The Spirit of the LORD descended on Yeshua/Jesus when John baptized Him. They were co-located, so to speak.
Then they walked over to the Mount of Olives, where Jesus overcame the onslaught of the Devil who attacked him while Peter slept, without praying for his Master, while Jesus took up the cup of a mighty, blood-sweating battle.
Is this your own interpolation, eisigesis, or interpretation ? Where in the scriptures, or in which faith group, do they teach this ?
Almost immediately after, Peter foolishly interfered with the temple guards who were trying to identify Jesus. Peter was not assigned to do this, but stepped in and performed an earotomy on the High Priest's servant Malchus. Peter, prompted by Satan, tried to get a knife fight going in which Satan might have gotten Jesus killed for "resisting arrest." This required Jesus to intervene and heal the wounded one supernaturally, so that He could continue on to the Cross, according to His plan.
Eisigesis again; nothing was going to happen as you describe; it was going to happen as ordained. There is no Satan in the text. Perhaps you saw it in a movie.
And then, just a short time after, Peter six times very vociferously denied any association with Jesus the Galilean, even to the very face of the same Malchus whose ear had been healed from Peter's wound!
Three, not six times:
Jesus said unto him, Verily I say unto thee, That this night, before the cock crow, thou shalt deny me thrice.
-- Matthew, Catholic chapter twenty six, Protestant verse thirty four, as authorized by King James
Yes, Messiah miraculously healed his ear, Peter obeyed Messiah and put away the sword Messiah had authorized him to carry; no harm, no foul
And then, after his Master had been crucified, but with the hope of an uprising against the Roman oppessors gone, Peter left the whole mess behind. Rather than following the resurrected Savior, he left for home, drawing away some of his pals, saying, "I go a-fishing" (Jn. 21:3). Was the Holy Ghost with/on him?
Yes. Are you thinking of Thomas ?
Then the same day at evening, being the first day of the week, when the doors were shut where the disciples were assembled for fear of the Jews, came Jesus and stood in the midst, and saith unto them, Peace be unto you. And when he had so said, he shewed unto them his hands and his side. Then were the disciples glad, when they saw the Lord. Then said Jesus to them again, Peace be unto you: as my Father hath sent me, even so send I you. And when he had said this, he breathed on them, and saith unto them, Receive ye the Holy Ghost: Whose soever sins ye remit, they are remitted unto them; and whose soever sins ye retain, they are retained. But Thomas, one of the twelve, called Didymus, was not with them when Jesus came. The other disciples therefore said unto him, We have seen the Lord. But he said unto them, Except I shall see in his hands the print of the nails, and put my finger into the print of the nails, and thrust my hand into his side, I will not believe. And after eight days again his disciples were within, and Thomas with them: then came Jesus, the doors being shut, and stood in the midst, and said, Peace be unto you. Then saith he to Thomas, Reach hither thy finger, and behold my hands; and reach hither thy hand, and thrust it into my side: and be not faithless, but believing. And Thomas answered and said unto him, My Lord and my God. Jesus saith unto him, Thomas, because thou hast seen me, thou hast believed: blessed are they that have not seen, and yet have believed. And many other signs truly did Jesus in the presence of his disciples, which are not written in this book:
-- John, Catholic chapter twenty, Protestant verses nineteen through thirty
I say "No," and you can't prove otherwise, IMHO.
But not on Peter. Nowhere dors the Scripture say that The Holy Ghost was resting on Peter in his days accompanying Jesus.In fact, Jesus told him to his face that night that he was not even converted, and that Satan was going to have at him for a while:
"And the Lord said, Simon, Simon, behold, Satan hath desired to have you, that he may sift you as wheat:
But I have prayed for thee, that thy faith fail not: and when thou art converted, strengthen thy brethren" (Luk 22:31 AV).
