Pamela Kumor
Marianne Tibaldi
Sarah Kalina
April 2000
Exegesis is the process of taking the meaning out of a text. An exegete often asks the questions who, what, where and why. Exegetes often read the texts and try to interpret them in different ways. They don’t take the literal meaning, but rather look for other meanings behind the text. In this paper we will try to interpret the Gospel of Mark through Peter’s Denial of Jesus (Mk 14:66-72).
The passage appears near the end of the gospel of Mark and immediately after Jesus’ trial before the Sanhedrin. Later, after Peter’s denial, Jesus is placed before Pontius Pilate where he is sentenced to crucifixion. This passage seems appropriately placed because not only did Jesus foretell of this denial, but it is also placed between his trial and his sentencing. The division for this pericope also seems appropriate. In Mark 14:27-31, Jesus foreshadowed Peter’s denial by telling him, "Amen, I say to you, this very night before the cock crows twice you will deny me three times." This passage is not only fitting because of Jesus’ foretelling, but also because it is placed before the sentencing. It is understandable how the people would be discussing Jesus right after his trial and how Peter would deny him out of fear. Also, the passage relates to the other passages before and after it, telling the reader that it was written as part of the gospel of Mark and not just placed in it at a later date.
The author of this pericope was Mark. He is referred to in the Pastoral Letters as a companion of Paul, but Mark was not one of Jesus’ disciples. He was a follower and interpreter of Peter. His mother’s home was in Jerusalem. Mark accompanied Barnabas and Paul on the "First Missionary Journey" and may have helped Peter and Paul in Rome in the 60’s (Brown 127). The audience that Mark intended his writings for were Gentile Christian Communities, unfamiliar with Jewish customs. He specifically wrote to those traditionally in Rome where Christians were being crucified. Mark probably also traveled to Palestine, Syria and Galilee (Brown 127). According to Williamson, Jesus serves as an example for readers who faced the danger of death. The example of Peter is offered to the many who faced hostility, ostracism and embarrassment (267).
Mark recounts two contrasting scenes in his gospel according to Brown. First, Mark tells us that Jesus bravely confesses that he is the Son of God to the high priests. At the same time, Peter curses him and denies knowing him. It is ironic that at the moment Jesus is being mocked for claiming to be a prophet, his prophecies are actually coming true. It is through this, that the readers heard anticipated debates of their own time. Christians saw the condemnation of Jesus as the reason that God allowed the Romans to destroy Jerusalem, therefore creating Jesus as the Son of God, as the growing controversy between Christians and Jews (Brown 146).
Mark was writing during a time of great turmoil in the Jewish society because of the revolt against Romans who were coming down on the Jews. It wasn’t good to be a Jew at this time because if the Romans knew you were they would take you to the lion pits and have you killed. Also during this time period there were a lot of Gentiles being persecuted. It was the Gentiles that Mark focused in on when writing his gospel. The Jewish revolt against the Romans probably took place during the writings of Mark. The time period this was written in was between CE 68-73 and was probably written in both Rome and Palestine. Mark may have been traveling back and forth between cities during his writings. Nero and Vespasian ruled during this time period. It was Nero who persecuted many Christians including Mark’s companion Paul and Peter whom he followed. Mark’s writings are gospel writings that are part of the New Testament of the Bible. A gospel is an inspiring story, in which those who believe in them will come to faith in God (Williamson 1). Mark’s gospel is to be read like a sermon, it preaches Christ and calls for faith. It seems likely that Mark was designed to be read aloud, probably to an audience consisting of both baptized Christians and inquirers (Hare 2).
The gospels of Matthew, Luke and John are similar to Mark’s but there are differences in what they have to say about Peter’s denial. First, in Matthew, it is not stated that the cock crowed twice but rather it is only noted once. This is different from Mark because Mark states that the rooster crows after the first denial and again after the last denial. Also in Matthew the bystanders says that his speech gives him away, while in Mark the bystanders say that he is from Galilee. Secondly, in Luke, instead of a woman and the bystanders pointing out Peter as a follower of Jesus, it is two men that ask Peter. Another difference from Mark is that once the rooster crows it is stated that the Lord turned to look at Peter and at the meeting of their eyes, Peter remembers the prophecy and goes off and weeps. In the gospel of John there is much difference from Mark. First, the denial is broken up into two segments with the high priest questioning Jesus in-between the first denial and the second/third denials. In John the people asking Peter about Jesus are different than in Mark. The third person is said to be a high priest’s slave whose ear Peter cut off. In the end of the pericope, Peter denies a third time, the rooster crows and that is the end. There is no remembering of what Jesus foretold, nor is there any weeping like in the other three gospels.
