<p>26:75&nbsp;<i>And Peter remembered-&nbsp;</i>The letters of Peter urge his readers to &ldquo;be mindful of the words which were spoken before&rdquo; (2 Pet. 3:2). Yet this is evidently alluding to the frequent references to the disciples being slow to &ldquo;remember&rdquo; s.w. &ldquo;mindful&rdquo; the words which their Lord had &ldquo;spoken before&rdquo; (Lk. 24:6,8; Jn. 2:17,22; 12:16). Indeed, the same word is used about Peter &lsquo;remembering&rsquo; s.w. &ldquo;be mindful&rdquo; all too late, the words which his Lord had &ldquo;spoken before&rdquo; to him (Mt. 26:75). So Peter was aware that his readers knew that he had not &lsquo;remembered&rsquo; the words his Lord had &ldquo;spoken before&rdquo; to&nbsp;<i>him</i>- and yet, knowing that, he exhorts his readers to &lsquo;remember&rsquo; or &lsquo;be mindful&rsquo; s.w. of words which had been previously spoken. His readers likely had memorized the Gospels by heart. And yet Peter asks them to learn from his mistake, not to be as slow to remember as the disciples had been, and he especially. This is the basis of powerful exhortation- a repentant life, not an appearance of sinlessness.&nbsp;</p><p>Mk. 14:72 adds that Peter &ldquo;thought thereon&rdquo;, using the Greek word usually translated &lsquo;to lay hands upon&rsquo;. We can hear the Lord&rsquo;s word but not really engage with it. This in fact is likely the status of so much of God&rsquo;s word which we have read, heard and stashed away in our memory cells. We heard it, we are reminded of it as Peter was by the first cock crow after the first denial episode, but we fail to lay hands on it, to bring it to mind &lsquo;remember&rsquo; it, to engage with it until it is paramount in our consciousness.</p><p><i>The words which Jesus had said: Before the cock crows</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- see on :71<i>Another maid</i>. 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 believe I established beyond doubt in commenting on :71&nbsp;<i>Another maid&nbsp;</i>that there were multiple denials by Peter. 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>You shall deny me three times</i>- Pliny records how Christians were asked to make a threefold denial of Christ (<i>Epistles</i>&nbsp;10.97). It has been suggested that the account of Peter's threefold denials of Christ has been included in the Gospel records as an encouragement to those whose faith failed them that still there was a way back to restoration with the Lord Jesus, just as there had been for Peter. When Peter encourages his persecuted brethren to resist the &quot;roaring lion&quot; of Roman / Jewish persecution (1 Pet. 5:8), he is therefore to be seen as writing against a background in which he had actually failed the very test which his brethren were facing. Yet he can therefore even more powerfully encouraged them, because he had also experienced the Lord's restoring grace.</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>