102,815
edits
Changes
→Martyrdom
Clement of Rome, in his Letter to the Corinthians (Chapter 5), written c. 80-98, speaks of Peter's martyrdom in the following terms: "Let us take the noble examples of our own generation. Through jealousy and envy the greatest and most just pillars of the Church were persecuted, and came even unto death… Peter, through unjust envy, endured not one or two but many labours, and at last, having delivered his testimony, departed unto the place of glory due to him."
Clement of Rome, in his Letter to the Corinthians (Chapter 5), written c. 80-98, speaks of Peter's martyrdom in the following terms: "Let us take the noble examples of our own generation. Through jealousy and envy the greatest and most just pillars of the Church were persecuted, and came even unto death… Peter, through unjust envy, endured not one or two but many labours, and at last, having delivered his testimony, departed unto the place of glory due to him."
==Writings==
Traditionally, two canonical epistles (1 & 2 Peter) and several apocryphal works have been attributed to Peter.
===New Testament===
The New Testament includes two letters (epistles) ascribed to Peter. Both demonstrate a high quality of cultured and urban Greek, at odds with the linguistic skill that would ordinarily be expected of an Aramaic-speaking fisherman, who would have learned Greek as a second or third language. However, the author of the first epistle explicitly claims to be using a secretary (see below), and this explanation would allow for discrepancies in style without entailing a different source. The textual features of these two epistles are such that a majority of scholars doubt that they were written by the same hand. This means at the most that Peter could not have authored both, or at the least that he used a different secretary for each letter. Some scholars argue that theological differences imply different sources, and point to the lack of references to 2 Peter among the early Church Fathers.
Of the two epistles, the first epistle is considered the earlier. A number of scholars have argued that the textual discrepancies with what would be expected of the biblical Peter are due to it having been written with the help of a secretary or as an amanuensis. Indeed in the first epistle the use of a secretary is clearly described: "By Silvanus, a faithful brother unto you, as I suppose, I have written briefly, exhorting, and testifying that this is the true grace of God wherein ye stand".[;&version=; 1 Pet. 5:12] Thus, in regards to at least the first epistle, the claims that Peter would have written Greek poorly seem irrelevant. The references to persecution of Christians, which only began under Nero, cause most scholars to date the text to at least 80, which would require Peter to have survived to an age that was, at that time, extremely old, and almost never reached, particularly by common fishermen. However, the Roman historian Tacitus and the biographer Suetonius both record that Nero's persecution of Christians began immediately after the fire that burned Rome in 64. Such a date, which is in accord with Christian tradition, especially Eusebius (History book 2, 24.1), would not have Peter at an improbable age upon his death. On the other hand, many scholars consider this in reference to the persecution of Christians in Asia Minor during the reign of the emperor Domitian (81-96).
In the salutation of the First Epistle of Peter the writer refers to the diaspora, which did not occur until 136: Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ, to God's elect, strangers in the world, scattered throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia and Bithynia, who have been chosen according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through the sanctifying work of the Spirit, for obedience to Jesus Christ and sprinkling by his blood: Grace and peace be yours in abundance.
The Second Epistle of Peter, on the other hand, appears to have been copied, in part, from the Epistle of Jude, and some modern scholars date its composition as late as c. 150. Some scholars argue the opposite, that the Epistle of Jude copied 2 Peter, while others contend an early date for Jude and thus observe that an early date is not incompatible with the text. Many scholars have noted the similarities between the apocryphal second pseudo-Epistle of Clement (2nd century) and 2 Peter. Second Peter may be earlier than 150, there are a few possible references to it that date back to the first century or early second century, e.g., 1 Clement written in c. AD 96, and the later church historian Eusebius claimed that Origen had made reference to the epistle before 250. Even in early times there was controversy over its authorship, and 2 Peter was often not included in the Biblical Canon; it was only in the 4th century that it gained a firm foothold in the New Testament, in a series of synods. In the east the Syrian Orthodox Church still did not admit it into the canon until the 6th century.
Traditionally, the Gospel of Mark was said to have been written by a person named John Mark, and that this person was an assistant to Peter, hence its content was traditionally seen as the closest to Peter's viewpoint. According to Eusebius's Ecclesiastical History, Papias recorded this belief from John the Presbyter:
Mark having become the interpreter of Peter, wrote down accurately whatsoever he remembered. It was not, however, in exact order that he related the sayings or deeds of Christ. For he neither heard the Lord nor accompanied Him. But afterwards, as I said, he accompanied Peter, who accommodated his instructions to the necessities [of his hearers], but with no intention of giving a normal or chronological narrative of the Lord's sayings. Wherefore Mark made no mistake in thus writing some things as he remembered them. For of one thing he took especial care, not to omit anything he had heard, and not to put anything fictional into the statements.—Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History, 3.39.14–16
Also Irenaeus wrote about this tradition:
After their (Peter and Paul's) passing, Mark also, the disciple and interpreter of Peter, transmitted to us in writing the things preached by Peter. (Irenaeus, Against Heresies, III. 1.2.; quoted by Eusebius in Ecclesiastical History, book 5, 7.6)
Based on these quotes, and on the Christian tradition, the information in Mark's Gospel about St. Peter would be based on eyewitness material. It should be noted, however, that some scholars (for differing reasons) dispute the attribution of the Gospel of Mark to its traditional author. The gospel itself is anonymous, and the above passages are the oldest surviving written testimony to its authorship.
