Mark 14:72 Komentář

In this chapter begins the account which this evangelist gives of the death and sufferings of our Lord Jesus, which we are all concerned to be acquainted, not only with the history of, but with the mystery of. Here is, I. The plot of the chief priests and scribes against Christ (Mar 14:1, Mar 14:2). II. The anointing of Christ's head at a supper in Bethany, two days before his death (Mar 14:3-9). III. The contract Judas made with the chief priests, to betray him (Mar 14:10, Mar 14:11). IV. Christ's eating the passover with his disciples, his instituting the Lord's supper, and his discourse with his disciples, at and after supper (v. 12-31). V. Christ's agony in the garden (Mar 14:32-42). VI. The betraying of him by Judas, and the apprehending of him by the chief priests' agents (Mar 14:43-52). VII. His arraignment before the high priest, his conviction, and the indignities done him at that bar (Mar 14:53-65). VIII. Peter's denying him (Mar 14:66-72). Most of which passages we had before, Mt. 26.

After two days was the feast of the passover,.... That is, two days after Christ had delivered the foregoing discourse concerning the destruction of the temple at Jerusalem, was the feast of the passover; which was kept in commemoration of God's passing over the houses of the Israelites, when he destroyed the firstborn of Egypt, and made way for the deliverance of the children of Israel from thence: and which was kept by eating the passover lamb; and which, properly speaking, is the feast of the passover: and of unleavened bread; which was the same feast with the other, called so from the unleavened bread which was then eaten; though with this difference, the passover lamb was only eaten on the first night, but unleavened bread was eaten for seven days together. The Syriac, Persic, and Ethiopic versions render it, "the passover of unleavened bread", leaving out the copulative "and". And the chief priests and Scribes sought how they might take him by craft; that is, Jesus, and put him to death: for which purpose they assembled together in Caiaphas the high priest's palace, and there took counsel together how to accomplish it; see Mat 26:2.

Mark writes these things, and through him Peter bears witness, for the whole of Mark is said to be a record of Peter’s teaching. Note how scrupulously the disciples refused to record those things that might have given the impression of their fame. Note how they handed down in writing numerous charges against themselves to unforgetting ages, and accusations of sins, which no one in later years would ever have known about unless hearing it from their own voice. By thus honestly reporting their own faults, it is reasonable to view them as relatively void of false speaking and egoism. This habit gives plain and clear proof of their truth-loving disposition. As for such critics who imagine they invented and lied, and try to slander them as deceivers, should they not to be regarded as absurd? Aren’t they thereby being convicted as friends of envy and malice, and foes of truth itself? For have they not taken those who have exhibited in their own words good proof of their integrity, and their straightforward and sincere character, and suggested that they are rascals and clever sophists who invent what never took place, and ascribe gratuitously to their own master what he never did? This is why I think it has been rightly said that “One must put complete confidence in the disciples of Jesus, or none at all.” And if we are to distrust them, we must also distrust all writers on the same principle, any who at any time have compiled, either in Greece or anywhere, lives and histories and records of persons of their own times, celebrating their noble achievements. Otherwise we would be considering it reasonable to believe others, and to disbelieve the evangelists only. And this would be clearly invidious. How could it be that these supposed liars would falsify the account of his death? What would be their motive in writing down deeds he never did? They candidly report his betrayal by one of his disciples, explicit accusations by dubious witnesses, insults and blows to his face, the scourging of his back, the crown of acanthus set on his head in a demeaning way, and finally his carrying of his own cross, and his being nailed to it! They report his hands and feet being pierced, his being given vinegar to drink, struck on the cheek with a reed, and reviled by those who looked upon him. Were these things and all else like them in the Gospels simply invented out of whole cloth by the disciples? Highly unlikely. Or must we doubt only the more glorious and lofty parts of the narrative? How could they do so and doubt these candid reports of ignominious actions? How could they reasonably support such an unreasonable conclusion—that the same witnesses spoke the truth and at the same time lied. That would be to predict contraries about the same people at the same time. How then are we to disprove their assertions? If it was their aim to deceive, and to adorn their master with false words, they would never have written these demeaning accounts of his pain and agony and that he was disturbed in spirit, that they themselves forsook him and fled, or that Peter the apostle and disciple who was chief of the apostles denied him three times, unless they had an extraordinarily high standard of truth-telling.

