The 24 Elders as stated in Revelation

I’d like to focus my Revelation blog on the 24 elders that John speaks of in chapter 4. Revelation is a book that I had read bits and pieces of in the past, when my curiosity of the end times was at a high point. Now that I am older, I realize just how trippy the whole book is. I mean, if John were alive today and told this story, many people would think he just got back from Bonnaroo and taken one too many acid trips…( For those who may not know, Bonnaroo is a huge music festival outside where people do multitudes of drugs and become “one” with music…or whatever that means.) 

                                                                                                                        

John was on the Island of Patmos when all of his visions began. I won’t summarize, because that’s not what this blog is intended to be, but rather, a closer look into the Holy throne room where Jesus sits. While reading this, I sometimes got lost because there was so much going on, so many descriptions of things we really can’t perceive with our mind yet. I tried to imagine what some of these creatures he mentioned looked like and it just wasn’t achievable. Revelation is one of those books that will always confuse me because even though it’s prophesying what is to come, most of it is still a complete mystery…to me anyway. Now that my small rant is over, I’ll get into it.                                                                                                                                                  

  The 24 elders are a part of the Heavenly Throne Room. 

 The room seemed to be set up in layers. The innermost core of this room was the throne, where Jesus sits; out from that, the circle moves to the four living creatures. These creatures had different heads, wings and eyes everywhere. One of those descriptions I can’t wrap my head around. Finally, out from the four creatures were the 24 elders. They are the outermost part of the throne room. Gotquestions suggests that some people believe these twenty-four elders represent Israel, but at the time of this vision, Israel as a whole nation had not yet been redeemed. All of them constantly sing praise to Jesus. According to http://lastdayscalendar.tripod.com/twenty_four_elders.htm there have been many different interpretations as to who the elders are. Some say that they could be a leader from each of the 12 tribes of Israel plus each of the 12 apostles. Others say that they could be 24 godly men from throughout biblical history, or finally, a special class of angels. Here is how noted pre-trib scholar Arnold Fruchtenbaum explains it,

"The identity of these twenty-four elders has been much debated. Some take it to refer to celestial beings, while others take it to refer to andrepresent the church. While the text does not clearly state as to what these twenty-four elders refer, there are clues in the text by which their identity can be deduced. First, these elders are clothed with white garments which throughout the Revelation are symbols of salvation. Celestial beings before the throne of God do not need salvation for they were not lost to begin with. But these elders were at one time lost and at some point received salvation as is seen by their wearing of the white garments. 

"The second clue is the fact that they are wearing crowns. These crowns are not diadem crowns worn by those who are royal by nature, which would have been the case had these been celestial beings. These crowns are the stephanos crowns, the crowns of an overcomer; the type of crown given as rewards to the members of the church at the Judgment Seat of Christ.”

"A third clue lies in their very title of elders. Nowhere else in Scripture is this term used to describe celestial or angelic beings. This term is used of humans in positions of authority either in the synagogue or church.”

"Hence, from these three clues, the twenty-four elders must represent the church saints. If this is true, then they provide further evidence for a pre-tribulation Rapture. The church is already in heaven in chapter four and five before the tribulation begins in chapter six."

            BibleProphecyBlog states that the 24 elders are mentioned five times in the Book of Revelation, as follows: 4:4, 10; 5:8; 11:16; and 19:4. If they represent the church, then it reflects what one would expect if the rapture has occurred before the tribulation has begun. If it represents someone else, then it would not necessarily argue against pretribulationism, especially if they were angels. Some think that the 24 elders are angels. If they are angels then they cannot represent the church or redeemed humans of any distinction. Robert Thomas argues that the 24 elders are angels and says the following:

“This particular group of angels primarily assists in the execution of the divine rule of the universe. Very probably they are part of the assembly of heavenly beings that are regularly pictured as present with God in heaven.”

            So, as we see there are two different ways that people have perceived these elders. Some believe that they are in fact angels while others tend to believe that they are just holy chosen men. After doing my research I tend to go with the majority of scholars who believe that these are men and not angels, mostly because angels do not age, and if the word used to describe these men is elderly, which it in fact is, then they cannot be angels.

                                               

                                                                                                                                                                                                                         

What was significant about the shadow of Peter?

