TRV
See on the biblical-era map
Study This Verse
Public-domain commentary
Matthew Henry
From his Commentary on the Whole Bible. Henry comments on passages, not single verses — this entry covers Luke 22:54–62. His two-level outline is real structure in the source text, so it is rendered as structure.
We have here the melancholy story of Peter's denying his Master, at the time when he was arraigned before the high priest, and those that were of the cabal, that were ready to receive the prey, and to prepare the evidence for his arraignment, as soon as it was day, before the great sanhedrim, Luk 22:66. But notice is not taken here, as was in the other evangelists, of Christ's being now upon his examination before the high priest, only of his being brought into the high priest's house, Luk 22:54. But the manner of expression is observable. They took him, and led him, and brought him, which methinks is like that concerning Saul (Sa1 15:12): He is gone about, and passed on, and gone down; and intimates that, even when they had seized their prey, they were in confusion, and, for fear of the people, or rather struck with inward terror upon what they had seen and heard, they took him the furthest way about, or, rather, knew not which way they hurried him, such a hurry were they in in their own bosoms. Now observe,
I.Peter's falling.
1.It began in sneaking. He followed Christ when he was had away prisoner; this was well, and showed a concern for his Master. But he followed afar off, that he might be out of danger. He thought to trim the matter, to follow Christ, and so to satisfy his conscience, but to follow afar off, and so to save his reputation, and sleep in a whole skin.
2.It proceeded in keeping his distance still, and associating himself with the high priest's servants, when he should have been at his master's elbow. The servants kindled a fire in the midst of the hall and sat down together, to talk over their night-expedition. Probably Malchus was among them, and Peter sat down among them, as if he had been one of them, at least would be thought to be so. His fall itself was disclaiming all acquaintance with Christ, and relation to him, disowning him because he was now in distress and danger. He was charged by a sorry simple maid, that belonged to the house, with being a retainer to this Jesus, about whom there was now so much noise. She looked wistfully upon him as he at by the fire, only because he was a stranger, and one whom she had not seen before; and concluding that at this time of night there were no neuters there, and knowing him not to be any of the retinue of the high priest, she concludes him to be one of the retinue of this Jesus, or perhaps she had been some time or other looking about her in the temple, and had seen Jesus there and Peter with him, officious about him, and remembered him; and this man was with him, saith she. And Peter, as he had not the courage to own the charge, so he had not the wit and presence of mind to turn it off, as he might have done many ways, and therefore flatly and plainly denies it: Woman, I know him not. 4. His fall was repeated a second time (Luk 22:58): After a little while, before he had time to recollect himself, another saw him, and said, "Even thou art one of them, as slyly as thou sittest here among the high priest's servants." Not I, saith Peter; Man, I am not. And a third time, about the space of an hour after (for, saith the tempter, "When he is down, down with him; let us follow the blow, till we get him past recovery"), another confidently affirms, strenuously asserts it, "Of a truth this fellow also was with him, let him deny it if he can, for you may all perceive he is a Galilean." But he that has once told a lie is strongly tempted to persist in it; the beginning of that sin is as the letting forth of water. Peter now not only denies that he is a disciple of Christ, but that he knows any thing of him (Luk 22:60): "Man, I know not what thou sayest; I never heard of this Jesus."
II.Peter's getting up again.
See how happily he recovered himself, or, rather, the grace of God recovered him. See how it was brought about: -
1.The cock crew just as he was the third time denying that he knew Christ, and this startled him and put him upon thinking. Note, Small accidents may involve great consequences.