But look, you've been told this before. How about keeping your mind on this fact? Peter was not yet fully placing his trust irreversibly on Jesus, and was not regenerated, not yet "born again," was not yet a true child of God in the Spirit. Please stop saying otherwise. Peter was a fitful, come-and-leave follower, but not an attentive one desiring to emulate Christ's teachings. In fact, he was demonstrating the same kind of leanings that got Lucifer kicked out of Heaven. I do know Jesus could quell that, but so far was only partially successful in translating Peter from a boorish fisherman to a reliable evangelizer and humble man of God. The time frame we're at here was just at the beginning of Peter's spiritual walk, not worthy of imitation.
Is this your own interpolation, eisigesis, or interpretation ? Where in the scriptures, or in which faith group, do they teach this ?
No, it is what I've learned from a proper exegetical approach to the Scriptures. About the "cup" of agony in the Garden of Gethsemane, apparently your "faith group" has not given you the clues necessary to interpret this event, which is explained in:
NOTES ON THE CUP ABOUT WHICH JESUS PRAYED IN GETHSEMANE
It is about the verse appearing in Hebrews 5:7-9:
"Who in the days of his flesh, when he had offered up prayers and supplications with strong crying and tears unto him that was able to save him from death, and was heard in that he feared;
Though he were a Son, yet learned he obedience by the things which he suffered;
And being made perfect, he became the author of eternal salvation unto all them that obey him; . . .
Excerpting this Note:
==========
What is the cup for which Jesus prayed in the Garden of Gethsemane? Herein is an attempt to clarify the apparent confusion which prompted the question. . . . Since the Lord Jesus used the word in figurative literal language, it is necessary to identify such uses throughout all of Scripture and then to focus on those that pertain to the question asked.
(My note here: Regarding this "cup" in Gethsemane, there are several explanations, only one of which can be shown to be valid, the seventh, Item G.)
A. Some propose that He prayed to be saved from dying. But that cannot be true . . .
B. Some propose that He prayed to be saved out of the permanent death of His human body.
C. Some think that Satan would kill him before He got to the cross, using Psalm 91:11,12 to substantiate it since Satan quoted it in the days of His testing in the desert [wilderness, AV] (Mt. 4:6).
D. Some advance the view that Jesus was praying for deliverance from dying in the Garden of Gethsemane . . . (but) to die as the Lamb of God to take away the sin of the world, and to shed His precious blood, would be negated.
E. Then another view presented is that the cup' is the cup of infinite holy wrath against human sin, involving that forsaking (sic) concerning which our Lord cried with such anguish, "My God, My God, why hast Thou forsaken me?"
F. Others also link the agony of Gethsemane with Calvary enduring our hell so that we might be set free to enter Heaven . . .
G. An alternative view presented by Adolph Saphir in The Epistle to the Hebrews gives an exposition of Hebrews 5:7 and mentions that The anticipation of His agony on the cross overwhelms Him''-- The Son of Man (p. 269). Later he states The anguish that well-nigh overcame Him was conquered'' (p. 270). Herein lies a vital distinction between the cup'' referred to in Jesus' prayer in the Garden of Gethsemane and the cup of infinite holy wrath against human sin indicated when speaking to Peter before the multitude led by Judas Iscariot. The cup which My Father has given to Me, I should positively drink it, should I not?'' (Jn. 18:11). Additional distinctions can be noted after comparing the accounts in the synoptic Gospels quoted from The New Testament: A Precise Translation.
====
An alternative view presented by Adolph Saphir in The Epistle to the Hebrews gives an exposition of Hebrews 5:7 and mentions that The anticipation of His agony on the cross overwhelms Him''-- The Son of Man (p. 269). Later he states The anguish that well-nigh overcame Him was conquered'' (p. 270). Herein lies a vital distinction between the cup'' referred to in Jesus' prayer in the Garden of Gethsemane and the cup of infinite holy wrath against human sin indicated when speaking to Peter before the multitude led by Judas Iscariot. The cup which My Father has given to Me, I should positively drink it, should I not?'' (Jn. 18:11). Additional distinctions can be noted after comparing the accounts in the synoptic Gospels quoted from The New Testament: A Precise Translation.