For my blog I am going to focus on Acts 5:15-16 where Luke wrote “As a result, people brought the sick into the streets and laid them on beds and mats so that at least Peter’s shadow might fall on some of them as he passed by.  Crowds gathered also from the towns around Jerusalem, bringing their sick and those tormented by impure spirits, and all of them were healed.” These particular verses struck a chord with me because although I have read about many miracles that have been done in the bible, I had never read about a shadow that healed people and I wanted to find out more about it. Did it really happen? Or is it some sort of exaggeration? I have always been fascinated by the works of miracles, like when Jesus would heal the sick or the blind, and even the crippled with just a touch of his hand. However, was Peter’s shadow really what healed them? Or was it something different? 
   

                                                                                       

The only facts we know from the wording of verse 15 are that people thought highly of Peter’s miracle-working and that they put faith even in his shadow. Verse 16 does say people were healed at that time, but there is no evidence that Peter’s shadow was the reason.  The verse says that “all were healed”, even those who were not under Peter’s shadow. People wanted to believe there was something special about Peter, so they got closer to him in hopes of having some healing come over them. It wasn’t the first (orlast) time that people sought a special blessing through a physical object. The paralyzed man in John5 believed that water in a certain pool could heal his lameness. Some Ephesians in Acts19 believed that healing power was concentrated in articles of Paul’s clothing (cf.Matthew 9:21). Some people today put their trust in handkerchiefs that have been “prayed over,” in homage to the saints, or in holy water.                              

This sounds to me like people were being healed by God through Peter, it was not Peter himself that held the power to do so, but more likely the spirit of God working through him for these miracles to happen. An example of this is in Acts 3 and 5 when “God’s power was demonstrated through Peter and John when a lame man was healed. The news spread quickly, and a great crowd gathered in Solomon’s Colonnade, full of amazement. Peter spoke to the crowd, correcting their assumption that he and John had special power in themselves: “Men of Israel, why does this surprise you? Why do you stare at us as if by our own power or godliness we had made this man walk?” (verse 12). The apostle then goes on to point the crowd to Jesus: “It is Jesus’ name and the faith that comes through him that has given this complete healing to him, as you can all see” (verse 16).

In Acts 5, the sick were not being healed by shadows or auras or magic garments; they were being healed as a direct answer to the apostles’ prayer in Acts 4:30: “Stretch out your hand to heal and perform miraculous signs and wonders through the name of your holy servant Jesus.” The miracles performed by the apostles were demonstrations of the Lord’s power and mercy, affirming Christ Jesus as Savior and testifying that their message was true.”

These miracles of healing brought attention to the early church and shed light on the truth of the teachings of the apostles and the fact that God was with them. The religious leaders who were jealous of Jesus’ power and authority saw the apostles as a continued threat and demanded respect for themselves. The apostles weren’t demanding respect for themselves.  Their aim was to bring respect  to God.  The apostles had acquired the respect of the people, not because they forced it, but more so because they deserved it. 

It is significant that Peter and the others had spent time with Jesus, and were held in some high regard for that connection. But the awe was not to be related to them, but to Jesus.  The “cult of personality” continues to exist today, more so in relation to “healing and miracle” ministries.                                                                                

Allusions in Game of Thrones

For my topic this week I chose to do an allusion to the HBO series Game of Thrones. I have to say, I've been watching this show since it first came out and my obsession with it is a little embarrassing. For those of you who may not be familiar with the show, it is based off of George R.R. Martin’s A Song of Ice and Fire book series and has captured the attention of many who have read it. Set in the fictional Seven Kingdoms of Westeros, the series chronicles the violent dynastic struggles among the realm's noble families for control of the Iron Throne. As the series opens, additional threats emerge in the icy North and in the eastern continent of Essos. The novels and their adaptation derive aspects of their settings, characters and plot from various events of European history. Allusions can be tricky to find if you aren't paying attention, but if you look hard enough you can find them in almost anything. I’ll be mentioning a few I've noticed in the first two seasons.

   The Whore of Babylon
            Revelation 17 tells us: "Then one of the seven angels who had the seven bowls came and said to me, ‘Come, I will show you the judgment of the great harlot who is seated upon many waters, with whom the kings of the earth have committed fornication, and with the wine of whose fornication the dwellers on earth have become drunk.’ And he carried me away in the Spirit into a wilderness, and I saw a woman sitting on a scarlet beast which was full of blasphemous names, and it had seven heads and ten horns. The woman was arrayed in purple and scarlet, and bedecked with gold and jewels and pearls, holding in her hand a golden cup full of abominations and the impurities of her fornication; and on her forehead was written a name of mystery: ‘Babylon the great, mother of harlots and of earth’s abominations.’ And I saw the woman, drunk with the blood of the saints and the blood of the martyrs of Jesus. When I saw her I marveled greatly" (Rev. 17:1–6).   

