TRV
“Peter Denies Jesus”· Matthew 26:69–75
Translation
King James Version
And after a while came unto him they that stood by, and said to Peter, Surely thou also art one of them; for thy speech bewrayeth thee.
Complete Jewish Bible
After a little while, the bystanders approached Kefa and said, "You must be one of them -- your accent gives you away."
Berean Standard Bible
After a little while, those standing nearby came up to Peter. “Surely you are one of them,” they said, “for your accent gives you away.”
American Standard Version
And after a little while they that stood by came and said to Peter, Of a truth thou also art one of them; for thy speech maketh thee known.
World English Bible Messianic
After a little while those who stood by came and said to Peter, “Surely you are also one of them, for your speech makes you known.”
Geneva Bible (1599)
So after a while, came vnto him they that stoode by, and sayde vnto Peter, Surely thou art also one of them: for euen thy speache bewraieth thee.
Young's Literal Translation
And after a little those standing near having come, said to Peter, `Truly thou also art of them, for even thy speech doth make thee manifest.'
See on the biblical-era map
In the KJVVerse 24,128 of 31,102 · 77.6%
LawLawHistoryHistPoetryPoetProphetsProphNew TestamentNT
Study This Verse
Copy as
Historical interpretation
Six Centuries of Reception
13 surviving comments on this verse. Each one is dated, so this reads as a timeline rather than a list.
Ante-NicenePost-NiceneEarly Medieval
300400500600700800
Select a marker to jump to its quote. Markers stagger vertically where authors wrote within a few decades of each other.
Upon examining Peter’s denial, we note that “as yet the Spirit had not been given, because Jesus was not yet glorified.” For this reason, neither was it possible for Peter at the time to profess belief in Jesus nor was he to be criticized for not professing belief in him, since it is said to those who profess belief: “It is not you who speak, but the Spirit of your Father speaking through you.” We … since the Spirit of the Father has the power to speak in us and since it is in our power to “make room” in us for the Holy Spirit and not “for the devil,” if we should deny Christ, we would have no excuse.It may be that whoever is in the courtyard of Caiaphas “the high priest” cannot admit knowing the Lord Jesus unless he has gone outside his courtyard and has been brought outside of every teaching contrary to Jesus and outside of Jewish traditions handed down, not according to the Spirit of the Scriptures but according to the “commands and teachings of men.” Consider how Peter, seated outside at a distance from Jesus and in the high priest’s courtyard, denied Jesus before them all; and again, for the second time, going out to the porch and wishing to leave but not yet outside the gateway, he denied the Lord. Then, for the third time, “while the bystanders came and said, ‘Certainly you are also one of them,’ ” when “he began to invoke a curse on himself and to swear ‘I do not know the man,’?” he was not yet outside. Furthermore, all the denials were made at night and in the darkness, before the break of dawn and the sign of the new day, that is, the crowing of the cock that bestirs the early risers. And if, by way of hypothesis, Peter had denied after the crowing of the cock, as was said, “The night is far gone, the day is at hand … let us conduct ourselves becomingly as in the day,” he would have had no excuse for his actions.
Perhaps all people when they deny Jesus … seemingly deny him before the crowing of the cock, when the sun of justice has not yet risen for them and its rising is not yet at hand. But if upon the rising of the sun for the soul “we sin deliberately after receiving the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins but a fearful prospect of judgment and a fury of fire which will consume the adversaries.”
I believe that the first servant girl who caused Christ’s disciples to deny him stands for the synagogue of the Jews “according to the flesh,” who have frequently coerced the faithful to deny him. The second maidservant stands for the assembly of Gentiles, who also in persecuting Christians has forced them to deny the Lord. And third were the bystanders in the courtyard, who are ministers of the different heresies and who also compel others to deny the truth of Christ.
Or, By the first handmaid is understood the Synagogue of the Jews, which oft compelled the faithful to deny; by the second, the congregations of the Gentiles, who even persecuted the Christians; they that stood in the hall signify the ministers of divers heresies, who also compel men to deny the truth of Christ.
(in Luc. 22, 57.) I had rather that Peter deny, than that the Lord be made out false.