Matthew and Luke’s version of this pericope are not really significantly different than Mark’s version. One confusing discrepancy in Luke to a reader would be the way he ends the pericope. He states that the Lord turns and looks at Peter and this is when Peter remembers the prophecy. To someone reading this, they may think that Jesus was standing there, whereas in the other gospels Peter just remembers from hearing the cock crow. This can be very confusing to decide which one is right when reading them all together and comparing them to each other. However, the true discrepancy lies within the version of John. In John, the passage is broken into two. It shows a little better than Mark how the story actually took place. It can be determined in Mark, that the denial is happening at the same time as the questioning of Jesus, but in John it is more clearly shown that the two events happened simultaneously. One might question these events happening at the same time when reading Mark because he leaves room for interpretation, whereas John does not. John is also much more descriptive in telling his readers who the questioners were (high priest’s slave whose ear Peter cut off). This gives readers a mental picture of who the accusers were, whereas in Mark, you are just told that it is the bystanders questioning Peter. Finally, a significant difference between the two gospels of Mark and John are the way they end. In Mark, you are told that Peter remembers the prophecy after the rooster crows and goes to weep and cry. To a reader it gives closure to the story because you can see that Peter is struck with guilt for his disbelieving in Jesus. However, in John, the story ends with the rooster crowing. The reader is unable to know what happened and probably questions whether or not he remembered the prophecy and if he was affected or not by it. This can be very confusing to those reading it.
Although he is not considered to be considered a historian, "it is in Mark that we are brought closest to the historical Jesus" (Hare 1). Mark wrote down the memories of Peter, therefore his story is based off an eyewitness. He used many key terms to define his passage. There are three main words that stick out to any reader of Mark. The first word is rooster. This word foreshadows the denial of Jesus by Peter. It is after the rooster crows that Peter remembers the prophecy made by Jesus. The second word is denial. This word brings much irony to the story because Peter denies Jesus, fulfilling the prophecy, at the same time that Jesus is being accused of being a false prophet (Brown 146). The high priests deny him as the Son of God, while Peter denies knowing Jesus as he truly knew him. The last word is accused. Accused is a word that is used for both honesty and dishonesty in this pericope. The people accused Peter of knowing Jesus and he denied what they said. Jesus was accused of being a prophet but did not deny it. Instead he took death because he had faith in the Father in heaven.
Mark’s main point seems to be the failure of Jesus’ friends. His central idea in this pericope is the inadequacy of the disciples’ faith. However, through the Gospel, we can see that although the disciples’ gave up on Jesus, he would never give up on them (Hare 191-2). In his Gospel, Mark uses Peter as an example for all. Through his denial of Jesus, Peter attempts to undermine God’s plan. However, it is his over-confidence, which makes the example of him. In the end, Peter realizes his mistake and feels the guilt of his denial. Another way that Mark uses Peter as an example is in the way that Peter thought so foolishly that he could get away with the denial of Jesus. "Peter’s unresolved guilt functions as an implicit appeal to the reader to try to do better than Peter. It depicts the human condition. If in Jesus we see how God always is, in Peter we see how we always are" (Williamson 267). Mark is basically saying that his audience should not go against what Jesus has in mind for them. They should live according to the way God wants them to live.
In order to make this pericope persuasive to his readers, Mark discusses the humiliation that Jesus had to suffer. To early Christians it was important that Jesus clearly foresaw the humiliation he was to suffer (Hare 191-2). "Jesus is being mocked for his predictions yet at that very moment, one of Jesus’ prophecies is being fulfilled in detail" (Juel 212). This is persuasive to the readers because at one point they see that Jesus is being condemned for his so-called ways by the high priests but at the same time his prophecy is coming true. These corresponding occurrences draw the attention of the reader. For a contemporary audience the persuasiveness lies within the context of pressure. Peer pressure is a timeless motivator, which has been a long time determinant of human action. "Under that kind of pressure, Peter caves in…he first pretends ignorance…protests innocence…in trying to save himself embarrassment, he in fact incurs the danger of divine punishment" (Williamson 267). It is this pressure which is the central idea of this pericope.
The contemporary audience might see this pericope as somewhat problematic because to them Peter should have had the most faith in Jesus. Peter was the leader of the disciples and he should have been the first one to stand up for Jesus. He should have been a leader to his followers, but instead he let them down by denying Jesus. This makes for a bad ending in the eyes of an audience. However, according to Juel, the readers are offered a glimpse into the plan of God where Jesus’ predictions and God’s will are being fulfilled. It is apparent that such an event such as the collapse of Peter, "the rock," is encompassed within the plan (212). Peter was meant to deny Jesus, it was his destiny. A reader should look at this as the fulfillment in God’s plan. To most though, Peter should have gone against the plan of God and been a true leader for his followers.
In our interpretation of this pericope the part that seems particularly Catholic is the part on how Peter is being described as "the rock." It can be interpreted that Peter was a rock that crumbled under the pressure of the moment. He should have been strong enough in his faith in Jesus but he was not. He succumbed to the pressures of the people around him and feared the outcome of his honesty. It is also seen as particularly Catholic because it is a sermon. Catholics like to preach to be able to spread the word of God. This pericope is an insight in the preaching of God’s plan.
Bibliography
Brown, Raymond. An Introduction to the New Testament. New York: Anchor Bible
Reference Library-Doubleday, 1997
Hare, Douglas R. A. Mark. Louisville: Westminster John Knox Press, 1996.
Juel, Donald H. Augsburg Commentary on the New Testament-Mark. Minneapolis:
Augsburg, 1990.
Painter, John. Mark’s Gospel. Edited by John Court. London: Routledge, 1997
Williamson, Lamar Jr. Mark-Interpretation. Edited by Patrick D. Miller. Atlanta:
John Knox Press, 1983.