Melisandre: Game of Thrones

Melissandre, or as she is otherwise known as the Red Woman, channels her inner Whore of Babylon in this series. Notice she also wears the scarlet cloak. Originally born a slave in Essos, Melisandre is a Red Priestess of the Lord of Light, a deity that is not widely worshiped in Westeros. Hailing from Asshai, a country located in the far east of the continent of Essos, she claims to wield powerful magical abilities,particularly the power of prophecy. Melisandre wears a large ruby necklace that seems to glow whenever she performs her magic. Some years ago she crossed the Narrow Sea and came to the court of Lord Stannis Baratheon on the island stronghold of Dragonstone, to preach her faith. Stannis and the majority of his household have now converted to her religion, and she has become a close adviser to Stannis himself. Throughout the first two seasons, she continually shows her true, ugly colors as a priestess to help Stannis. One instance is when she convinces him to betray his wife and impregnate her in order to win the war. She gives birth to a dark shadow assassin that ultimately kills Stannis’s brother Renly. She also has people burned as sacrifices to the Lord of Light. 

Ned Stark

Another allusion I found in the series was that of Eddard Stark, or Ned as he is mostly called. Eddard is the head of House Stark and Lord Paramount of the North. He is a dedicated husband and father, a loyal friend and an honorable lord. Eddard becomes Hand of the King to his lifelong friend, Robert Baratheon, when the previous hand dies insuspicious circumstances. He follows his predecessor's footsteps and uncoversan incestuous relationship between Queen, Cersei Lannister, and her brother, Sir Jaime Lannister. Robert dies after being injured while hunting and Eddard challenges the legitimacy of his successor, Joffrey Baratheon, but is betrayed by hispolitical allies and arrested for treason.He confesses to the crime to protect his family, but is nevertheless executed due to Joffrey'simpulsive sadism. The conflict between House Stark and House Lannister sets the stage for the War of the Five Kings. To me, Ned seems to be a Christ-like figure. He honestly should have been king, he would have made a great one, but Littlefinger betrayed him and wound up leading to his death, thanks to Jeoffrey. Does anyone else see how that parallels back to Judas betraying Jesus? These are just a few of the allusions I found while adamantly enjoying this awesome series. I’m sure to find more as the show continues but these are the ones that stood out to me the most thus far.  I have attached a video of some highlights of the first two seasons if you would like to check it out. 

The Sophia of Jesus Christ: What is the relationship between Jesus and Sophia (Divine Wisdom) in the gospels?

The Sophia of Jesus Christ is by far the most different Gospel I've ever read, to say the least. The debate about dating is critical, since some argue that it reflects the true, recorded, sayings of Jesus, which is possible if they were to be dated as far back as the 1st century. Others argue that they are, in fact, considerably later, and constitute an unreliable secondary source. The author of this gospel is unknown. If you have ever read any of the Synoptic Gospels of the New Testament, then some of this might make sense to you, If you haven’t, then hold on because it’s about to be a bumpy ride. The Sophia of Jesus Christ begins with Jesus, resurrected and talking to his disciples and also a few women, one we know for sure was Mary. 

                                                           

They followed Jesus to Galilee and up on to a mountain called “Divination and Joy.” When they all arrived there they were confused and started to bombard Jesus with tons of questions, namely about the universe and the plan, the holy providence, the authorities and their power, and everything that Jesus is doing with them in his plan. He then appeared to them, but this time it was not in his previous form but in a form called the “invisible spirit”, as the text explains. The author says that Jesus was a great light but could not go on explaining what he was like because we as mortal beings could not handle it, but only pure and perfect flesh could endure his appearance.                   