2.The Lord turned and looked upon him. This circumstance we had not in the other evangelists, but it is a very remarkable one. Christ is here called the Lord, for there was much of divine knowledge, power, and grace, appearing in this. Observe, Though Christ had now his back upon Peter, and was upon his trial (when, one would think, he had something else to mind), yet he knew all that Peter said. Note, Christ takes more notice of what we say and do than we think he does. When Peter disowned Christ, yet Christ did not disown him, though he might justly have cast him off, and never looked upon him more, but have denied him before his Father. It is well for us that Christ does not deal with us as we deal with him. Christ looked upon Peter, not doubting but that Peter would soon be aware of it; for he knew that, though he had denied him with his lips, yet his eye would still be towards him. Observe, Though Peter had now been guilty of a very great offence, and which was very provoking, yet Christ would not call to him, lest he should shame him or expose him; he only gave him a look which none but Peter would understand the meaning of, and it had a great deal in it. (1.) It was a convincing look. Peter said that he did not know Christ. Christ turned, and looked upon him, as if he should say, "Dost thou not know me, Peter? Look me in the face, and tell me so." (2.) It was a chiding look. We may suppose that he looked upon him and frowned, or some way signified his displeasure. Let us think with what an angry countenance Christ justly looks upon us when we have sinned. (3.) It was an expostulating upbraiding look: "What, Peter, art thou he that disownest me now, when thou shouldest come and witness for me? What thou a disciple? Thou that 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; he looked upon him with tenderness. "Poor Peter, how weak is thine heart! How art thou fallen and undone if I do not help thee!" (5.) It was a directing look. Christ guided him with his eye, gave him a wink to go out from that sorry company, to retire, and bethink himself a little, and then he would soon see what he had to do. (6.) It was a significant look: it signified the conveying of grace to Peter's heart, to enable him to repent; the crowing of the cock would not have brought him to repentance without this look, nor will the external means without special efficacious grace. Power went along with this look, to change the heart of Peter, and to bring him to himself, to his right mind.
3.Peter remembered the words of the Lord. Note, 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 a happy turn. Tolle et lege - Take it up, and read.
4.Then Peter went out, and wept bitterly. One look from Christ melted him into tears of godly sorrow for sin. The candle was newly put out, and then a little thing lighted it again. Christ looked upon the chief priests, and made no impression upon them as he did on Peter, who had the divine seed remaining in him to work upon. It was not the look from Christ, but the grace of God with it, that recovered Peter, and brought him to-rights.
Historical interpretation
Three Centuries of Reception
7 surviving comments on this verse. Each one is dated, so this reads as a timeline rather than a list.
Select a marker to jump to its quote. Markers stagger vertically where authors wrote within a few decades of each other.
(App. Serm. 79.) For to Peter were delivered the keys of the kingdom of heaven, to him were entrusted an innumerable multitude of people, who were wrapped up in sin. But Peter was somewhat too vehement, as the cutting off the car of the High Priest's servant betokens. If he then who was so stern and so severe had obtained the gift of not sinning, what pardon would he have given to the people committed to him? Therefore Divine Providence suffers him first to be holden of sin, that by the consciousness of his own fall he might soften his too harsh judgment towards sinners. When he wished to warm himself at the fire, a maid came to him, of whom it follows, But a certain maid beheld him, &c.
And he followed from a distance, about to deny it; for he could not have denied it if he had joined Christ closely. But perhaps in this we should greatly admire him, that he did not leave the Lord, even when he was afraid. Fear is natural, concern is piety. He fears what is foreign: he does not flee what is his own. What he follows is devotion: what he denies is deception. What is shared is what slips away: what is of faith is what he regrets. Now a fire was burning in the high priest's courtyard: Peter approached to warm himself; because with the Lord locked away, the heat of his mind had also cooled in him.
The wretched men understood not the mystery, nor had reverence unto an outpouring of compassion so merciful, that even His enemies He suffered not to be wounded. For it is said, Then look they him, &c. When we read of Jesus being holden, let us guard against thinking that He is holden with respect to His divine nature, and unwilling through weakness, for He is held captive and bound according to the truth of His bodily nature.
Rightly he followed afar off, soon about to deny, for he could never have denied if he had clung close to Christ. But herein must he be revered, that he forsook not our Lord, even though he was afraid. Fear is the effect of nature, solicitude of tender affection.
And by this time there was a fire burning in the house of the High Priest; as it follows, And when they had kindled a fire, &c. Peter came to warm himself, because his Lord being taken prisoner, the heart of his soul had been chilled in him.
What meaneth it, that a maid is the first to betray Peter, whereas surely men ought the more easily to have recognised him, save that that sex should be plainly implicated in our Lord's murder, in order that it might also be redeemed by His Passion? But Peter when discovered denies, for better that Peter should have denied, than our Lord's word should have failed. Hence it follows, And he denied, saying, Woman, I know him not.
