Gospel of Peter
Part of a series on |
New Testament apocrypha |
---|
![]() |
![]() |
The Gospel of Peter (
A major focus of the surviving fragment of the Gospel of Peter is the
Composition
Authorship
The Gospel of Peter explicitly claims to be the work of Saint Peter:
And I with my companions was grieved; and being wounded in mind we hid ourselves:
— Gospel of Peter, 7
But I
Andrewmy brother took our nets and went to the sea;— Gospel of Peter, 14.
According to bible scholar
The true author of the gospel remains a mystery. Although there are parallels with the three Synoptic Gospels, Peter does not use any of the material unique to Matthew or unique to Luke. Raymond E. Brown and others[who?] find that the author may have been acquainted with the synoptic gospels and even with the Gospel of John; Brown even suggests that the author's source in the canonical gospels was transmitted orally, through readings in the churches, i.e. that the text is based on what the author remembers about the other gospels, together with their own embellishments.[3]
Date
The gospel is widely thought to date from after the composition of the four canonical gospels. Scholars are divided as to the exact date of the text, with some placing it in the first half of the 2nd century and considering it to have been compiled based on oral traditions about Jesus, independent of the canonical gospels.[5] The dating of the text depends to a certain extent on whether the text condemned by Serapion, Bishop of Antioch upon inspection at Rhossus is the same as the text that was discovered in modern times.[6] The Rhossus community had already been using it in their liturgy.[7][8]
Craig A. Evans argues that the Gospel of Peter was written in the 2nd century CE to counter anti-Christian polemics of that time (such as the ones found in Celsus's The True Word).[11]
Later Western references, which condemn the work, such as
Historical references
The Second Epistle of Clement refers to a passage thought to be from the Gospel of Peter:[13]
2 Clement 5:2
For the Lord saith, Ye shall be as lambs in the midst of wolves.
2 Clement 5:3
But Peter answered and said unto Him, What then, if the wolves
should tear the lambs?
2 Clement 5:4
Jesus said unto Peter, Let not the lambs fear the wolves after they
are dead; and ye also, fear ye not them that kill you and are not
able to do anything to you; but fear Him that after ye are dead
hath power over soul and body, to cast them into the Gehenna of
fire.
In his
In his Compendium of Heretical Accounts, Theodoret states that the 4th century Nazarene sect used the Gospel of Peter in their liturgy,[18] but this is considered to be highly unlikely and anachronistic.[by whom?] In his Church History, Philip of Side states that "the ancients absolutely refused the Gospel of the Hebrews, the Gospel of Peter and the Gospel of Thomas, which they considered the work of heretics."[19]
Discovery
![](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/2e/Das_Fragment_von_Akhmim_in_Griechisch.jpg/220px-Das_Fragment_von_Akhmim_in_Griechisch.jpg)
![](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/6b/P._Oxy._LX_4009.jpg/220px-P._Oxy._LX_4009.jpg)
![](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/19/P._Oxy.2949_1.jpg/220px-P._Oxy.2949_1.jpg)
The Gospel of Peter was recovered in 1886 by the French archaeologist
Two other papyrus fragments from Oxyrhynchus (P.Oxy 4009 and P.Oxy. 2949) were uncovered later and published in 1972. They are possibly, but not conclusively, from the Gospel of Peter and would suggest, if they belonged, that the text was more than just a passion narrative. These small fragments both seem to give first person accounts of discussions between Jesus and Peter in situations prior to the Passion week. It has also been speculated that the Fayyum Fragment may be an excerpt from the Gospel of Peter.[22]
To date it is one of four early non-canonical narrative gospels, which exist only in fragmentary form: this Gospel of Peter, the
Contents
Edgar J. Goodspeed stated that the main importance of this work is that it is the first of the Christian apologies, although on the next page he admits that only "bits" actually fall into that category.[24]
One of the chief characteristics of the work is that Pontius Pilate is exonerated of all responsibility for the Crucifixion, the onus being laid upon Herod Antipas, the scribes, and other Jews, who pointedly did not "wash their hands" like Pilate. However, the Gospel of Peter was condemned as heretical by c. 200 AD for its alleged docetic elements.