 Jesus then laughed and asked them what they were so afraid of and why they were so confused. This in particular is funny to me because of all the times in the Synoptic Gospels when Jesus constantly has to tell his disciples what is going on and they still don’t get it, so that in itself is one similarity to the canonized gospels. This gospel is simply devoted to all of the questions that his disciples ask him, and Jesus answers with some information that I have never even heard of, and I was raised in church. For the most part, Jesus is explaining to them God, who he is and what he is, and his plan for the universe and everything that went into it. Jesus also gives them some insight in deeper detail about who he is and what his purpose was. This is another similarity in the other four gospels, given the fact that he was clearly painted as the savior of the world.                                                                                I think a difference in this text and the other four gospels is that Jesus goes into more detail about the big plan and really what everything means in the Sophia of Jesus Christ. In the other gospels he was like “yeah I’m the savior of the world”, but in this one he alludes to so much more than that. This text gives insight to so many different ideas that it’s honestly hard to describe and difficult to even comprehend. This is cheesy, but it really is like an onion…many layers. Jesus talks about god of gods, king of kings, and aeons,which are different emanations of God all throughout this text and the more he gives to his disciples, the more questions they continue to ask. I think the assumed audience to which this was written was really anyone who wanted to know more about God’s plan; I don’t think the author wrote it for a specific people.                         

I believe this gospel was not included because there are so many different ideas going on with the identity of God and Jesus and it would confuse modern day Christians, because again, this is some complicated information to take in. My question is what is the relationship between Jesus and Sophia (Divine Wisdom) in the gospels? Given the different perspectives on the relationship between Jesus and Wisdom as presented in the Gospels, people must ask whether Jesus is to be understood as a prominent prophet of Sophia, an incarnation of Sophia or as Sophia Incarnate. “Wisdom writings can be observed in both protocanonical texts such as Proverbs and Job, and in deuterocanonical texts including Sirach, Esdras, and the Wisdom of Solomon. In these Jewish texts, Divine Wisdom is personified as a female figure that is sometimes referred to as “Lady Wisdom.” Lady Wisdom is portrayed as a teacher, bride, sister, savior, mother, and beloved, who actively invites men to accept her. Philo referred to Sophia as “the daughter of God” and many scholars believe that Sophia was deliberately contrasted with the pagan goddess Isis, while at the same time taking on many of the characteristics attributed of Isis. It is has been pointed out that Sophia was meant to be a poetic reference to the Law/Torah of God, rather than a real or separate person within the Jewish tradition. However, in early Christian tradition, Sophia was often extended and understood to refer to Jesus Christ himself.”                                             

 The Wisdom/Sophia tradition went into two directions in early Christianity. One was the Gnostic tradition and the other was by St. Paul and the Gospel writers, which led to the theology of the early Church Fathers.                                                                                                                         

“The early Christian church seems to have embraced the Wisdom Tradition as relating to Jesus in a way that is nearly lost today. The early Church accepted as canonical and authoritative Wisdom texts such as Sirach and the Wisdom of Solomon (as Roman Catholics still do) and viewed many of those texts as referring to Jesus directly. In particular, the Byzantine Church seems to have upheld the Wisdom Tradition in equating Christ with Sophia more explicitly then many of the Western Churches. An example of this can be seen in the famous and beautiful “Hagia Sophia” (Holy Wisdom) Church in Istanbul, Turkey that is dedicated to Jesus Christ.”

Sources:

1.      http://www.franciscan-anglican.com/Sophia.htm

2.      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Sophia_of_Jesus_Christ

3.      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aeon

4.      http://gnosis.org/naghamm/sjc.html

What is the significance of the crown of thorns and purple robe Jesus wore at his crucifixion?

For my blog question on John this week I would like to focus on a few different issues within Jesus’ crucifixion, specifically the significance of the purple robe and crown of thorns that were placed on him. John 19:5 says: Jesus then came out, wearing the crown of thorns and the purple robe. Pilate said to them, "Behold, the Man!” Before I read this book, I didn't really know that they had put any different clothes on him before the crucifixion; I had only seen pictures of Jesus on the cross with a little white tunic covering his midsection, so I thought it was an interesting topic to research and find out if there was a deeper meaning behind it. Fortunately for me, there was. Growing up in church, it’s easy for me to look at this theologically but I am trying my best to branch away and gain some other interpretations on why they chose a robe and a crown and not something else, so bare with me.   

Robe Colors

                                                                                                                                  There are accounts of the purple robe and crown of thorns in Mathew, Mark and John. Mark and John say that it is indeed purple, but Mathew calls it scarlet, which is obviously a more red color. Eric Lyons, in his article about the robe color, states that a difference like this one means that the Gospel writers all wrote on their own accord, with no help from a higher being. This is what led to the contradictions within the stories themselves. Lyons, when describing how the difference in color came about, related it simply to the fact that people see colors differently. When one person sees red, another could see maroon. It all boils down to different shades of the same color inevitably. There was no difference in scarlet and purple in ancient Rome, they would use the term “purple” when actually describing various shades of red. Because of this, none of the Gospels are wrong when describing what color the robe was, they just used the terms interchangeably .

