That's the point. Ellen White classifies willful sin as premeditated sin. Therefore, Peter's sin wasn't willful.

In such cases do you think God will impute repentance knowing that they would have repented had not death taken them?

Romans
4:7 [Saying], Blessed [are] they whose iniquities are forgiven, and whose sins are covered.
4:8 Blessed [is] the man to whom the Lord will not impute sin.

True, Peter didn't premeditate denying the Lord thrice. Each time he denied Jesus, he knew it was wrong. He was not ignorant. His sin was all the more wrong because Jesus forewarned him and because he passionately promised not to deny Jesus.

Here are some insightful passages on sin:

As I said, the word in Hebrew refers not merely to sins of ignorance, but to all sins where there wasn't a (previous, premeditated) intent to sin.
As I also said, Ellen White contrasts "errors committed through ignorance, thoughtlessness, or weakness" with "wilful, premeditated sin" (PUR, April 10, 1902 par. 7). That's why, to me, Peter's was a sin committed through weakness, while Juda's was a willful, premeditated sin.

I hear what you're saying, however, Judas' plan was to push Jesus to declare His kingship and overthrow the Romans. Peter merely denied knowing Jesus to save his hide. Both were forewarned. Neither one listened. Each committed a horrible sin. Judas killed himself. Peter died to self. The other 10 disciples abandoned Jesus to save themselves. All committed terrible sins. All 12 were fully aware that they did something grievously wrong. Not one of them was ignorant. They all sinned intentionally.

I think that, except for the sin of the African native who has never heard about a book called Bible and thus could never have kept holy a day called Sabbath, every sin is, in a sense, intentional. At some point, whether consciously or unconsciously, you choose to sin. But the term "unintentional" would apply to a sin where there wasn't a previous, premeditated intent to sin.

Okay. But I still don't see how you can say Peter sinned unintentionally. Just because he didn't premeditate denying Jesus hours or days in advance it doesn't mean he sinned unintentionally. He had plenty of time to think about it, especially between the first and second denial, and even more so between the second and third denial.

I can see Moses sin of striking the rock as an impulsive sin, but Aaron's sin?
I have a hard time seeing Aaron's sin as anything but deliberate.
He had to collect gold from all the people. Get the equipement and the fires going to melt it all down and shape a golden calf. That took some pretty good planning. Yes, I know he made it sound like the calf just kind of jumped out of the fire, but that was the speech of man trying to avoid blame.
He even called the people to worship this calf, saying it was a day of worship to the Lord!


I mean, he didn't just hide in fear and let the people do what they wanted, he actually LED OUT in the whole affair!


If Aaron was not chargeable with deliberate or willful sin, then Peter most certainly wasn't either.

I think Peter was so emotionally distraught with fear and disappointed hope (after all he still didn't understand the sacrificial work of the Messiah and thought Christ should be king) that he didn't even realize he was fulfilling Christ's prediction of denial UNTIL the cock crowed the second time and it hit him like a thunderbolt.

Have you been reading the gosple of Judas?
Actually, Judas, thought he was better than Jesus, smarter. He thought Jesus needed a manager to keep Him on track. Judas wanted to be "the boss" and use Jesus for his own ends. In fact the continuous arguing amongst the disciples as to who would be greatest was usually instigated by Judas. And remember what event sent Judas scrurrying to the priest to make the betrayal arrangements. Money and power motivated Judas. Judas sin was not something of the moment -- it was the result of a lot of little steps into sin.


Judas was never sorry for his sins, he was merely sorry that things hadn't worked out as he had planned, and couldn't live with the consequences.

Peter, on the other hand, loved the Lord with all his impetuous heart. He was ready to fight the whole mob there in the garden of Gethsemane, but Christ told him to put away his sword.
Now Peter felt helpless, disoriented, confused, and fearful, out of control, totally uncertain of the future, as he saw the Man in whom he had placed all his hopes, beaten, and abused and condemned, AND DOING NOTHING. Peter's denial wasn't premediated, it came from his emotional confusion and fears.
Once the reality of what he had done hit him, it nearly crushed his heart. He was truly sorry for what he had done!

Are you applying the quote in CC 110 to the story of the golden calf? Of the golden calf debacle, Ellen wrote:


Seems to me Aaron was guilty of deliberate sin in the golden calf incident, but was not chargeable with deliberate sin when he and Moses disobeyed God at Meribah.