[edit]Pseudepigrapha and apocrypha
There are also a number of other apocryphal writings that have been either attributed to or written about St. Peter. They were from antiquity regarded as pseudepigrapha.[citation needed] These include:
Gospel of Peter, a Docetic narrative that has survived in part
Acts of Peter
Acts of Peter and Andrew
Acts of Peter and Paul
Acts of Peter and the Twelve
Gnostic Apocalypse of Peter
A Letter of Peter to Philip, which was preserved in the Nag Hammadi library
Apocalypse of Peter, which was considered as genuine by many Christians as late as the fourth century
The Epistula Petri, the introductory letter ascribed to Apostle Peter that appears at the beginning of at least one version of the Clementine literature
==Notes==
# Harris, Stephen L., Understanding the Bible. Palo Alto: Mayfield. 1985.
# "Peter, St." Cross, F. L., ed. The Oxford dictionary of the Christian church. New York: Oxford University Press. 2005
# His father's name is given as 'Jonah',[Jn. 1:42] [Matt. 16:17] although some manuscripts of John give his father's name as John.
# Matt. 10:2-4, Mk. 3:16-19, Lk. 6:14-16
# http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/11744a.htm Catholic Encyclopedia: St. Peter, Prince of the Apostles
# Sermon by Leo the Great (440-461)
# Archbishop Stylianos of Australia
# Patriarch H.H.Ignatius Zakka I Iwas
# Identity of the Syriac Orthodox Church
# http://cbi.sagepub.com/cgi/reprint/5/1/73.pdf
# http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/250102.htm [Church History Book II, Chapter I, quoting Clement of Alexandria's Sixth book of Hypotyposes]
# Matt. 26:51, Mk. 14:47, Lk. 22:50
# May, Herbert G. and Bruce M. Metzger. The New Oxford Annotated Bible with the Apocrypha. 1977.
# Brodie, T. L. (1997). The Gospel according to John a literary and theological commentary. New York: Oxford University Press. pg. 574
# Louise Ropes Loomis, The Book of Popes (Liber Pontificalis). Merchantville, NJ: Evolution Publishing. ISBN 1-889758-86-8 (Reprint of the 1916 edition.
# This is provided in Downey, A History of Antioch, pp. 583–586. This evidence is accepted by M. Lapidge, among others, see Bischoff and Lapidge, Biblical Commentaries from the Canterbury School (Cambridge, 1994) p. 16. Lastly, see Finegan, The Archaeology of the New Testament, pp. 63–71.
# http://oce.catholic.com/index.php?title=Peter%2C_Apostle%2C_Saint
# Kirsch, J.P. (1911). St. Peter, Prince of the Apostles. In The Catholic Encyclopedia. New York: Robert Appleton Company. Retrieved February 20, 2009 from New Advent: http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/11744a.htm
# Kirsch, J.P. (1911). St. Peter, Prince of the Apostles. In The Catholic Encyclopedia. New York: Robert Appleton Company. Retrieved February 13, 2009 from New Advent: http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/11744a.htm
# Walsh, The Bones of St. Peter: A 1st Full Account of the Search for the Apostle's Body
# Finegan, The Archeology of the New Testament, pp. 368–370.
# http://www.saintpetersbasilica.org/Necropolis/JW/TheBonesofStPeter-1.htm The Bones of St. Peter
# Gospel of Thomas 13
# Gospel of Thomas 114
# Apocalypse of Peter
# Gospel of Mary 9:4
# http://www.gnosis.org/library/marygosp.htm Gospel of Mary 9:6
# Gospel of Peter 14:3
# Doctrine & Covenants 27:12-13
# Doctrine & Covenants 128:20-21
# http://www.catholic.com/library/Peter_the_Rock.asp
# http://www.peshitta.org/pdf/Mattich16.pdf
# Jesus, Peter & the Keys: A Scriptural Handbook on the Papacy
# Veselin Kesich (1992). "Peter's Primacy in the New Testament and the Early Tradition" in The Primacy of Peter. St. Vladimir's Seminary Press. pp. 61–66.
# Catechism of the Catholic Church, Articles 424 and 552
# WELS Topical Q&A
# Rykle Borger, "Remarks of an Outsider about Bauer's Worterbuch, BAGD, BDAG, and Their Textual Basis," Biblical Greek Language and Lexicography: Essays in Honor of Frederick W. Danker, Bernard A. Tayler (et al. eds.) pp. 32-47.
# WELS Topical Q&A
# Mathison, Keith A., The Shape of Sola Scriptura, pp184-185
# John Meyendorff, et al. (1963), The Primacy of Peter in the Orthodox Church (St. Vladimir's Seminary Press, Crestwood NY, ISBN 978-0-88141-125-6)
# Holy Apostles Convent (1999) The Orthodox New Testament, Vol. I: The Holy Gospels (Dormition Skete, Buena Vista CO, ISBN 0-944359-13-2) p. 105
# Primacy of St. Peter http://www.syrianchurch.org/Articles/PrimacyofStPeter.htm
# This phrase is found in Matt. 16:16 and Jn. 6:69.
# LDS Bible Dictionary—Peter
# Doctrine & Covenants 27: 12–13
# Wall, J. Charles. (1912), Porches and Fonts. Pub. London: Wells Gardner and Darton. P. 295.
# White, L. Michael (2004). From Jesus to Christianity. HarperSanFrancisco. pp. 170. ISBN 0–06–052655–6.
# http://www.egodeath.com/arthurdrewslegendstpeter.htm
# George Albert Wells, "St. Peter as Bishop of Rome"
[[Category: Religion]]
[[Category: Religion]]
[[Category: Biography]]
[[Category: Biography]]