Denials and Trials

This is the Bible study page for the Thursday Night Bible Study Group meeting March 2 to study Luke 22:54-71.  This is both Peter's denial and Jesus' "trial" such as it is in Luke.  The parallel passages are Matthew 26:57-75, Mark 14:53-72, and John 18:13-27.  It will be helpful to read these others as there are details that are actually difficult to reconcile.

Read through the passage in Luke, and the parallels looking for the scenes in as much detail as you can imagine.  There are two scenes, one in the courtyard, and one in a big room in the house.  Put yourself right in the crowd in the courtyard.  What noises and voices do you hear?  What do you see?  What do you smell?  What are the people talking about?  Once you have the scene set in your mind, now read the text.

Now put yourself in the house with the religious leaders and guards.  What noises and voices do you hear there?  What do you see, what do you smell?  What are the people on the fringes of the crowd discussing?  Once you have the scene set in your mind, now read the text.

Jot down your observations, questions you have about what's in Luke or the parallel passages.  Think through the differences and see if any sort of reconciliation makes sense in your mind.  Re-imagine the scene again with the insight you've gained and see if anything changes.  Remember to ask why who says what.

Armed with those notes and questions, now go to commentaries.  The Matthew Henry Commentary on the Blue Letter Bible will be helpful here because it's so detailed.  Keep in mind that commentators have trouble with synchronizing the various Gospel accounts.  So, different commentators will take different approaches.  Of the variety of views you find, try and pick one, or combination of some, that make the most sense to you.  You won't be in danger of being wrong if you disagree with any of them (or me, or each other).

After you've done this work, go back through with the questions below:

• Peter follows the soldiers and officials who arrested Jesus at a distance, but then joins them at the courtyard fire.  Why do you think Peter would approach so close?  Why do you think none of the other disciples did?
• The accounts in the various Gospels disagree on almost every point surrounding Peter's denial except that there were three, and in the courtyard of the high priest.  Why do you think there was such variance in the accounts?
• The first accusation always seems to be a servant girl, either the one who let Peter in or one present.  Why do you think that might be an important point?
• The second accusation takes various forms from different people, and Peter's response is also different in each account.  How significant do you think these differences are in light of the point of the overall "denial scene"?
• The third denial in each Gospel seems to stem from Peter being from Galilee (his speech/accent gives him away).  While the exact details vary, the element of his being from the same region as Jesus seems the same.  Why do you think that might be significant, or significant enough to show up in the same order in each Gospel?
• In Luke, as Peter makes his third denial, Jesus looks straight at him.  This detail occurs only in Luke.  It may be hard to imagine how they could see each other, but why do you think this detail is important for Luke to include?
• Peter weeps over his failure in Matthew, Mark, and Luke; but John has nothing.  What do you think is going on in Peter's mind and heart?
• The trial of Jesus in Luke is very short, but when does the event take place in Luke?
• The beating of Jesus by the guards in Luke comes before He stands before the council, in the others, after they accuse Him.  How might this help you reconcile the timing of the three accounts of Matthew and Mark with Luke?
• As the guards blind and then beat Jesus, they ask Him to prophesy who hit Him.  This is supremely ironic for the readers/hearers of the first century because of how Luke arranges his account.  What irony do you see here?
• The council of elders, chief priests and scribes assemble and Jesus is brought to them.  They ask Him if He is the "Messiah".  What do you think they mean by that term?
• Jesus' answer to the council is really weird in Luke.  What do you think Jesus means by "...if I ask you a question you will not answer..."?  Read Luke 20:1-8 and see if that helps any (it may not - honestly nobody really knows)
• Look at how Jesus describes where He will be seated the next time they see Him.  In Matthew, Mark, and Luke, Jesus will be "...seated at the right hand of power...".  Luke adds, "of God", which is obvious, but look at the range of options for this word in the Strong's entry on the Blue Letter Bible.  This is supposed to be a quote from Psalm 110:1, but only the reference to "sitting to the right" is from there.  So, why do you think there is this common reference to "power" in each Gospel (except John)?  What do you think is the point of "power" to the early followers of Jesus?
• In Luke, Jesus is asked if He is the "Son of God".  How do you think the religious leaders made the leap from "seated at the right of 'power'" to Jesus being the "Son of God"?  Keep in mind that's not a normal understanding of the "Messiah" in Judaism.
• In each of the responses recorded in Matthew, Mark, and Luke, Jesus literally says, "You say that I am."  In a sense Jesus dodges the question, but still affirms the title.  Why do you think this might be important enough for each Gospel writer to record it exactly the same?
• This assertion, or affirmation, is all the religious leaders need to accuse Jesus.  Why do you think it was enough?  What is Jesus being accused of by the religious leaders?

That's plenty to keep us busy.  Remember to look for places where you learn about your relationship with Jesus.  Keep in mind, saying you'd never think or act that way isn't where you'll learn and grow the most.  Stretch yourself, and see where our Master might be trying to deepen your relationship with Him.

Blessings upon you all until we meet again!