Eight Reasons for Such Conclusion
1. The Scripture indicated that Satan would return to test Him at an appointed time. Scripture does not record or specify such occasion. The only other recorded most likely event is this "cup.''
2. This cup''contrasted with the hour'' in both Matthew and Mark indicates they refer to the same thing.
3. Jesus' emphasis on one hour'' indicates the length of time until the cup passed.
4. The use of the first class conditional clause indicates the possibility that the request could be granted. Jesus knew that there was no possibility to avoid the cross.
5. The wording of the prayer in Koin‚ Greek, This cup is to go from alongside Me!'' indicates that the ordeal is in His presence and not before or up ahead of Him.
6. The only occasion other than Matthew 4:11 that (an) angel(s) ministered to or strengthened Him is recorded of Gethsemane in Luke 22:43.
7. The Savior's statements, "It is far distant away. The hour is gone,'' substantiate that the prayer was heard.
8. The thick blood clots of perspiration ceased indicating that the ordeal is ended.
===========
Look, from all the hints you've gotten from myself and others, you need to find someone who can disciple you through getting to know the God of the Bible, and His Only Begotten-in-the-flesh Son. And your "faith-group" does not seem to be helping. I'd love to see you enjoying the benefit of a good Biblical training. You're certainly floundering now --
While yet in the Garden, and before the other watching disciples and band of temple guards and mobsters, Satan certainly had Peter and was sifting him, as Jesus predicted. Where's your common sense on this, let alone spiritual insight?
Six times, not three, demonstrating beyond the shadow of a doubt that you haven't scrutinized the Scriptures. To find the truth, you have to take a couple of things into account:
"And the second time the cock crew. And Peter called to mind the word that Jesus said unto him, Before the cock crow twice, thou shalt deny me thrice. And when he thought thereon, he wept" (Mar_14:72 AV).
A correct exposition will show you that Peter denied thrice before the first crowing, and thrice more in the hour before the second crowing. To get it, you have to use the Koine to discern the gender of who was doing the accosting, and allow for the fact that the servant girl at Annas's door accused him on two different occasions, to both of which Peter responded "nay." That's two times right there.
Yes. Are you thinking of Thomas ?
No. I am saying exactly that Peter, instead of hanging close to the risen Lord, went back to Galilee and commenced his old occupation (which he had told Jesus that he had abandoned to follow Him), and drawing off his old pals instead of proclaiming with them the great news, "He is risen!" to the Galilean public.
Fishers of men? Pah! They weren't even good at fishing for fish.
And there, The resurrected Lord called him back to the shore, to his promised duties, to take up his cross like the other faithful disciples. He hit Simon, laughingly and perversely nicknamed "The Rock" with the challenge:
"Simon," (not "Peter") "agapao thou Me? (do you sovereignly prefer thou Me over yourself and above these others here?)"
And did Simon (no longer addressed as "Peter" or "Kephas") confess to Him, say the same thing as he had always before professed to follow Him to death? No. What he responded with was:
"Yea, Lord; thou knowest that I phileo thee" ("Well, yah, Lord, you know, I have a warm fraternal affection for you, eh?)
Pffft! this guy finally had to face up to his phony attitude, without even coming up with the truth, which was "Yeah, bro, I like you OK, but I'm going to look out for myself."
And when asked to "Feed My sheep, tend my lambs," did Simon say "Ok, Lord, I'll do it. I'll do what you asked, without question." Nah. Simon, who had wanted to be top dog all along, just turned to his old pal, old Buddy John, pointed to him and said, "Ok, so what are you going to do with this guy?" trying to shift the Lord's attention away from himself and onto John.
Boy! What a pal!
OK, AF, you can wake up, any time now --- you're doing the same thing in this thread that "Peter" was doing in this vignette. How about coming up with some excuses for your own versions of "truth"? Quit trying to make a prince out of Peter. Stick to the script, please!
And quit trying to find fault with me, when nobody believes in your phony stories and excuses for Simon Bar Jona, dubbed "Peter," before his moment of truth at Pentecost.