Oh strange and wonderful acts! When indeed he saw his master seized only, he was so fervent as both to draw his sword, and to cut off the man's ear; but when it was natural for him to be more indignant, and to be inflamed and to burn, hearing such revilings, then he becomes a denier. For who would not have been inflamed to madness by the things that were then doing? yet the disciple, overcome by fears, so far from showing indignation, even denies, and endures not the threat of a miserable and mean girl, and not once only, but a second and third time doth he deny Him; and in a short period, and not so much as before judges, for it was without for "when he had gone out into the porch," they asked him, and he did not even readily come to a sense of his fall. And this Luke saith, namely, that Christ looked on him showing that he not only denied Him, but was not even brought to remembrance from within, and this though the cock had crowed; but he needed a further remembrance from his master, and His look was to him instead of a voice; so exceedingly was he full of fear.
But Mark saith, that when he had once denied, then first the cock crew, but when thrice, then for the second time; for he declares more particularly the weakness of the disciple, and that he was utterly dead with fear; having learnt these things of his masters himself, for he was a follower of Peter. In which respect one would most marvel at him, that so far from hiding his teacher's faults, he declared it more distinctly than the rest, on this very account, that he was his disciple.
How then is what is said true, when Matthew affirms that Christ said, "Verily I say unto thee, that before the cock crow thou shalt deny me thrice;" and Mark declares after the third denial, that "The cock crew the second time?" Nay, most certainly is it both true and in harmony. For because at each crowing the cock is wont to crow both a third and a fourth time, Mark, to show that not even the sound checked him, and brought him to recollection saith this. So that both things are true. For before the cock had finished the one crowing, he had denied a third time. And not even when reminded of his sin by Christ did he dare to weep openly, lest he should be betrayed by his tears, but "he went out, and wept bitterly."
And he, who, when he saw his Master laid hands on, drew his sword and cut off the ear, now when he sees Him enduring such insults becomes a denier, and cannot withstand the taunts of a mean servant girl. A damsel came unto him, saying, Thou also wast with Jesus of Galilee.
But not once, but twice and thrice did he deny within a short time.
To show that the sound did not keep him from denial, nor bring his promise to mind.
Peter sat without, that he might see the event, and not excite suspicion by any approach to Jesus.
And again he denied with an oath, I do not know the man. I know that some out of a feeling of piety towards the Apostle Peter have interpreted this place to signify that Peter denied the Man and not the God, as though he meant, 'I do not know the Man, because I know the God.'x But the intelligent reader will see that this is trifling, for if he denied not, the Lord spoke falsely when He said, Thou shalt deny me thrice.
Not that Peter was of a different speech or nation, but a Hebrew as his accusers were; but every province and every district has its peculiarities, and he could not disguise his native pronunciation.
In another Gospel we read, that after Peter's denial and the cock-crow, the Saviour looked upon Peter, (Luke 22:61.) and by His look called forth those bitter tears; for it might not be that he on whom the Light of the world had looked should continue in the darkness of denial, wherefore, he went out, and wept bitterly. For he could not do penitence sitting in Caiaphas' hall, but went forth from the assembly of the wicked, that he might wash away in bitter tears the pollution of his timid denial.
“And again he denied it with an oath, ‘I do not know the man.’ ” I know that some people with a soft spot in their hearts for the apostle Peter have interpreted this passage to the effect that Peter did not deny God but man, and what he meant was “I do not know the man, because I know God.” The wise reader realizes how frivolous this interpretation is, for those who thus defend the apostle make the Lord guilty of a lie. If Peter did not deny him, then the Lord lied in saying, “Truly, I say to you, this very night, before the cock crows twice, you will deny me three times.” Notice what he says: “You will deny me”—not “the man.”“Certainly you are also one of them, for your accent betrays you.” Not that Peter spoke a different language or belonged to a foreign nation … but since each province and region had their own characteristics and vernacular, one could not help having a certain sound to his speech. For instance, the Ephrathites in the book of Judges cannot pronounce the word synthema.
“Then he began to invoke a curse on himself and to swear that he did not know the man. And immediately the cock crowed.” In the other Gospel we read that after Peter’s denial and the crowing of the cock, the Savior looked at Peter and, by his very gaze, aroused bitter tears in him. It could not be that Peter, on whom the light of the world had gazed, should remain in the darkness of denial.
(Verse 73.) Truly, you are also one of them: for even your speech gives you away. Not that Peter spoke a different language or came from a foreign nation. For all of them were Hebrews, both those who accused and those who were accused. But each province and region has its own peculiarities, and cannot avoid the sound of their native language. Hence, even the Ephraimites in the Book of Judges (chapter 12) could not pronounce the word σύνθημα.
(Quæst. Ev. i. 44.) That, they did spit in his face, signifies those who reject His proffered grace. They likewise buffet Him who prefer their own honour to Him; and they smite Him on the face, who, blinded with unbelief, affirm that He is not yet come, disowning and rejecting His person.
