Peter's Three Denials: A Temporary Collapse of Faith and the Reawakening of Assumption

The story of Peter’s denial of Jesus is often seen as a moment of betrayal, but when interpreted through Neville Goddard’s Law of Assumption, it reveals a deep psychological process that many of us experience when attempting to manifest our desires. Rather than focusing on the literal events, this narrative becomes an allegory for the temporary collapse of faith in the creative power of imagination and the eventual restoration of assumption.

Peter’s three denials represent the temporary faltering of belief in the assumption we’ve made, something everyone encounters at different stages of manifestation. However, just as Jesus’s arrest is symbolic of the imprisonment of imagination, Peter’s denial shows us how to return to faith in our assumptions and the power of imagination, even after it seems to waver.

Peter and Jesus: Two Aspects of the Mind

In Neville’s teachings, Jesus represents the imagination, which is the higher consciousness capable of creating reality. Jesus is the inner power of creation that aligns us with our desired state. On the other hand, Peter represents the conscious faith or assumption, which may waver or fluctuate based on external circumstances.

Rather than seeing this as a story about two separate figures, we can understand Peter and Jesus as aspects of the mind—Jesus being the inner creative power (imagination) and Peter being the conscious faith (assumption) that can momentarily weaken under pressure.

Peter’s Denials: A Temporary Collapse of Assumption

The three denials occur under intense external pressure, mirroring our own experience when we begin to doubt the assumptions we have made for manifestation. Peter’s denials represent moments when we question or reject the validity of our assumptions, especially when the outer world appears to contradict them.

1. The First Denial: The First Doubt in the Assumption

When Peter is first asked if he knows Jesus, he replies, “I do not know what you are talking about.” This first denial symbolizes the initial wavering of faith when external circumstances challenge the assumption we’ve made. Just like Peter’s first denial, we may start questioning our assumptions when we see no immediate evidence to support them.

For instance, if you’ve assumed success in a new venture, but the early signs suggest failure, you may begin to doubt the validity of your assumption, just as Peter initially denies his connection to Jesus.

2. The Second Denial: The Growing Doubt

The second denial comes when Peter is confronted again and denies knowing Jesus even more forcefully: “I do not know the man!” This escalation in denial represents a deeper wavering of faith in the assumed state. The more persistent the external circumstances, the more we may question the power of our assumptions. It’s easy to fall into the trap of denying our assumptions outright, especially when they seem to be contradicted by reality.

At this stage, you may feel overwhelmed by the contradictions between your assumed state and the physical evidence surrounding you. This second denial can represent a time when you’ve almost given up on the manifestation process, believing it’s impossible.

3. The Third Denial: The Complete Collapse of Assumption

The third and final denial is the most intense. Peter curses and swears, “I do not know the man!” This represents the complete collapse of assumption—the point where external circumstances have fully convinced you that your desire is unattainable. When faced with overwhelming doubt and contradiction, we may feel like all is lost, and we may reject our assumptions entirely.

At this stage, the external world seems so contrary to our assumption that we deny it altogether, feeling that our desired state is beyond reach. But as Neville teaches, the appearance of failure is only a temporary state—it doesn’t invalidate the assumption itself.

Jesus’s Arrest: The Suppression of Imagination

While Peter is denying Jesus, the narrative of Jesus’s arrest symbolizes the suppression of imagination. In Neville’s terms, Jesus represents the imagination, and His arrest represents the temporary suppression of the creative power within. Just as Peter’s faith falters, the imagination appears to be captured by the external world, unable to act freely. The arrest is a powerful symbol of how, in moments of doubt, we may feel that our imagination (the creative power) is being "held captive" by circumstances.

In the Law of Assumption, imagination is the force that shapes our reality. When we deny our assumptions or let external conditions dictate our beliefs, we experience the imprisonment of imagination, a temporary disconnection from our true creative power.

The Cock Crows: The Awakening of Assumption

Despite Peter’s denials, the cock crows, signaling the moment when Peter’s faith returns, and he remembers Jesus’s words. This moment is symbolic of the awakening of assumption, when we remember the power of our imagination and the assumptions we’ve made.

The crowing of the cock is a call to return to faith. No matter how deeply we’ve doubted or rejected our assumptions, the power of imagination and the Law of Assumption are always available to us. This awakening calls us to remember that our assumptions are still valid, and that we can always return to them, no matter how far we’ve strayed from them in moments of doubt.

The Crucifixion: The Success of Assumption

In Neville’s teachings, the crucifixion of Jesus represents the fixed assumption, the final certainty of a belief held in the imagination. The moment of crucifixion is not a defeat, but a symbol of the firming of an idea in the subconscious mind. Just as Jesus's death marks the culmination of his purpose, the assumption made in the imagination is sealed, ensuring that the desired manifestation will eventually appear in physical reality.

The crucifixion is a powerful representation of success through persistence. Even though external circumstances (Peter’s denials, the arrest) may suggest failure, the assumption remains solidified, and the manifestation of the desired state becomes inevitable. The Law of Assumption teaches that once the belief is firmly held, manifestation is guaranteed, just as Jesus’s death ultimately led to his resurrection—representing the ultimate success of the fixed assumption.

Conclusion: Faith and Imagination in the Mind of the Reader

Through the lens of Neville’s Law of Assumption, the story of Peter’s denials and Jesus’s arrest is not just a historical account but a symbolic representation of the struggle between faith and imagination within the reader’s own mind. Peter represents the wavering assumption, the doubts that arise when external evidence contradicts what we’ve assumed. Jesus represents the imagination, the creative power within that knows our desired state is already ours.

This story serves as a reminder that even when we falter, when our assumptions seem impossible and the external world tells us otherwise, we can always return to the assumption of the desired state. The crowing of the cock marks the reawakening of faith, a call to persist in our assumptions despite what the world reflects back to us.

Persistence in the assumption is the key to manifestation. Just as Peter’s denials do not nullify his connection to Jesus, our temporary doubts do not invalidate the power of imagination. Imagination is the force that creates reality, and once we return to the assumption with faith, we can manifest our desires. And just as Jesus’s crucifixion ultimately represents the fixed assumption, we know that once our assumptions are firmly embedded in the subconscious mind, the manifestation is inevitable.