In this respect we most marvel at Mark, because not only did he refuse to hide Peter’s fault, but wrote the account of it in greater detail than the others. And it is for this very reason that he is called Peter’s disciple.

As holy David repented for his deadly crimes and still retained his kingship, so the blessed Peter earnestly repented, having denied the Lord, and shed such bitter tears, yet remained an apostle.

In this matter we must consider why Almighty God permitted him whom He had determined to place over the whole Church to fear the voice of a servant girl and to deny himself. This we recognize was done by a dispensation of great mercy, so that he who was to be the Pastor of the Church might learn through his own fault how he ought to show mercy to others. Therefore He first showed him to himself, and then set him over the rest, so that from his own weakness he might learn how mercifully he should bear with the weaknesses of others.

And Peter remembered the word that Jesus had said to him: "Before the rooster crows twice, you will deny me three times." And he began to weep. How harmful are the colloquies of the wicked? Peter himself among the faithless denied even knowing a man, whom among his fellow disciples he had already confessed to be the Son of God. But neither could he, held in the courtyard of Caiaphas, perform penitence. He went outside, as the other evangelists narrate, so that, secluded from the council of the ungodly, he might wash away the filth of his fearful denial with unrestrained weeping.

(ubi sup.) But the Scripture is wont to point out a Sacrament of the causes of things, by the state of the time; thus Peter, who denied at midnight, repented at cock crow; wherefore it is added: And the second time the cock crew. And Peter called to mind the word which Jesus said unto him, Before the cock crow twice, thou shalt deny me thrice. And he began to weep.

But repentance and tears restored him again to Christ. For it says: "he began to weep." That is, covering his face, he began to weep bitterly. Matthew (speaking of Peter's denial) said unclearly: "before the rooster crows" (Mt. 26:34); Mark clarified this: "before the rooster crows twice." Roosters usually make several calls at one time, then fall asleep, and after some time begin crowing again. Therefore the meaning of Matthew's account is this: "before the rooster crows," that is, before it finishes its first round of crowing, "you will deny Me three times." But let the Novatians be put to shame, who do not accept repentance and communion of the Holy Mysteries for those who have sinned after baptism! Behold, Peter, who denied already after partaking of the Most Pure Body and Blood, was again received into the apostolic company. For the falls of the saints are recorded precisely so that we, when we fall through our own carelessness, might look to their example and hasten to correct ourselves through repentance.

For tears brought Peter by penitence to Christ. Confounded then be the Novatians, who say that he who sins after receiving baptism, is not received to the remission of his sin. For behold Peter, who had also received the Body and Blood of the Lord, is received by penitence; for the failings of saints are written, that if we fall by want of caution, we also may be able to run back through their example, and hope to be relieved by penitence.

Peter when he had not the Spirit yielded and lost courage at the voice of a girl, though with the Spirit he was not afraid before princes and kings. But in a mystical sense, the first maid means the wavering, the second, the assent, the third man is the act. This is the threefold denial which the remebrance of the word of the Lord washes away through tears. The cock then crows for us when some preacher up our hearts by repentance to compunction. We then begin to weep, when we are set on fire within by the spark of knowledge, and we go forth, when we cast out what we were within.

The Jews conspire against Christ, Mar 14:1, Mar 14:2. He is anointed in the house of Simon the Leper, Mar 14:3-9. Judas Iscariot sells him to the chief priests for thirty pieces of money, Mar 14:10, Mar 14:11. He orders his disciples to prepare the passover, Mar 14:12-16. Predicts his approaching death, Mar 14:17-21. Institutes the holy eucharist, Mar 14:22-26. Foretells the unfaithfulness of his disciples in general, Mar 14:27, Mar 14:28, and Peter's denial, Mar 14:29-31. His agony in the garden, Mar 14:32-36. The disciples overcome by sleep, Mar 14:37-42. Judas comes with a mob from the chief priests, and betrays him with a kiss; they seize him, Mar 14:43-49. The disciples flee, Mar 14:50. A young man following, and about to be apprehended, makes his escape, Mar 14:51, Mar 14:52. Jesus is brought before the chief priests, and Peter follows at a distance, Mar 14:53, Mar 14:54. He is examined, insulted, and abused, and condemned on false evidence, Mar 14:55-65. Peter thrice denies him, reflects on his wickedness, and repents of his sin, Mar 14:66-72.