Peter denied, because he promised rashly. He does not deny on the mount, nor in the temple, nor in his own house, but in the judgment-hall of the Jews. There he denies where Jesus was bound, where truth is not. And denying Him he says, I know him not. It were presumptuous to say that he knew Him whom the human mind can not grasp. For no one knoweth the Son but the Father. (Matt. 11:17). Again, a second time he denies Christ; for it follows, And after a little while another saw him, and said, Thou wert also one of them.
For he preferred to deny himself rather than Christ, or because he seemed to deny being of the company of Christ, he truly denied himself.
He is also asked a third time; for it follows, And about the space of one hour after, another confidently affirmed, saying, Of a truth this fellow also was with him.
That is, I know not your blasphemies. But we make excuse for him. He did not excuse himself. For an involved answer is not sufficient for our confessing Jesus, but an open confession is required. And therefore Peter is not represented to have answered this deliberately, for he afterwards recollected himself, and wept.
Lastly, those whom Jesus looks upon weep for their sins. Hence it follows, And Peter remembered the word of the Lord, how he had said to him, Before the cock crow, thou shalt deny me thrice. And he went out, and wept bitterly. Why did he weep? Because he sinned as man. I read of his tears, I do not read of his confession. Tears wash away an offence which it is shame to confess in words. The first and second time he denied and wept not, for as yet our Lord had not looked upon him. He denied the third time, Jesus looked upon him, and he wept bitterly. So then if thou wilt obtain pardon, wash away thy guilt in tears.
(Hom. 83. in Matt.) It is therefore said, to the house of the High Priest, that nothing whatever might be done without the consent of the chief of the Priests. For thither had they all assembled waiting for Christ. Now the great zeal of Peter is manifested in his not flying when he saw all the others doing so; for it follows, But Peter followed afar off.
(Hom. 83. in Joan.) Marvel now at the case of the Master, who though He was a prisoner, had exercised much forethought for His disciple, whom by a look He brought to Himself, and provoked to tears; for it follows, And the Lord turned, and looked upon Peter.
But first He was led to Annas, the father-in-law of Caiaphas, as John says, then to Caiaphas, as Matthew says, but Mark and Luke do not give the name of the High Priest.
(ut sup.) What ails thee, Peter, thy voice is suddenly changed? That mouth full of faith and love, is turned to hatred and unbelief. Not yet awhile is the scourge applied, not yet the instruments of torture. Thy interrogator is no one of authority, who might cause alarm to the confessor. The mere voice of a woman asks the question, and she perhaps not about to divulge thy confession, nor yet a woman, but a door-keeper, a mean slave.
(de Con. Ev. lib. iii. c. 6.) And it is supposed that in the second denial he was addressed by two persons, namely, by the maid whom Matthew and Mark mention, and by another whom Luke speaks of. With respect then to what Luke here relates, And after a little while, &c. Peter had already gone out of the gate, and the cock had crowed the first time, as Mark says; and now he had returned, that, as John says, he might again deny standing by the fire. Of which denial it follows, And Peter said, Man, I am not.
(de Con. Ev. ut sup.) What Matthew and Mark call after a little while, Luke explains by saying, about the space of one hour after; but with regard to the space of time, John says nothing. Likewise when Matthew and Mark record not in the singular but in the plural number those who conversed with Peter, while Luke and John speak of one, we may easily suppose either that Matthew and Mark used the plural for the singular by a common form of speech, or that one person in particular addressed Peter, as being the one who had seen him, and that others trusting to his credit joined in pressing him. But now as to the words which Matthew asserts were said to Peter himself, Truly thou art one of them, for thy speech bewrayeth thee; as also those which to the same Peter John declared to have been said, Did not I see thee in the garden? whereas Mark and Luke state that they spoke to one another concerning Peter; we either believe that they held the right opinion who say that they were really addressed to Peter; (for what was said concerning him in his presence amounts to the same as if it had been said to him;) or that they were said in both ways, and that some of the Evangelists related them one way, some the other.
(ut sup.) The cock-crow we understand to have been after the third denial of Peter, as Mark has expressed it.
Now the Chief Priest means Caiaphas, who according to John was High Priest that year.
But that when our Lord was going to His Passion, Peter followed afar off represents the Church about to follow indeed, that is, to imitate our Lord's Passion, but in a far different manner, for the Church suffers for herself, our Lord suffered for the Church.