(de Cons. Ev. iii. 6.) Among the other insults offered to our Lord was the threefold denial of Peter, which the several Evangelists relate in different order. Luke puts Peter's trial first, and the ill usage of the Lord after that; Matthew and Mark reverse the order.
(ubi sup.) We understand that having gone out after his first denial, the cock crowed the first time as Mark relates.
(ubi sup.) The second denial was not outside the door, but after he had returned to the fire; for the second maid did not see him after he had gone out, but as he was going out; his getting up to go out drew her attention, and she said to them that were there, that is, to those that were standing round the fire in the hall, Tins fellow also was with Jesus of Nazareth. He who had gone out, haying heard this returned, that he might by denial vindicate himself. Or, as is more likely, he did not hear what was said of him as he went out, but it was after he came back that the maid, and the other man whom Luke mentions, said to him, And thou also art one of them.
(ubi sup.) Let us now come to the third denial; And after a while came they that stood by, and said to Peter, Surely thou also art one of them, (Luke's words are, About the space of one hour after,) for thy speech bewrayeth thee. (Luke 22:59.)
(Quæst. Ev. i. 45.) Also Peter thrice denied, because heretical error concerning Christ is limited to three kinds; they are in error respecting His divinity, His humanity, or both.
(Serm. 60, 4.) For this reason it should seem he was permitted to waver, that the remedy of penitence might be exhibited in the head of the Church, and that none should dare to trust in his own strength, when even the blessed Peter could not escape the danger of frailty.
(Serm. 60. 4.) Blessed tears, O holy Apostle, which had the virtue of holy Baptism in washing off the sin of thy denial. The right hand of the Lord Jesus Christ was with thee to hold thee up before thou wast quite thrown down, and in the midst of thy perilous fall, thou receivedst strength to stand. The Rock quickly returned to its stability, recovering so great fortitude, that he who in Christ's passion had quailed, should endure his own subsequent suffering with fearlessness and constancy.
Observe how baneful are communications with evil men; they even drove Peter to deny the Lord whom he had before confessed to be the Son of God.
Spiritually; By Peter's denial before the cock-crow, are denoted those who before Christ's resurrection did not believe Him to be God, being perplexed by His death. In his denial after the first cock-crow, are denoted those who are in error concerning both Christ's natures, His human and divine. By the first handmaid is signified desire; by the second, carnal delight; by them that stood by, the dæmons; for by them men are led to a denial of Christ.
What means this, that a handmaid is the first to tax him, when men would be more likely to recognise him, except that this sex might seem to sin somewhat in the Lord's death, that they might be redeemed by His passion? He denied before them all, because he was afraid to reveal himself; that he said, I know not, shows that he was not yet willing to die for the Saviour.
In this denial of Peter we affirm that Christ is denied not only by him who denies that He is Christ, but who denies himself to be a Christian.
Observe, that he said the first time, I know not what thou sayest; the second time, He denied with an oath; the third time, He began to curse and to swear that he knew not the man. For to persevere in sinning increases sinfulness, and he who disregards light sins, falls into greater.
After the third denial comes the cock-crow; by which we may understand a Doctor of the Church who with chiding rouses the slumbering, saying, Awake, ye righteous, and sin not. (1 Cor. 15:14.) Thus Holy Scripture uses to denote the merit of divers cases by fixed periods, as Peter sinned at midnight and repented at cock-crow.
Source: Quotations drawn from early Church Fathers and historical Christian theologians (AD 100–1500). Some quotes address the surrounding passage context rather than this verse alone.
Copy as
Continue studying Matthew 26:73 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
Matthew 26:73 records the third and final denial of Jesus by Peter, a pivotal moment in the Passion narrative. As Peter lingered in the courtyard of the high priest, bystanders approached him, confidently asserting his association with Jesus based on his distinctive Galilean accent. This accusation, "Surely thou also art one of them; for thy speech bewrayeth thee," marks the culmination of Peter's fearful retreat from his earlier bold declarations of loyalty, directly fulfilling Jesus' prophecy and highlighting the profound frailty of human resolve under intense pressure.
