Another girl, at the gateway (Matthew&nbsp;26:71) or entryway (Mark&nbsp;14:68,69).<br /><b>Fifth denial:</b>&nbsp;<br />Some anonymous (standing) people by the fire in the courtyard (Matthew&nbsp;26:73, Mark&nbsp;14:70, John&nbsp;18:25).<br /><b>Sixth denial:</b>&nbsp;<br />Another man who happens to be a male servant of the high priest (Luke&nbsp;22:59, John&nbsp;18:26).<br /><b>Second crow.</b>&nbsp;<br />Matthew&nbsp;26:74, Mark&nbsp;14:72, Luke&nbsp;22:60, John&nbsp;18:27.</p><p><i>And he went out and wept bitterly</i>- There are connections between Peter&rsquo;s position at this time and that of the rejected before the judgment seat. His bitter weeping connects most obviously with the weeping and gnashing of teeth of the rejected. He was &lsquo;remaining outside&rsquo; of the Palace where the Lord was (Mt. 26:29 AV &ldquo;sat without&rdquo;). Yet the Greek&nbsp;<i>exo</i>&nbsp;translated &ldquo;without&rdquo; or &ldquo;outside&rdquo; is elsewhere used about the rejected being &ldquo;cast out&rdquo; (Mt. 5:13; 13:48), &lsquo;standing without&rsquo; with the door shut (Lk. 13:25,28), like a fruitless branch cast out into the fire (Jn. 15:6). When we read that Peter &ldquo;went out&rdquo; from the Lord&rsquo;s presence (Mt. 26:75), the same Greek word is used. The oaths which Peter used would probably have included &lsquo;Before God&rsquo;. He was anticipating the judgment seat: before God he admitted he did not know His Son. But in this life we can be condemned- and yet be reprieved through repentance. But remember that Judas likewise &ldquo;went out&rdquo; into the darkness. Judas is described as &quot;standing with&quot; those who ultimately crucified Jesus in Jn 18:5. Interestingly the same idea occurs in Jn. 18:18 where Peter is described as standing with essentially the same group; point being, that Judas and Peter in essence did the same thing, they both denied their Lord and stood with His enemies. But one repented real repentance, whereas the other couldn't muster the faith for this. Lesson: We all deny the Lord, but the two paths before us are those of either Peter or Judas. Peter of course is our pattern. Perhaps Peter was encouraged towards repentance by recalling that just hours before, the Lord had predicted that the disciples would weep s.w., but their sorrow would be turned to joy (Jn. 16:20), in harmony with the Lord&rsquo;s earlier teaching of blessedness for those who weep now. His weeping was intense, and he must&rsquo;ve wondered how ever such weeping could be turned to joy. The only answer was that Jesus would have to die for Peter&rsquo;s sin, be resurrected, forgive Peter and restore fellowship with him, even using him again in His service. It was upon this, then, that Peter desperately set his hope and faith- and it was rewarded.</p>