Significance of Crown and Robe

 

            John 19:2-3 says “And the soldiers twisted together a crown of thorns and put it on his head and arrayed him in a purple robe. The color Purple was that of royalty. They came up to him, saying, 'Hail, King of the Jews!' and struck him with their hands." The context of this is that they were mocking Jesus. They used both the crown and the robe to present him as a king to the public. It has been rumored that the robe Jesus wore could have been Herod’s robe.  They also hung a sign above him that read “King of the Jews.”  Hebrews 6:7-8 also states that thorns were viewed as a curse in ancient culture (http://www.compellingtruth.org/crown-of-thorns.html). Hebrews states "For land that has drunk the rain that often falls on it, and produces a crop useful to those for whose sake it is cultivated, receives a blessing from God. But if it bears thorns and thistles, it is worthless and near to being cursed, and its end is to be burned."                                  

The idea that Jesus was crowned with thorns highlighted that His suffering and death were a curse. Galatians says, "Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us—for it is written, 'Cursed is everyone who is hanged on a tree.” Some say that dying this way was in fact the perfect death, because Jesus redeemed Christians from the curse of death by becoming the curse itself (http://www.compellingtr.There is more symbolism with the crown found when Adam and Eve sinned, which brought upon the curse and evil in the world. The Roman soldiers took an object from a curse (the crown of thorns) and put it on the head of a man that was to deliver all people from that curse, so…jokes on them. While the crown and robe were meant for mockery, it was actually the perfect duo for Jesus (http://www.gotquestions.org/crown-of-thorns.html).                                     
           

                  

What did Jesus mean when he said "Let the dead bury their own dead", in Luke 9:60?

For this blog I’m going to focus on what Jesus meant when he said “Let the dead bury their own dead”, as it is seen in Luke 9:60. I chose this particular scripture because it is one of those sayings where I feel Jesus sounds a bit harsh with his words and I wanted to crack down on the significance of what he was really saying beneath the surface. 

Franz, on the website http://www.ldolphin.org/deaddead.html, explains that there are two different times in the four Gospels that Jesus tells a disciple that he could not take a leave of absence to bury his father. Once in Mathew 8: 21-22 and another time in Luke: 9:60. Franz says, “Critical scholars suggest that Jesus was encouraging His disciples to break the fifth commandment, honor your father and mother, by not giving their fathers a proper burial.” The majority interpretation would say that Jesus meant for the spiritually dead to worry about burying the physically dead. However, the interpretation is not consistent with Jewish burial practices in the first century AD.

The Requests

The first request by a disciple was written in Mathew 8, as Jesus was about to take the twelve to cross Galilee and into the Decapolis city of Gadara. One disciple did not want to go because he thought of the Gentiles as “unclean.”He asked Jesus if he could go bury his father and Jesus replied. Critics say that this could have been Peter because he had trouble associating with the Gentiles. As it is in Luke, Jesus again says the same thing to another disciple because he felt it was more important for him to go with the others to Perea.

Jewish Burial Practices in First Century AD

            According to http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Judaism/ancientburial.html, burial was very important in Israel. There are many instances where we see that Jewish burial had certain standards, as in Abraham’s purchase of the cave at Machpelah (Genesis 23). In the New Testament, standards of Jewish burial were raised quite a bit as we see when the disciples took Jesus’ body and poured myrrh and aloes on him. We also see that they wrapped his body in linen cloth with spices. Jewish custom also says that burial should be without delay, out of respect for the dead. It refreshes the soul and then can be admitted to God’s presence. This also had a lot to do with climate, because the Israelites did not embalm their dead.

 

                                       

So, according to these customs, I could see why the disciples had put some urgency and careful thought about the matter. According to  http://www.gotquestions.org/let-dead-bury-dead.html some Jews at the time wanted to stay behind for one year, in order to rebury the bones of their fathers.

So what did Jesus mean?

            First of all, before we can analyze what Jesus meant by “the dead” we first need to figure out who the dead were. According to http://www.gotquestions.org/let-dead-bury-dead.html the word dead is use in two different ways: To be dead to the law (Romans 7:4) and to be dead to sin (Romans 6:11). The Jews use the word dead to express the idea that it has no influence or power over people. People who do not follow Jesus on Earth are dead to him, along with Earthly possessions. This is why he calls them the “spiritually dead” and says that they are the ones to bury the “physically dead”. In other words, people of the Earth are supposed to follow Jesus first and leave the dead behind, according to the majority interpretation.        