The opening leaves of the text are lost, so the Passion begins abruptly with the trial of Jesus before Pilate, after Pilate has washed his hands, and closes with its unusual and detailed version of the watch set over the tomb and the resurrection. The Gospel of Peter is more detailed in its account of the events after the Crucifixion than any of the canonical gospels, and it varies from the canonical accounts in numerous details: Herod gives the order for the execution, not Pilate, who is exonerated; Joseph (of Arimathea, which place is not mentioned) has been acquainted with Pilate; in the darkness that accompanied the crucifixion, "many went about with lamps, supposing that it was night, and fell down".
Jesus' cry from the cross, which the Gospels of Mark and Matthew give as "Eli, Eli, lama sabachthani?" which Mark and Matthew explain as meaning, "My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?" is reported in the Gospel of Peter as "My power, my power, thou hast forsaken me". Immediately after, Peter states that, "when he had said it, he was taken up", suggesting that Jesus did not actually die. This, together with the claim that on the cross Jesus "remained silent, as though he felt no pain", has led many early Christians to accuse the text of docetism. F. F. Bruce writes:
The docetic note in this narrative appears in the statement that Jesus, while being crucified, 'remained silent, as though he felt no pain', and in the account of his death. It carefully avoids saying that he died, preferring to say that he 'was taken up', as though he – or at least his soul or spiritual self – was 'assumed' direct from the cross to the presence of God. (We shall see an echo of this idea in the Qur'an.) Then the cry of dereliction is reproduced in a form which suggests that, at that moment, his divine power left the bodily shell in which it had taken up temporary residence.[25]
F. F. Bruce continues:
Apart from its docetic tendency, the most striking feature of the narrative is its complete exoneration of Pilate from all responsibility for the crucifixion of Jesus. Pilate is here well on the way to the goal of canonisation which he was to attain in the Coptic Church. He withdraws from the trial after washing his hands, and Herod Antipas takes over from him, assuming the responsibility which, in Luke's passion narrative, he declined to accept. Roman soldiers play no part until they are sent by Pilate, at the request of the Jewish authorities, to provide the guard at the tomb of Jesus. The villians [sic] of the piece throughout are 'the Jews' – more particularly, the chief priests and the scribes. It is they who condemn Jesus to death and abuse him; it is they who crucify him and share out his clothes among themselves.[26]
The account in Peter tells that the supposed writer and other disciples hid because they were being sought on suspicion of plotting to set fire to the temple, and totally rejects any possibility of their disloyalty. The centurion who kept watch at the tomb is given the name Petronius. Details of the sealing of the tomb, requested of Pilate by the elders of the Jewish community, elaborate upon Matthew 27:66: "So they went, and made the sepulchre sure, sealing the stone, and setting a watch", saying instead:[27]
And Pilate gave them Petronius the centurion with soldiers to guard the tomb. And with them came elders and scribes to the sepulchre, and having rolled a great stone together with the centurion and the soldiers, they all who were there together set it at the door of the sepulchre; and they affixed seven seals and pitched a tent there and guarded it. And early in the morning as the Sabbath was drawing on, there came a multitude from Jerusalem and the region round about, that they might see the sepulchre that was sealed.
Most importantly, the Resurrection and Ascension, which are described in detail, are not treated as separate events, but occur on the same day:
9. And in the night in which the Lord's day was drawing on, as the soldiers kept guard two by two in a watch, there was a great voice in the heaven; and they saw the heavens opened, and two men descend with a great light and approach the tomb. And the stone that was put at the door rolled of itself and made way in part; and the tomb was opened, and both the young men entered in. 10. When therefore those soldiers saw it, they awakened the centurion and the elders, for they too were close by keeping guard. And as they declared what things they had seen, again they saw three men come forth from the tomb, and two of them supporting one, and a cross following them. And the heads of the two reached to heaven, but the head of him who was led by them overpassed the heavens. And they heard a voice from the heavens, saying, You have preached to them that sleep. And a response was heard from the cross, Yes.
