Today’s post will tackle another question that the Skeptic Annotated Bible asked: “Did the cock crow before or after Peter’s denial?”
Here are the answers which the skeptic believes shows a Bible contradiction:
Peter denied Jesus three times before the cock crowed.
“But he denied it before them all, saying, “I do not know what you are talking about…And again he denied it, with an oath: “I do not know the man…Then he began to curse and swear, “I do not know the man!” And immediately a rooster crowed.” (Matthew 26:70, 72, 74)
“But he denied it, saying, “I do not know Him, woman!” 58 And a little later, another person saw him and said, “You are one of them too!” But Peter said, “Man, I am not!” 59 And after about an hour had passed, some other man began to insist, saying, “Certainly this man also was with Him, for he, too, is a Galilean.” 60 But Peter said, “Man, I do not know what you are talking about!” And immediately, while he was still speaking, a rooster crowed.” (Luke 22:57-60)
“Then the slave woman who was the doorkeeper *said to Peter, “You are not also one of this Man’s disciples, are you?” He *said, “I am not.”…Now Simon Peter was still standing and warming himself. So they said to him, “You are not one of His disciples as well, are you?” He denied it, and said, “I am not.” 26 One of the slaves of the high priest, who was related to the one whose ear Peter cut off, *said, “Did I not see you in the garden with Him?” 27 Peter then denied it again, and immediately a rooster crowed. (John 18:17, 25-27)
The cock crowed after Peter’s first denial.
“and seeing Peter warming himself, she looked at him and *said, “You were with Jesus the Nazarene as well.” 68 But he denied it, saying, “I neither know nor understand what you are talking about.” And he went out onto the porch. 69 The slave woman saw him, and began once more to say to the bystanders, “This man is one of them!” 70 But again he denied it. And after a little while the bystanders were again saying to Peter, “You really are one of them, for you are a Galilean as well.” 71 But he began to curse himself and to swear, “I do not know this man of whom you speak!” 72 And immediately a rooster crowed a second time. And Peter remembered how Jesus had made the remark to him, “Before a rooster crows twice, you will deny Me three times.” And he hurried on and began to weep.” (Mark 14:67-72)
(All Scriptural quotation comes from the New American Standard Bible)
Here’s a closer look at whether or not there is a contradiction:
- When dealing with skeptics’ claim of Bible contradictions it seems one can never be reminded enough of what exactly is a contradiction. A contradiction occurs when two or more claims conflict with one another so that they cannot simultaneously be true in the same sense and at the same time. To put it another way, a Bible contradiction exists when there are claims within the Bible that are mutually exclusive in the same sense and at the same time.
- One should be skeptical of whether this is a Bible contradiction given the Skeptic Annotated Bible’s track record of inaccurately handling the Bible. See the many examples of their error which we have responded to in this post: Collection of Posts Responding to Bible Contradictions. Of course that does not take away the need to respond to this claim of a contradiction, which is what the remainder of this post will do. But this observation should caution us to slow down and look more closely at the passages cited by the Skeptic Annotated Bible to see if they interpreted the passages properly to support their conclusion that it is a Bible contradiction.
- The skeptic tries to pit three passages from Matthew, Luke and John concerning Peter’s betrayal of Jesus (Matthew 26:70, 72, 74, Luke 22:57-60, John 18:17, 25-27) as affirming the claim “The cock crowed after Peter denied Jesus three times” against Mark 14:67-72 as affirming “The cock crowed after Peter’s first denial.”
- Taking the skeptics’ at face value of his claims as what the passage he cited states we still do not have a logical contradictions since the claims themselves are not mutually exclusive.
- The claim “The cock crowed after Peter denied Jesus three times” doesn’t logically contradict “The cock crowed after Peter’s first denial.” Logically speaking in order to contradict the claim “The cock crowed after Peter denied Jesus three times” the claims will have to be either “The cock DID NOT crowed after Peter denied Jesus three times” or “The cock ONLY crowed after Peter denied Jesus three times.” But that is not the same thing as “The cock crowed after Peter’s first denial.”
- The claim “The cock crowed after Peter’s first denial” doesn’t logically contradict “The cock crowed after Peter denied Jesus three times.” Logically speaking in order to contradict the claim “The cock crowed after Peter’s first denial” the claims will have to be either “The cock DID NOT crowed after Peter’s first denial” or “The cock ONLY crowed after after Peter’s first denial.” But that is not the same thing as “The cock crowed after Peter denied Jesus three times.”
- It is important to ask what is going on in the passages the skeptics cited to see if the passages were properly interpreted to support the skeptics’ claims.
- The three passages of Matthew (Matthew 26:70, 72, 74) Luke (Luke 22:57-60) and John (John 18:17, 25-27) does affirm the claim “The cock crowed after Peter denied Jesus three times.”
- Mark 14:67-72 does not affirm the claim “The cock crowed after Peter’s first denial.” The passage nowhere say “The cock crowed after Peter’s first denial.” In verse 72 it records Jesus saying “Before a rooster crows twice, you will deny Me three times.” So when Peter denied Jesus the third time according to verse 72 the crow would have crowed twice. But when the first crow isn’t mentioned, whether that is after the first or the second denial by Peter. So the skeptic is not justified to say “The cock crowed after Peter’s first denial.”