Resons Behind Peter's Denial: Really Peter, Really?!

Peter’s denial is seen in all four accounts of Mathew, Mark, Luke and John due to the Synoptic Problem with the first three accounts of the New Testament, and the obvious similarities between them. As I was reading Mark this week, I was torn as to why Peter would deny Jesus three times, especially since Peter had fair warning from Jesus on multiple occasions. (And because they were besties, if that’s what you want to call it). Also, I had a question on why Jesus would allow for Peter’s denial, since he knew it was going to happen. Why not spare him the embarrassment? I apologize for the many questions, but my curiosity in this subject often leads me from one question and onto a snowball effect of fifty more questions. With all that being said, I won’t keep you too long and I’d like to first go into more depth about who Peter was and the significance he had to Jesus as one of his closest disciples. 

Who was Peter?

            According to http://www.gotquestions.org/life-Peter.html Peter’s birth name was Simon. Along with his brother Andrew, they were both followers of John the Baptist. Andrew introduced Simon to Jesus and he renamed him in Aramaic a name that meant “rock”. In Greek the word rock was “petros.” Hence, Peter. Peter was outspoken and quickly became the spokesperson of the twelve. However, his tongue would get him into trouble on occasion. Jesus included Peter in the circle of his closest friends. We all know him for his denial of Christ three times during his trial, and after Jesus rose he assured Peter of his forgiveness.                                        

  Peter was crucified, but not in the traditional “Jesus way” He proclaimed he was not worthy to die as Jesus did, so he opted to be crucified upside down. Scary right? By now we have seen that Peter was a devout follower of Jesus, yet still struggled with his own pride and demons just as everyone else. When the time came and the rooster crowed, he had met his fate face to face. (Dun Dun Dun).  

Peter’s Denial

            Peter’s denial can be summed up in three easy points: Weakness, fear, and of course…Satan had something to do with it. According to  http://www.gotquestions.org/Peters-denial.html Jesus told Peter to stay up and pray for strength, because “although his spirit be willing, his flesh was weak.” He fell asleep anyways and by then it was too late. The soldiers had come to arrest Jesus and praying for strength was out of the question. As for fear, Peter followed Jesus after he had been arrested, but he kept his distance from him while he was being beaten and persecuted. Peter was at that time fearful of his own life.                                                                 

The next question is, why would Jesus allow Peter to mess up when he already knew that he would? He told Peter of Satan’s request to “sift Peter like wheat”. Let’s take a second to understand what Satan meant by this. According to http://www.oceanetwork.org/publications/article.cfm?id=37 when God mentions sifting wheat, he meant to say it as a terrible action someone could take upon another. The action was to separate the grain from the stalk and the chaff, tearing the wheat apart. So, therefore Satan wanted him in agony. Jesus allowed this because he wanted to strengthen Peter for the benefit of the other disciples, and to fulfill being the “rock” in the early church in Jerusalem.

The 3 Denials

            As Jesus was arrested, Peter uttered his first denial to a servant girl. Luke 22:54-57 explains. “Then they seized him and led him away, bringing him into the high priest's house. Peter followed at a distance and when they had kindled a fire in the middle of the courtyard and had sat down together, Peter sat down with them. A servant girl saw him seated there in the firelight. She looked closely at him and said, "This man was with him." But he denied it. "Woman, I don't know him," he said.” The second denial was to the same servant in Mark 14:69-70.  “When the servant girl saw him there, she said again to those standing around, "This fellow is one of them." Again he denied it.” The final denial was to numerous people at the time of Jesus’ trial, in Mathew 26:73-75. After a little while, those standing there went up to Peter and said, "Surely you are one of them, for your accent gives you away." Then he began to call down curses on himself and he swore to them, "I don't know the man!" Immediately a rooster crowed. Then Peter remembered the word Jesus had spoken: "Before the rooster crows, you will disown me three times." And he went outside and wept bitterly. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Denial_of_Peter

Significance of Denial?

            By now we all have a pretty good understanding of the significance of Peter’s denial. Jesus was teaching Peter a lesson in humility, strength, passion, forgiveness and faith; all of which attributes Peter needed to become St. Peter, the rock, and one of the most famous and great apostles in history.