The text is unusual at this point in describing the Cross itself as speaking,[a] and even moving out of the tomb. Deane Galbraith shows that the Gospel of Peter has derived its unusual description of the talking and moving cross by interpreting the first six verses of LXX Psalm 18 (Psalm 19 in the Masoretic Text) as a prophecy of Jesus' resurrection.[28] The text then proceeds to follow the Gospel of Mark, ending at the short ending (where the women flee the empty tomb in fear), adding on an extra scene set during the Feast of Unleavened Bread, where the disciples leave Jerusalem, and ends, like the short ending, without Jesus being physically seen.
See also
Notes
- ^ This is also a feature of the Gospel of the Saviour, believed to have been written in the 2nd or 3rd century.
Citations
- ^ Thomas Patrick Halton, On Illustrious Men, v. 100, CUA Press, 1999. pp 5–7
- ISBN 0-310-22655-4.
- ^ Death of the Messiah, Appendix 1 Gospel of Peter - B3 Composition, Doubleday, 1994. Vol. 2, p. 1334-1335
- ^ Walter Richard Cassels, Supernatural Religion - An Inquiry Into the Reality of Divine Revelation, Read Books, 2010. Vol. 1, p. 419–422
- ^ Ehrman and Pleše 2011, pp. 370–372.
- ^ Ehrman and Pleše 2011, p. 371.
- ^ Ehrman and Pleše 2011, pp. 365–366
- ^ Foster 2007, p. 325
- ^ Crossan, John Dominic. The Cross that Spoke, pp. 16–30. Wipf and Stock, 1988.
- ISBN 978-0-8006-3122-2. footnote
- ISBN 978-0-8308-3355-9.
- ^ Jerome, Of famous men, I: "...the books, of which one is entitled his Acts, another his Gospel, a third his Preaching, a fourth his Revelation, a fifth his Judgment are rejected as apocryphal."
- ^ Ehrman, Bart. "After the New Testament," Lecture 15. The Teaching Company Limited Partnership, 2005.
- Origen of Alexandria. "The Brethren of Jesus". Origen's Commentary on Matthew in Ante-Nicene Fathers Volume IX. Retrieved 2008-09-18.
- ^ Eusebius, Church History, Book 6, Chapter 12, Paragraphs 2–6
- ^ Eusebius, Church History, Book 3, Chapter 3, Paragraphs 1–4
- ^ Jerome, De Viris Illustribus, Book I
- ^ Theodoret, Compendium of Heretical Accounts, Book 2, Chapter 2
- ^ Philip of Sides, Church History, fragment
- ^ Bouriant, "Fragments du texte grec du livre d'Énoch et de quelques écrits attribués à saint Pierre" in Mémoires de la mission archéologique française au Caire 1892.
- ^ An early reaction was E. N. Bennett, "The Gospel according to Peter" The Classical Review 7.1/2 (February 1893), pp. 40–42.
- ISBN 978-3-11-019313-8.
- ^ As noted by E. N. Bennet 1893, p. 40.
- ISBN 0226303861.
- ^ "Gospel of Peter". www.earlychristianwritings.com.
- ^ "The Gospel According to Peter". www.orthodox.cn.
- S2CID 171576180.
References
- Foster, P, (2007), 'The Gospel of Peter', Exp. Times, Vol. 118, No. 7, p. 318-325.
- J. Rendel Harris, A Popular Account of the Newly-Recovered Gospel of Peter
- John Dominic Crossan, The Cross That Spoke: The Origins of the Passion Narrative. San Francisco: Harper and Row, 1988.
External links
- Gospel of Peter
- Early Christian Writings: Gospel of Peter: several translations and commentaries, and three Patristic references
- Gospels.net: Gospel of Peter: additional information
- The New Schaff-Herzog Encyclopedia of Religious Knowledge : Peter the Apostle: III.1
- Geoff Trowbrige, "The Gospel of Peter" Archived 2006-12-11 at the Wayback Machine
- Barbara Thiering's interpretation of the Gospel of Peter