Gospel of Peter
Originally written in Koine Greek, it is a non-canonical gospel and was rejected as apocryphal by the Church's synods of Carthage and Rome, which contributed to the establishment of the New Testament canon.
A major focus of the surviving fragment of the Gospel of Peter is the Passion narrative, which ascribes responsibility for the crucifixion of Jesus to Herod Antipas rather than to Pontius Pilate.
A consequence of this is the potential existence of a source text that formed the basis of the passion narratives in Matthew, Luke, and Mark, as well as in Peter.
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.
[10] 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 Jerome and the Decretum Gelasianum, traditionally connected to Pope Gelasius I, are apparently based upon the judgment of Eusebius, not upon a direct knowledge of the text.
[17] In his Compendium of Heretical Accounts, Theodoret states that the 4th century Nazarene sect used the Gospel of Peter in their liturgy,[18] though there is little evidence to support this claim.
"[19] The Gospel of Peter was recovered in 1886 by the French archaeologist Urbain Bouriant in the modern Egyptian city of Akhmim (60 miles (97 km) north of Nag Hammadi).
Harris is convinced that the author borrowed from the canonical accounts, and he lists other literature that may have incorporated the Gospel of Peter, with special emphasis on the Diatessaron.
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.
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".
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.
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.
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.
[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.
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.
