Saint Peter

His writings

The New Testament includes two letters (or epistles) ascribed to Peter. While neither demonstrates the quality of Greek expected from an Aramaic fisherman who learned it as a second or third language, a number of scholars argued that if his first epistle was not at least written by him with the help of a secretary or amanuensis, then its author was a close associate of Peter who not only knew his opinions well, but felt comfortable speaking in Peter's name.

Related Topics:
Aramaic - First epistle - Amanuensis

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

The Second Epistle of Peter is another possible case. This letter demonstrates a dependence on the Epistle of Jude, and some modern scholars date its composition as late as AD 250. However, this epistle is included in numerous early Bibles of around that time and before, such as Papyrus 72 (3rd century) and the Bible of Clement of Alexandria (ca. 200). See the following section for more detail.

Related Topics:
Second Epistle of Peter - Epistle of Jude

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

The Gospel of Mark is generally attributed as being the teachings of Peter, recorded by Mark. According to Eusebius' "Ecclesiastical History" 3.39.14-16, Papias recorded this 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 , but with no intention of giving a regular 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 fictitious into the statements."

Related Topics:
Gospel of Mark - Eusebius - Papias - John the Presbyter

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

If this tradition is authentic, and Mark was the faithful amanuensis of Simon Peter, then very strong doubt is cast on Peter stories found in the NT but not in the Gospel of Mark, including the paean to Peter in Matthew 16:17-19. If this were authentic, then Mark would certainly include it, but it is found only in Matthew and nowhere else.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~