In this denial then of Peter we affirm that not only is Christ denied by him who says that He is not Christ, but by him also, who, being a Christian, says he is not.
But he adds, For he is a Galilæan; not that the Galilæans spoke a different language from the inhabitants of Jerusalem, who indeed were Hebrews, but that each separate province and country having its own peculiarities could not avoid a vernacular tone of speech. It follows, And Peter said, Man, I know not what thou sayest.
Holy Scripture is often wont to mark the character of certain events by the nature of the times in which they take place. Hence Peter who sinned at midnight repented at cock-crow; for it follows, And immediately, while he yet spake, the cock crew. The error he committed in the darkness of forgetfulness, he corrected by the remembrance of the true light.
This cock must, I think, be understood mystically as some great Teacher, who rouses the listless and sleepy, saying, Awake, ye righteous, and sin not.
For to look upon him is to have compassion, seeing that not only while penance is being practised, but that it may be practised, the mercy of God is necessary.
And when they kindled a fire in the midst of the courtyard and sat around it, Peter was in their midst. There is a fire of love, and there is also a fire of desire. Of this, it is said: "I came to cast fire on the earth, and what will I, if it be already kindled?" (Luke 12:49). Of that: "Behold, all you that kindle a fire, that gird yourselves with flames: walk in the light of your fire, and in the flames that you have kindled" (Isaiah 50:11). This fire, descending from heaven upon the believers in the upper room of Zion, taught them to praise God in various tongues. That fire, kindled from earthly materials of Caiaphas in the courtyard, inflamed the crowds to deny the Lord. With this fire, Moses burned the head of the golden idol, with that Zedekiah burned the writings of Jeremiah prophesying. Whoever extinguishes a vicious and harmful fire within himself can sing to the Lord: "For I am become like a bottle in the frost, I have not forgotten your statutes" (Psalm 119:83). But he who loses the flame of virtues hears from the Lord: "Because iniquity has abounded, the charity of many will grow cold" (Matthew 24:12). Numbed by this chill for a moment, Apostle Peter desired to be warmed by the coals of the persecutors, because he sought the temporary comfort of their company. But without delay, being regarded by the Lord, he abandoned both their physical fire and the infidelity in his heart.
Continue studying Luke 22:55 across the web’s major study libraries — every link below opens this exact verse, chapter, or book on the destination site.
Read & Compare
BibleGatewayThis verse in more than 200 translations and 70 languages.
Bible.comThe YouVersion reader — hundreds of translations, reading plans, and highlights.
ESV.orgCrossway's official English Standard Version reader.
NET BibleThe NET translation with 60,000+ translators' notes on every rendering decision.
STEP BibleTyndale House's free study tool — original text, vocabulary, and scholarly resources.
BibliaLogos Bible Software's free web reader.
USCCBThe New American Bible (Revised Edition) with the U.S. bishops' study notes.
Commentaries
BibleHub CommentariesDozens of classic commentaries on this verse, gathered on one page.
StudyLightMore than 100 commentary sets — the largest collection on the web.
BibleRefPlain-English commentary on what this verse means, verse by verse.
Enduring WordDavid Guzik's free commentary on this chapter, widely used by Bible teachers.
Bible Study ToolsVerse commentary alongside Greek and Hebrew study aids.
Original Language & Research
- BibleHub InterlinearThe verse word by word — original language, transliteration, and English.
- BibleHub LexiconEvery word's original-language definition and Strong's entry.
Blue Letter BibleDeep-study tools — Strong's numbers, concordance, and word studies.
CNTR CollationThe earliest Greek manuscripts of this verse, collated letter by letter.
Sermons, Hymns & Audio
TrulyRandomVerse is not affiliated with these sites and doesn’t control their content. They’re linked because they’re genuinely useful.
Summary
Luke 22:55 describes Peter's precarious position in the high priest's courtyard following Jesus' arrest. As a fire is kindled in the center of the hall for warmth, Peter, having followed at a distance, joins the group gathered around it. This seemingly innocuous act of seeking warmth places him directly in the environment of Jesus' accusers and sets the stage for the fulfillment of Jesus' prophecy concerning Peter's denial, highlighting the subtle yet profound dangers of compromising proximity to temptation.
