Diogenes the Cynic

Mark also denies Peter any witness of the resurrection, though, which implies that he surrendered his authority through his triple denial of Jesus. Mark gives Peter no redemption for that.

Rick Sumner

Mark 14:27 says that Jesus knows that's coming. 14:28 says that they are still chosen. Their witness to the resurrection may not be described by Mark, but he makes it quite clear in 14.28 that that witness will happen. If authority was to be denied Peter because of the denial, Mark should have said so in 14.28. But he doesn't.

The speech on forgiveness in 11.22-25, and even moreso the prediction of persecution in 13.9-23 make no sense if they are both to be flatly denied, even by implication, later in the story.

I think the better reading of the passage, particularly of 14.27-31, is to see that before Jesus' death the disciples did not understand why he was dying, but after the resurrection they did. Their loyalty isn't really what's in question--the claim that they would die for him should be taken quite seriously. After all, swords were drawn at the arrest.

It wouldn't be until later that they understood that Jesus didn't want them to die, or his life to be saved.

I would argue that that contrast--the disciples who would later be persecuted in Mk.13 and the disciples who would flee and even deny Jesus in Mk.14 is one of the key elements to understanding Mark's gospel.

Underscoring this is the careful instruction that Jesus would go before them in Galilee. Not Jerusalem. This is the new covenant, and the old covenant way of thinking won't do at all.

Regards,
Rick Sumner