- Looking at Mark 14:67-72 more carefully we see that it is compatible with the other three passages that claims “The cock crowed after Peter denied Jesus three times.” Mark 14:72 states that a cock crowed after Peter’s third denial, which is consistent with the account in the book of Matthew, Luke and John. Mark 14:72 of course adds more details that this crow by the rooster is the second time when it happened during Peter denial of Jesus for the third time but still we see all the passages are in agreement that a rooster crowed after Peter denied Jesus for the third time.
- If any skeptics is stuck thinking thee is a contradiction because the passages stats the cock crowing either once or twice see my response here: Did Jesus say before the cock crow or before the cock crows twice?
- There is no contradiction here. Seems the skeptic needs to learn of How to Handle Bible Contradictions.
- We shouldn’t miss that worldviews are at play even with the skeptic’s objection to Christianity. The worldview of the author of the Skeptic Annotated Bible actually doesn’t even allow for such a thing as the law of non-contradiction to be meaningful and intelligible. In other words for him to try to disprove the Bible by pointing out that there’s a Bible contradiction doesn’t even make sense within his own worldview. Check out our post “Skeptic Annotated Bible Author’s Self-Defeating Worldview.”
[…] Did the cock crow before or after Peter’s denial? […]
Thanks for the great insight on this. I appreciate your continued series on this.
Blessings for a wonderous weekend.
Excellent job, brother! I will confess I thought, “didn’t he just write on this?!” and then as always, you fleshed it out for me! There is no contradiction here. I still stand by Mark’s account being different is because of John Mark’s relationship to Peter and receiving details that Peter remembered after the fact. Praying for you and youth today!!
I do agree with you that Mark’s account is based upon Peter remembering the details. There are times I’m pleasantly surprised seeing Mark gives more details than the other Gospels of the same episode like in this instance with the rooster crowing at least twice after Peter’s denying Jesus three times. I mean it’s so specific and wordy! Sounds like Peter behind it to me and not just a passing summary. Thanks for your blessing with youth group and your prayer for us today which will begin in an hour! Can I also ask for further prayer as for Lunch I’ll be meeting with some individuals looking for a church and considering ours because HeartCry recommended us to them? What does your weekend looks like sister Mandy?
Well said, brother! How did it go with the youth and with your lunch meeting?! Today was a beautiful day outside so we went fishing 🎣!!!!
Good point worth emphasizing: “The worldview of the author of the Skeptic Annotated Bible actually doesn’t even allow for such a thing as the law of non-contradiction to be meaningful and intelligible.”
The skeptic’s worldview of what they believe ultimately is self-defeating of even their own endeavor of showing there is a Bible contradiction! Hope you have a blessed weekend Frank and thanks for sharing our posts so often on Twitter! Any plans for Saturday?
We had no plans for Saturday, but we will shortly be listening to Jonathan Cahn’s Passover service. He is a messianic Jewish pastor.
Good point. They have no foundation
That pulls the rug off their feet
Thanks for thoroughly debunking another one of Steve/Stephen Wells’ alleged contradictions. He’s digging a deep rut in the road with his either/or false dichotomies.
Hope you have a good prep day today!
Thank you for reading this Tom! About to begin youth group in 3 minutes! Yep, another false dichotomy from the skeptic, far too many of these fallacious thinking on the part of the skeptics. How’s your shift going? Wanted to ask if you can pray for my meeting with some individuals looking for a new church
RE: shift
Thanks! The end is in sight. A lot of physical work today, ready for the mattress.
Yup, I’ll be praying for those individuals looking for a new church. I hope they decide to attend your church!
Reblogged this on Talmidimblogging.
See 2 Pe. 1:20-21 of what the Bible says about itself. The problem with the atheist here seems to be a general misreading of the Gospels and typical of how liberal/progressive “Christianity” think, making one’s autonomous reasoning the starting point instead of the Bible’s own account of itself and then working forward to look at these so-called contradictions
Fine refute and usual.
Thank you Maw Maw, hope you doing well today!
I am. Hope you and family the same. Love in Christ.
Thank you for sharing this post SlimJim! We need to stand on God’s word ☺️
The skeptics bring up this objection pretty often so it’s to the benefit of many to see you handled this
You do an excellent job debunking these assumed contradictions. Thank you for all the hard work and time spent on these.
God bless you
You are welcome! I enjoy doing these ones related to Jesus and Passion week, as we approach Good Friday and Resurrection Sunday. Thank you for reading this…and happy Palm Sunday! Is your Church doing anything different today?
Our church didn’t mentioned Palm Sunday.
We did have a missionary from Mauritius. His messaged I needed to hear. Sometimes is discouraging when we are out sharing the gospel. I am sure you know what I mean.
Have a blessed Lord’s Day as you minister in the power of the Holy Spirit.
Even in the final hours of His earthly life, the Son of Man could see the future. Peter (and really all of His remaining disciples) would be seeking to hide their own truth about their Teacher.
Let add an Amen! Atheist got no basis for saying there is a a Bible contradiction with this instance.
Skeptics love to pick on small details but don’t like major and fundamental critiques of their own worldview under your last point
[…] 2.) Bible Contradiction? Did the cock crow before or after Peter’s denial? […]
[…] Did the cock crow before or after Peter’s denial? NEW […]
Logically laid out
Perfect read on Good Friday
[…] Did the cock crow before or after Peter’s denial? […]
Damaged!
[…] Did the cock crow before or after Peter’s denial? […]
[…] Did the cock crow before or after Peter’s denial? […]