Thoughts on the Apocalypse of Peter


#1

Anyone have thoughts on this?

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apocalypse_of_Peter#Content


#2

It’s a writing from the 2nd century which may or may not have been told to one of Peter’s students before he died and later written down.

It’s not part of the Bible because it was written too far after St. Peter was killed.

You can read it here.

catholicculture.org/culture/library/fathers/view.cfm?recnum=1983


#3

Exactly however it is a good reading and useful for teaching espeacially things concerning Hell all of it orthodox which meets chrch standards


#4

I caution against using non-canonical resources as teaching devices. Best to check with your pastor and/or bishop prior to using as a teaching book. There were many ancient manuscripts that were forged after Christ died; that’s what led the church to defining the canon and discerning what is divinely inspired or not. There are so many other books that have been verified and accepted, I would be very hesitant to reference this book.


#5

I have read it. M.R. James “New Testament Apocrypha” is an excellent book. You need to take these books with a grain of salt however. Like a lot of them were written as pseudographia, and seem to tell stories that troubled early Christians. For example, The Acts of Peter, the author was definitely concerned of the Gnostic sect of the Simonians who followed Simon Magus. The books however do shed light on a lot of the traditions we do hold, such as how Peter and Paul died, the names of the Magi which are in the Acts of Pilate(Gospel of Nicodemus). One book that always also struck me was the Acts of Paul, and especially the second part of the book known as The Acts of Paul and Thecla. Many Scholars believe this book was almost included in the Canon but later rejected because it emphasized females as being able to be priests in a sense. But yah read the Bible, and grasp it, know the truth of the Bible. And once you do that, reading the New Testament Apocrypha is okay. It however can become confusing if you do not have a firm grasp on the accepted books, and need to realize these books were kept out for just cause. The only books I believe should be in the Bible are mostly Old Testament books such as The book of Enoch, and Jubilees.


closed #6

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.