Context
Literary Context
This verse is the climax of a deeply dramatic and sorrowful sequence for Peter. It follows his first denial to a maidservant (Matthew 26:69-70) and his second denial to another maid and bystanders (Matthew 26:71-72). The immediate narrative flow places Peter in the courtyard of Caiaphas, the high priest, while Jesus is undergoing an unjust trial inside. Peter's presence in this dangerous environment, coupled with his fear of association with the condemned Jesus, drives his repeated denials. The entire episode is framed by Jesus' solemn prophecy to Peter at the Last Supper, found in Matthew 26:34, that he would deny Him three times before the rooster crowed. The subsequent verse, Matthew 26:74, immediately records Peter's final, vehement denial followed by the crowing of the rooster, bringing the weight of his failure crashing down upon him.
Historical & Cultural Context
The setting is the high priest's courtyard in Jerusalem during the Passover festival, a time of heightened religious and political tension. Jerusalem was the center of Jewish religious authority, and its inhabitants, particularly the religious elite and their servants, would have been familiar with regional dialects. Galileans, like Peter and many of Jesus' disciples, were often looked down upon by Judeans, and their Aramaic dialect had distinct phonetic characteristics that made it easily recognizable. For instance, Galileans were known to confuse guttural sounds, making their speech sound unrefined to Judean ears. To be identified as a Galilean in Jerusalem, especially in the context of Jesus' arrest, was to be immediately associated with a perceived provincial, possibly rebellious, movement. The danger of such an association was severe, potentially leading to arrest, trial, or even execution, explaining Peter's desperate attempts to distance himself from Jesus.
Key Themes
This verse powerfully contributes to several major themes within Matthew's Gospel and the broader biblical narrative. It highlights the theme of human frailty and the struggle with fear, as Peter, despite his earlier bold declarations of loyalty (e.g., Matthew 26:33), succumbs to the intense pressure of persecution. It also underscores the fulfillment of divine prophecy, as Jesus' precise foretelling of Peter's denial comes to pass exactly as predicted (compare with Matthew 26:34). Furthermore, the verse introduces the theme of speech as a revealer of identity and allegiance. Peter's accent, his "speech," becomes the undeniable evidence of his origin and association, demonstrating how our words, even our manner of speaking, can betray our true affiliations or character, a concept that resonates throughout biblical wisdom literature (e.g., Proverbs 18:21).
Exposition and Analysis
Key Word Analysis
This word refers to "talk" or "speech," but in this context, it specifically denotes Peter's manner of speaking, his dialect, or accent. The bystanders recognized the distinct phonetic qualities of his Galilean Aramaic, which differed noticeably from the Aramaic spoken in Jerusalem. This linguistic identifier served as irrefutable proof of his origin and, by extension, his association with Jesus and other Galilean disciples.
This archaic English term translates the Greek word meaning "clear," "evident," or "manifest." It signifies that Peter's speech makes him evident or reveals him clearly. His accent was not merely a hint but a definitive indicator, leaving no doubt about his background to those who heard him. The word emphasizes the undeniable nature of the evidence.
This adverb means "truly," "indeed," or "of a surety." Its inclusion underscores the certainty and conviction of the bystanders' accusation. They were not merely guessing or suspecting; they were absolutely convinced of Peter's identity due to the undeniable evidence of his speech. This certainty contrasts sharply with Peter's desperate and increasingly vehement denials.
Verse Breakdown
"And after a while came unto him they that stood by"
This phrase indicates a passage of time since Peter's previous denial, allowing for a new group of people, perhaps those who had just arrived or were observing the scene, to approach Peter. The phrase "they that stood by" (G2476, hístēmi) implies a casual observation that turns into an active confrontation, highlighting the persistent scrutiny Peter faced in the high priest's courtyard.
"and said to Peter, Surely thou also art one of them;"
This is a direct, confident accusation. The use of "Surely" (G230, alēthōs') emphasizes the accusers' conviction. They are not asking a question but stating a fact, asserting Peter's identity as one of Jesus' followers. The phrase "one of them" links Peter directly to Jesus and His other disciples, implying shared allegiance and, in the context of Jesus' trial, shared culpability.
"for thy speech bewrayeth thee."
This clause provides the irrefutable evidence for their accusation. Peter's "speech" (G2981, laliá), specifically his Galilean accent or dialect, "bewrayeth" (G1212, dēlos') him, meaning it exposes or reveals his identity. His words, intended to deny, paradoxically confirm his association, demonstrating the power of ingrained linguistic patterns to reveal one's origin and affiliations.
