So recently, on another forum that I am a member of, a woman posted something about Simon Peter. She posted a different view of Peter than what is generally thought of him. And it got me thinking.
When one thinks of Peter, the first thought might be that he's a desciple of Jesus Christ. The next thought would probably turn to how he had 'betrayed' Christ three times before Christ's crucifixion. I mean, when Christ had told Peter that he would deny Him three times before the rooster crowed, Peter told Christ that he wouldn't do it. But then he did. And Christ looked on him & Peter wept bitterly. Did he cry because he was ashamed? Did he deny Christ because he was afraid of death himself?
I don't think so.
**Warning - This is gospel doctrine by Her Royal Highness, but it makes more sense to me this way. **
Simon Peter was one of Jesus' closest friends. Peter was with Him through much of His ministry and saw the miracles that Christ had performed. Peter also had risked his own life in the garden of Gethsemane when he took a sword and cut the ear of one of the soldiers. Peter could have been killed for that act but yet the Savior told him to put down his weapon. Also, after Jesus was taken, it was Peter & John who followed after Him, risking their own lives when the rest of the twelve "forsook Him and fled". Were these acts of a coward?
When Jesus told Peter, "Thou shalt deny me thrice...", I believe he was commanding Peter to deny Him. Not only was it a prophecy of what was to come, but Christ was telling Peter, "You're going to have to stay out of it this time, okay? Do as I ask you to do." Those words, "Thou Shalt", they have significant meaning in the scriptures. "Thou shalt have no other Gods before me. Thou shalt not commit adultery. Thou shalt obey thy father and mother. Thou shalt... " It's a commandment.
So when Peter was presented with the opportunity to butt in again, he passed it up, obeying his Master's command. And when Jesus looked on Peter after the third denial, I don't think that Peter "wept bitterly" because he was ashamed. I think he wept because he couldn't help his Friend this time. Because he wasn't allowed to help his Friend.
He must have felt so sick after that happened. But then, a few days later, Simon Peter sees the resurrected Lord & it's an 'A Ha!' moment for him because he then realizes why doing what he did was so important. Oh the joy he must have felt that day!
It brings to life a whole new view of Peter for me. I just thought I'd share.
Sunday, August 24, 2008
I've been thinking.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)



4 comments:
Hi HRH. I am also a member on the other forum you spoke about. I read your blog often and I love your sense of humor. Just wanted you to know you have a friendly "stalker". Thank you for this different angle on Simon Peter. It definitely give a whole new perspective on the relationship he had with Jesus Christ. Thanks again
Amber
Thank you for this. It sheds a new light on how Peter might have felt about things and why he did what he did, or had to do. Great insight.:O)
Very interesting thoughts and take on the matter.
Definitely food for thought. ;-)
Good food.
I never thought of it that way, and I definitely like your idea better than the common opinion of Peter. I don't want to think of a prophet as a coward or one who would deny his testimony. It's too faith shattering because if he can't hack it, what chance do I have? Plus, if Peter had truly denied Christ, wouldn't that be the unpardonable sin?
I appreciate your perspective, and will share it with others!
Post a Comment