Context
Literary Context
This verse immediately follows the dramatic arrest of Jesus in the Garden of Gethsemane, where Judas betrayed Him with a kiss, and Peter impulsively drew his sword (Luke 22:47-53). Luke 22:54 then states that Jesus was led away to the high priest's house, and Peter followed "at a distance." Luke 22:55 thus transitions the narrative focus from Jesus' initial interrogation to Peter's unfolding crisis of faith, setting the physical scene for his subsequent denials, which are detailed in the verses immediately following (Luke 22:56-62). It is a crucial pivot point, moving from the external conflict of Jesus' capture to the internal struggle of His closest disciple.
Historical & Cultural Context
The events described occurred late at night, likely in the pre-dawn hours, making the air cold, especially in the elevated city of Jerusalem. The "hall" (Greek: aulē) refers to the open courtyard of the high priest's residence, a common architectural feature in large ancient Near Eastern homes. These courtyards served as semi-public spaces, accessible to household servants, guards, and those involved in legal proceedings, such as members of the Sanhedrin. Kindling a fire in the midst of such a courtyard was a practical necessity for warmth, but it also created a natural gathering point, drawing people together and making individuals more visible in the flickering light. This detail is corroborated by John 18:18, which also mentions Peter standing and warming himself by a charcoal fire, underscoring the commonality of the practice and the specific conditions of that night.
Key Themes
Luke 22:55 contributes significantly to several key themes within Luke's Gospel and the broader Passion narrative. Firstly, it highlights Human Frailty and Vulnerability, particularly concerning Peter, who, despite his earlier bold declaration of loyalty to Jesus (Luke 22:33), now finds himself in a compromising position. His decision to sit "among them" underscores the subtle way fear and self-preservation can lead even the most devoted followers into situations of temptation. Secondly, the verse serves as crucial Foreshadowing and Fulfillment of Prophecy. Jesus had explicitly predicted Peter's denial before the rooster crowed (Luke 22:34), and this scene meticulously sets the stage for that prophecy's grim realization. The fire itself, while practical, also functions as a Symbol of Exposure, making Peter visible and creating the very circumstances for his recognition and subsequent challenges.
Exposition and Analysis
Key Word Analysis
Refers to a literal fire, kindled for warmth in the cold night. In this context, it is more than just a source of heat; it becomes a focal point that draws people together and, ironically, illuminates Peter's presence, making him identifiable and vulnerable to questioning. Its literal function creates the setting for a profound spiritual test.
Denotes an open courtyard or atrium, not an enclosed room. This detail is crucial for understanding the public or semi-public nature of the space where Peter was. It implies a place where various people associated with the high priest's household or the Sanhedrin's proceedings would gather, making Peter's attempt to blend in inherently risky due to the open environment.
Implies a settled, deliberate action of taking a seat. Peter's act of sitting "among them" suggests a desire to appear inconspicuous, to blend in with the crowd of guards and servants. However, this very act of settling in makes him part of the group, increasing his exposure and the likelihood of being recognized and challenged, rather than allowing him to remain a detached observer.
Verse Breakdown
"And when they had kindled a fire in the midst of the hall"
This clause establishes the physical setting and the practical action taken by those present. The "hall" (courtyard) is the location, and the kindling of a fire indicates the coldness of the night and the communal nature of the gathering. This fire, intended for warmth, inadvertently creates the conditions for Peter's exposure.
"and were set down together"
This phrase describes the collective action of the group already present. They had gathered around the fire, seeking comfort and companionship in the late hours. This detail emphasizes the established social dynamic that Peter was entering, a group already settled and interacting.
"Peter sat down among them"
This final clause focuses on Peter's specific action and his chosen proximity. Having followed "at a distance" (Luke 22:54), Peter now deliberately chooses to join the very people associated with Jesus' arrest and trial. His act of sitting "among them" signifies his attempt to blend in, but also places him in direct relational and physical proximity to those who would soon challenge his identity as a follower of Jesus.
