PETER AND THE COCK-CROWING.
WE are asked by several correspondents to harmonize with each other the statements of the evangelists in regard to the crowing of the cock in connection with Peter’s denial of Christ, and also to harmonize with them a statement made in Spirit of Prophecy, Vol. 3, p. 169. The difficulties suggested for solution are 1. That cocks were not allowed in Jerusalem on account of the holy things, and hence there were none there to crow on this occasion; 2. That three of the evangelists speak of only one crowing of the cock, while Mark mentions two; 3. That Spirit of Prophecy speaks of the cock’s crowing three times. As to the first assertion that cocks were not permitted at Jerusalem, S. J. Andrews, Life of our Lord, p. 145, says that it “has no basis.” Dean Alford on Matt. 26 : 34, says, “A question has been raised whether cocks were usually kept or even allowed in Jerusalem. No such bird is mentioned in the O. T., and the Mischna states that the inhabitants of Jerusalem, and the priests everywhere kept no fowls because they scratched up unclean worms. But the Talmud is here not consistent with itself; and Lightfoot brings forward a story which proves it. And there might be many kept by the resident Romans over whom the Jews had no power.” Lightfoot says, “It is certain that there were cocks at Jerusalem as well as at other places.” Smith’s Unabridged Dictionary of the Bible, quoting Harris (Dict. of Nat. Hist. of Bible, p. 72), says: “‘If there was any restraint in the use or domestication of this bird, it must have been an arbitrary practice of the Jews, but could not have been binding on foreigners, of whom many resided at Jerusalem as officers or traders.’ Thomson (Land and Book, p. 672) says the fowls are now common in Jerusalem; ‘that they swarm around every door, share in the food of their possessors, are at home among the children in every room, roost over head at night, and with their cackle and crowing, are the town clock and the warning bell, to call up sleepers at early dawn.’” Bloomfield, on Matt. 26 : 34, suggests that even though none might have been allowed in the city, they would be outside, and their crowing there could easily be heard in the city in the stillness of night. From all this we may consider it decided that the literal crowing of the cock is intended, and that there were such fowls either in, or immediately without, Jerusalem, to do the crowing which is mentioned. We now come to the record of the evangelists concerning this event. Matthew says: “Verily I say unto thee, That this night before the cock crow, thou shalt deny me thrice.” Matt. 26 : 34. Luke says: “The cock shall not crow this day, before that thou shalt thrice deny that thou knowest me.” Luke 22 : 34. John says: “Verily, verily, I say unto thee, The cock shall not crow, till thou hast denied me thrice.” John 13 : 38. These all seem to agree. But Mark says: “This day, even in this night, before the cock crow twice, thou shalt deny me thrice.” Mark 14 : 30. And in the record of the fulfillment of this prediction the same peculiarity is observed: Matthew, Luke, and John speak of only one crowing, Mark speaks of two, asserting that the cock crew after his first denial, and the second time after his third. This is explained by the fact that there was a period of the night which was called the cock-crowing, which was the third watch of the night, from midnight to 3 o’clock A. M. This seems to have been marked by the crowing of the cocks at its commencement and its close, so that people came to speak of two cock-crowings; and the latter, at the close of the watch and near the break of day, being so much more marked and prominent than the former, came to be regarded pre-eminently as the cock-crowing. Now it is the view of all commentators that the words of Christ to Peter, “Before the cock crow,” are to be understood as referring not to the individual act of the crowing of the cock, but to the period of the night which bore that name, as if he had said, “Before the time of the cock-crowing, thou shalt deny me thrice;” and that Matthew, Luke, and John use the term in the popular sense, referring to the latter period, but Mark is more accurate, and recognizes the first crowing, and speaks of the latter as the second, which it really was. So from their different standpoints their language is to be understood thus: Matthew, Luke, and John are to be understood as saying, Before the cock crow, that is, before this time of the night which is pre-eminently and popularly known as the cock-crowing, thou shalt deny me thrice; but Mark is to be understood as saying, Before that time of night which is the second period of the crowing141of the cock’s (referring, in more accurate language, to the very same time that Matthew, Luke, and John refer to) thou shalt deny me thrice. On this point Dean Alford remarks: “The first cock-crowing is at midnight; but inasmuch as few hear it, when the word is used generally, we mean the second crowing early in the morning, before dawn. If this view be taken, the cock-crowing and double cock-crowing amount to the same, only the latter is the more precise expression.” Bloomfield says: “It has been thought a contradiction that Mark 14 : 30 says, πρὶν ἢ δὶς ἀλέκτορα φωνῆσαι [before the cock crow twice]. But there will be none, if it be considered that the heathens reckoned two cock-crowings; of which the second (about day-break) was the more remarkable, and was that called κατ’ ἐξοχήν [by way of eminence] the cock-crowing. Thus the sense is, ‘before that time of night or early morn which is called the cock-crowing (namely, the second time which bears that name), thou shalt deny me thrice.’ Mark relates the thing more circumstantially, but there is no real discrepancy between the two accounts.” Whitby (comment on Matt. 26 : 34) says: “Here note that there is a double crowing of the cock mentioned by heathen authors, Ammianus, Aristophanes, and Juvenal; the first was about midnight, the second at the fourth watch of the night, or the breaking in of the day; and this latter, as being the louder and more observable, in the enumeration of the times of night is that which is properly called ἀλεκτοροφωνία, or cock-crowing. . . . Of this crowing of the cock are St. Matthew and the other evangelists to be understood when they relate Christ’s words thus, ‘before the cock crow’ (i. e., before that time of the night which bears that name, and that crowing of the cock which is emphatically so called) ‘thou shalt deny me thrice.’” Calvin (Harmony of the Evangelists, Vol. 3, p. 263) says: “Indeed, I have no doubt that when Christ said to Peter, Before the cock crow, he meant the cock-crowing, which includes many crowings; for cocks do not merely crow once, but repeat their crowings many times; yet all the crowings of a single watch are called but one cock-crowing.” The records of the evangelists are thus clearly harmonized. They speak not of the distinct acts of the crowing of the cock, but of those periods of time in the night during which the cocks crow; and there being two of these seasons, the first of which was not usually recognized, three of the evangelists pass this by and speak only of one; but Mark, not passing over the first, calls that of which the others speak the second; and each of these seasons was called but a cock-crowing, singular number, though many cocks might crow therein, or one cock might crow many times. Now as to the statement in the “Spirit of Prophecy,” that is easily harmonized with the evangelists when we consider what is evidently a fact, that that work speaks not of these periods of cock-crowing, as the evangelists do, but of individual acts of this kind. And the thought is indeed striking that after every denial of Peter, the cock should crow. To recapitulate, we have before us these facts: 1. That there were cocks in Jerusalem, the crowing of which was heard each night in the city. 2. That there were two cock-crowings, the first about midnight, the second near the dawn of day. 3. That this latter, being the more prominent, was regarded as the cock-crowing, the first, in general conversation, not being counted. 4. That when Christ said to Peter, Before the cock crow, the meaning of this language was, before the period of night called the cock-crowing, near the break of day, the great idea being the shortness of the time before he would deny him; thus, This night before the break of day thou shalt deny me thrice. 5. That Mark, using a more accurate form of expression, speaks of this as the second cock-crowing. 6. That Peter’s denials were to be made, and were all made, before this. 7. That meanwhile the midnight crowing, noticed by Mark but not by the other evangelists, had taken place. That Peter commenced his denials about midnight, and that after his first denial the cock crowed, this being the first, or midnight crowing mentioned by Mark, and the first individual crowing mentioned in “Spirit of Prophecy.” After the lapse of some time, Peter denied the second time, and the crowing of the cock was heard again, as mentioned in “Spirit of Prophecy,” but not noticed by Mark, as he is not speaking of the individual crowings, but only of the periods of time called cock-crowings, and in the first of which this would come. But to neither of these does the testimony of Matthew, Luke, or John apply. 9. That more time elapses, and Peter finally denies again with cursing. We have now drawn near the close of the third watch and opening of the fourth, and toward the dawning of the day; and the shrill notes of the cock are again heard. Peter’s denials are now all made, and this opens the cock-crowing season proper. This is the one to which the testimony of Matthew, Luke, and John applies; but it is that which Mark enumerates as the second period of cock-crowing; and it is the third individual cock-crowing mentioned in the “Spirit of Prophecy.” We think the subject is now cleared of all difficulty, and that a harmony of all the testimony is established.