Luke 22:60

And Peter said, Man, I know not what thou sayest. And immediately, while he yet spake, the cock crew.

EXPOSITORY (ENGLISH BIBLE)

Matthew Henry's Concise Commentary

22:54-62 Peter's fall was his denying that he knew Christ, and was his disciple; disowning him because of distress and danger. He that has once told a lie, is strongly tempted to persist: the beginning of that sin, like strife, is as the letting forth of water. The Lord turned and looked upon Peter. 1. It was a convincing look. Jesus turned and looked upon him, as if he should say, Dost thou not know me, Peter? 2. It was a chiding look. Let us think with what a rebuking countenance Christ may justly look upon us when we have sinned. 3. It was an expostulating look. Thou who wast the most forward to confess me to be the Son of God, and didst solemnly promise thou wouldest never disown me! 4. It was a compassionate look. Peter, how art thou fallen and undone if I do not help thee! 5. It was a directing look, to go and bethink himself. 6. It was a significant look; it signified the conveying of grace to Peter's heart, to enable him to repent. The grace of God works in and by the word of God, brings that to mind, and sets that home upon the conscience, and so gives the soul the happy turn. Christ looked upon the chief priests, and made no impression upon them as he did on Peter. It was not the mere look from Christ, but the Divine grace with it, that restored Peter.

Barnes' Notes on the Bible

See the notes at Matthew 26:57-75.

Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Bible Commentary

Lu 22:55-62. Jesus before Caiaphas—Fall of Peter.

The particulars of these two sections require a combination of all the narratives, for which see on [1727]Joh 18:1-27.

Matthew Poole's Commentary

See Poole on "Luke 22:54"

Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible

And Peter said, man, I know not what thou sayest,.... Suggesting, that he was so far from being a follower of Jesus, or a disciple of his, and from having any personal acquaintance with him, that he did not know what he was talking of, or at least could not understand what he meant by this harangue, or by talking after this manner about him; and then began to curse and swear, and wish the most dreadful things to befall him, if he knew any thing of Jesus of Nazareth:

and immediately while he yet spake: in this shocking manner, with his mouth full of oaths, curses, and imprecations:

the cock crew; the second time, Mark 14:72.

Geneva Study Bible

And Peter said, Man, I know not what thou sayest. And immediately, while he yet spake, the cock crew.

EXEGETICAL (ORIGINAL LANGUAGES)

Expositor's Greek Testament

Luke 22:60. ἄνθρωπε, etc., man, I don’t know what you are saying—under shelter of the epithet Γαλιλαῖος, pretending ignorance of what the man said—an evasion rather than a denial, with no cursing and protesting accompanying. A monstrous minimising of the offence, if Lk. had Mk.’s account before him, thinks J. Weiss; therefore he infers he had not, but drew from a Jewish-Christian source with a milder account. What if he had both before him, and preferred the milder?—ἐφώνησεν ἀλεκ., immediately after the cock crew; but in Lk.’s account the reaction is not brought about thereby. In the parallels, in which Peter appears worked up to a paroxysm, a reaction might be looked for at any moment on the slightest occasion, the crowing of the cock recalling Christ’s words abundantly sufficient. But in Lk. there is no paroxysm, therefore more is needed to bring about reaction, and more accordingly is mentioned.

Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges

60. Man, I know not what thou sayest] St Luke drops a veil over the ‘cursing and swearing’ which accompanied this last denial (Matthew 26:74).

the cock crew] Rather, a cock. It crew for the second time. Minute critics have imagined that they found a ‘difficulty’ here because the Talmud says that cocks and hens, from their scratching in the dung, were regarded as unclean. But as to this the Talmud contradicts itself, since it often alludes to cocks and hens at Jerusalem (e.g. Berachdth, p. 27, 1). Moreover the cock might have belonged to the Roman soldiers in Fort Antonia.

Luke 22:60