Literary Devices
Luke 22:55 employs several potent literary devices. Foreshadowing is prominent, as Peter's decision to sit "among them" by the fire directly sets the stage for his three denials, fulfilling Jesus' earlier prophecy. The seemingly mundane act of seeking warmth becomes a catalyst for a profound spiritual failure. There is also a strong element of Irony: the fire, intended to provide comfort and warmth, instead becomes a source of exposure and discomfort for Peter, illuminating his presence and drawing attention to him at the most vulnerable moment. Furthermore, the Symbolism of the fire itself is multifaceted: it represents both physical warmth and the spiritual "heat" of the moment—the intense pressure and scrutiny Peter is about to face. The light from the fire, while practical, also symbolizes the revelation of truth and identity, as Peter's true allegiance is about to be put to the test.
Theological and Thematic Connections
Luke 22:55 is a poignant illustration of the human propensity to falter under pressure, even for those with the deepest devotion. Peter's decision to sit among Jesus' accusers, while seemingly a practical choice for warmth, reveals a deeper spiritual vulnerability—a desire for self-preservation that momentarily eclipses his courageous commitment to Christ. This moment underscores the theological truth that even the strongest believers are susceptible to temptation and fear when they rely on their own strength rather than divine grace. It highlights the subtle dangers of compromising environments and the ease with which one can slip from following "at a distance" to being "among" those hostile to Christ, setting the stage for a profound failure that ultimately leads to repentance and restoration.
Reflection and Application
Luke 22:55 serves as a powerful cautionary tale for believers across all ages. Peter's initial desire to be close to Jesus, even "at a distance," is commendable, but his subsequent choice to sit "among them" by the fire reveals a critical lapse in judgment. This moment challenges us to examine our own lives: Are we, in our desire for comfort, acceptance, or safety, placing ourselves in environments or associations that subtly compromise our commitment to Christ? Do we recognize the insidious nature of fear and self-preservation, which can lead us to deny our faith not always through explicit words, but through our actions and associations? This verse calls for vigilance, self-awareness of our inherent weaknesses, and an unwavering reliance on God's strength rather than our own resolve, especially when the pressures of the world seek to draw us away from our allegiance to Christ. It reminds us that true discipleship often requires a willingness to stand apart, even when it means discomfort or isolation.
Questions for Reflection
FAQ
Why did Peter sit among them, given the danger?
Peter's decision to sit among the guards and servants by the fire was likely a complex mix of practical necessity and human weakness. The night was cold, so seeking warmth was natural. However, having followed Jesus "at a distance" (Luke 22:54), Peter was attempting to remain inconspicuous while still being close enough to observe the proceedings involving Jesus. His act of sitting "among them" was an attempt to blend in and avoid drawing attention to himself as a disciple of the accused. Yet, this very act of seeking comfort and anonymity placed him directly in the environment where his identity would be challenged, revealing his vulnerability to fear and self-preservation, ultimately leading to his denials.
What is the significance of the fire in this passage?
The fire in Luke 22:55 holds both practical and symbolic significance. Practically, it provided warmth on a cold night, explaining why people, including Peter, gathered around it. Symbolically, however, the fire becomes a focal point that illuminates Peter's presence, making him visible and identifiable to those who would question him. It represents the "heat" of the moment—the intense pressure and scrutiny Peter is about to face. The light from the fire, while offering physical comfort, ironically serves to expose Peter's hidden presence, setting the stage for his public denials and the subsequent exposure of his human frailty.
Christ-Centered Fulfillment
Luke 22:55, though depicting Peter's human weakness, ultimately points to the profound grace and redemptive work of Christ. Peter's failure to stand firm in the face of temptation, despite his earlier bold declarations, highlights the universal need for a Savior who perfectly fulfills righteousness where humanity falls short. Even as Peter sits among his Lord's accusers, Jesus is undergoing His own trial, enduring the accusations and suffering for the very sins Peter (and all humanity) would commit. The scene foreshadows not only Peter's denial but also his bitter repentance (Luke 22:61-62), which is made possible by Christ's intercession for him (Luke 22:31-32). Ultimately, Peter's restoration, beautifully recounted in John 21:15-19, demonstrates that Christ's love and forgiveness are greater than any human failure. This passage, therefore, underscores the necessity of Christ's perfect sacrifice to cover our imperfections and His compassionate High Priestly work to sustain us even when we falter, ensuring that our ultimate hope rests not in our own strength, but in His unfailing grace.