Literary Devices
The verse employs several potent literary devices. Irony is prominent, as Peter's attempts to deny Jesus through his words are undermined by the very "speech" that reveals his true identity. His denial is simultaneously his exposure. There is also a strong element of foreshadowing, as this moment directly fulfills Jesus' prophecy in Matthew 26:34, adding a layer of divine sovereignty to the human drama. Furthermore, the concept of "speech" (laliá) functions as a powerful symbolism, representing not just a regional accent but the deeper reality of one's origin, identity, and allegiance, which can be unintentionally revealed even when one tries to conceal it.
Theological and Thematic Connections
Peter's denial, culminating in this verse, is a profound theological statement on human fallibility and the unwavering nature of divine prophecy. It underscores that even the most devoted disciples are susceptible to fear and failure when confronted with overwhelming pressure, reminding us that our strength is not inherent but derived from God. Yet, this moment of profound weakness also serves to highlight God's sovereign plan, as Jesus' prophecy is meticulously fulfilled. The incident sets the stage for Peter's deep repentance and, ultimately, his glorious restoration by the resurrected Christ, demonstrating God's boundless grace and redemptive power even in the face of abject failure. It teaches us that failure, while painful, is not the end of God's story for us, but can be a crucible for deeper humility and reliance on Him.
Reflection and Application
Peter's third denial is a stark, humbling mirror for every believer. It challenges us to examine the depth of our commitment, not in moments of ease, but when our faith is truly tested. His failure serves as a powerful reminder that self-confidence, however well-intentioned, is a fragile foundation; true strength lies in humble dependence on God's grace. We are called to vigilance and prayer, especially when spiritual dangers loom, recognizing our own susceptibility to fear and temptation. Moreover, Peter's experience underscores the profound truth that our words, and even our manner of speaking, can reveal our true allegiances and character. This calls us to mindful communication, ensuring our speech consistently reflects our identity as followers of Christ. Ultimately, Peter's story is one of profound failure followed by glorious restoration, offering immense hope that even when we stumble, God's mercy is greater than our sin, and He is faithful to forgive and restore those who genuinely repent and turn back to Him.
Questions for Reflection
FAQ
Why was Peter's speech so distinctive that it "bewrayed" him?
Peter's speech was distinctive because he was from Galilee, a region north of Judea. Galileans spoke a dialect of Aramaic that had noticeable phonetic differences from the Aramaic spoken in Jerusalem and Judea. These differences, such as the pronunciation of certain guttural sounds, made their accent easily recognizable to Judeans. In this tense courtyard setting, Peter's accent served as an undeniable linguistic marker, revealing his regional origin and, by extension, his association with Jesus and the other disciples, many of whom were also Galileans.
What does the archaic word "bewrayeth" mean in this context?
The King James Version's "bewrayeth" (from the Greek dēlos') means to expose, reveal, or make manifest. It signifies that Peter's speech clearly and undeniably uncovered his identity. It wasn't a subtle hint, but a definitive piece of evidence that made his connection to Jesus evident to the bystanders, despite his attempts to deny it.
How does this verse relate to Jesus' earlier prophecy to Peter?
This verse directly fulfills Jesus' prophecy given to Peter at the Last Supper. In Matthew 26:34, Jesus told Peter, "Verily I say unto thee, That this night, before the cock crow, thou shalt deny me thrice." Peter's third denial in Matthew 26:73 is immediately followed by the crowing of the rooster in Matthew 26:74, bringing Jesus' words to pass with chilling precision. This fulfillment highlights the divine foreknowledge and sovereignty at work even amidst human failure.
Christ-Centered Fulfillment
While Matthew 26:73 vividly portrays Peter's human frailty and denial of Christ, it paradoxically points to the perfect faithfulness of Christ Himself. Peter's failure underscores the necessity of a perfectly obedient Savior who would never deny His Father or His mission, even unto death. As Peter succumbs to fear, Jesus, in stark contrast, steadfastly endures the unjust trial, remaining silent or speaking truth, fully committed to the Father's will (compare Matthew 26:63). Peter's profound brokenness after the rooster crows (Matthew 26:75) sets the stage for his glorious restoration by the resurrected Christ, as beautifully depicted in John 21:15-19. This restoration is a testament to Christ's redemptive power and boundless grace, demonstrating that His perfect sacrifice covers even the deepest human failures. Peter's subsequent transformation, empowered by the Holy Spirit at Pentecost (Acts 2:14-41), from a fearful denier to a bold proclaimer, is a direct result of Christ's finished work and His intercession for Peter (as foretold in Luke 22:31-32). Thus, Peter's denial, though a dark moment, ultimately magnifies the unyielding love, faithfulness, and redemptive power of Jesus Christ.