And when he thought thereon, he wept - Or, he fell a weeping. This Mr. Wakefield thinks comes nearest to the original, επιβαλων εκλαιε. Others think it means the wrapping of his head in the skirts of his garment, through shame and anguish. Others think that επιβαλων rather refers to the violence, or hurry, with which he left the place, being impelled thereto by the terrors and remorse of his guilty conscience. Our own translation is as good as any. Next: Mark Chapter 15

ANGELIC ANNOUNCEMENT TO THE WOMEN ON THE FIRST DAY OF THE WEEK, THAT CHRIST IS RISEN--HIS APPEARANCES AFTER HIS RESURRECTION--HIS ASCENSION--TRIUMPHANT PROCLAMATION OF HIS GOSPEL. ( = Mat 28:1-10, Mat 28:16-20; Luke 24:1-51; Joh 20:1-2, John 20:11-29). (Mark 16:1-20) when the sabbath was past--that is, at sunset of our Saturday. Mary Magdalene--(See on Luk 8:2). Mary the mother of James--James the Less (see Mar 15:40). and Salome--the mother of Zebedee's sons (compare Mar 15:40 with Mat 27:56). had bought sweet spices, that they might come and anoint him--The word is simply "bought." But our translators are perhaps right in rendering it here "had bought," since it would appear, from Luk 23:56, that they had purchased them immediately after the Crucifixion, on the Friday evening, during the short interval that remained to them before sunset, when the sabbath rest began; and that they had only deferred using them to anoint the body till the sabbath rest should be over. On this "anointing," see on Joh 19:40.

And the second time the cock crew--The other three Evangelists, who mention but one crowing of the cock--and that not the first, but the second and last one of Mark--all say the cock crew "immediately," but Luke (Luk 22:60) says, "Immediately, while he yet spake, the cock crew." Alas!--But now comes the wonderful sequel. The Redeemer's Look upon Peter, and Peter's Bitter Tears (Mar 14:72; Luk 22:61-62). It has been observed that while the beloved disciple is the only one of the four Evangelists who does not record the repentance of Peter, he is the only one of the four who records the affecting and most beautiful scene of his complete restoration (Joh 21:15-17). Luk 22:61 : And the Lord turned and looked upon Peter--How? it will be asked. We answer, From the chamber in which the trial was going on, in the direction of the court where Peter then stood--in the way already explained. See on Mar 14:66. Our Second Evangelist makes no mention of this look, but dwells on the warning of his Lord about the double crowing of the cock, which would announce his triple fall, as what rushed stingingly to his recollection and made him dissolve in tears. And Peter called to mind the word that Jesus said unto him, Before the cock crow twice, thou shalt deny me thrice. And when he thought thereon, he wept--To the same effect is the statement of the First Evangelist (Mat 26:75), save that like "the beloved physician," he notices the "bitterness" of the weeping (Luk 22:62). The most precious link, however, in the whole chain of circumstances in this scene is beyond doubt that "look" of deepest, tenderest import reported by Luke alone (Luk 22:61). 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 Peter remembered the word of the Lord, how He had said unto him, Before the cock crow, thou shalt deny Me thrice. Luk 22:62 : And Peter went out and wept bitterly}}--How different from the sequel of Judas' act! Doubtless the hearts of the two men towards the Saviour were perfectly different from the first; and the treason of Judas was but the consummation of the wretched man's resistance of the blaze of light in the midst of which he had lived for three years, while Peter's denial was but a momentary obscuration of the heavenly light and love to his Master which ruled his life. But the immediate cause of the blessed revulsion which made Peter "weep bitterly" (Mat 26:75) was, beyond all doubt, this heart-piercing "look" which his Lord gave him. And remembering the Saviour's own words at the table, "Simon, Simon, Satan hath desired to have you, that he may sift you as wheat; but I prayed for thee, that thy faith fail not" (Luk 22:31-32), may we not say that this prayer fetched down all that there was in that look to pierce and break the heart of Peter, to keep it from despair, to work in it "repentance unto salvation not to be repented of," and at length, under other healing touches, to "restore his soul?" (See on Mar 16:7). Next: Mark Chapter 16