RELIGIOUS ENCYCLOPEDIA
Peter of Alexandria Peter the Apostle
. Life.
Name and Early Career (§1). Position among the Apostles
(§ 2). Character and Temperament (§ 3). Activity and Position in Palestine
(§ 4). His Teachings aa Recorded in Acta
(§5). Attitude toward Gentile Christians
(§6). The Closing Years (§ 7).
PETER THE APOSTLE,
Confused and False Traditions Concerning Peter (§8). II. Writings.
Occasion and Circumstances of I Peter (§ 1).
Relation to Other N. T. Writings (§2).
Its Theology (§ 3).
Place and Date of Composition; Authenticity (§ 4).
II Peter (§ 5). III. Apocryphal Petrine Literature.
1. The Gospel.
Early Mention (§ 1). Rediscovery (§ 2). Contents (§3). Date, Sources, Character (§ 4).
2. The Apocalypse. Early Mention (§ 1). Contents (§ 2).
Literary Influence; Date (§ 3).
3. The Preaching.
4. The Acts.
I. Life: The sole source for the biography of the Apostle Peter during the earthly ministry of Christ is the canonical Gospels. He originally bore the very common Jewish name of Shimeon, Simeon, or Simon (cf. Acts xv. 14; II Pet. i. 1), the first of these forms being the earliest, and the last the latest. He likewise had the Aramaic honorary surname of Kepha (Gk. Kephas), i. Name or " Rock," which was translated into and Early its Greek equivalent Petros, " Peter." Career. Christ himself, however, termed his apostle Peter only thrice (John i. 42; Matt. xvi. 18; Luke xxii. 34), elsewhere using either the name Simon (Matt. xvii. 25; Mark xiv. 37; Luke xxii. 31) or, in more solemn moments, Simon son of John (Matt. xvi. 17; John i. 42, xxi. 15-17). The phraseology of the Evangelists varies. Mark terms the apostle Simon until he receives the surname of Peter (Mark iii. 16), after which he is called Peter; and a similar, though less consistent, course is followed by the other two synoptists (cf. Matt, iv. 18, viii. 14, xvi. 16; Luke v. 8). In Acts he is invariably called Peter, even when addressed (Acts x. 13, xi. 7). In the Fourth Gospel he is called Simon only when first mentioned, elsewhere being usually termed Simon Peter, Peter alone being used only when the double name either precedes or follows. Paul almost invariably terms him Cephas (I Cor. i. 12, iii. 22, ix. 5, xv. 5; Gal. i. 18, ii. 9, 11, 14), the use of Peter here being extremely rare (Gal. ii. 7-8). The father of the Apostle Peter was named John (John i. 42, xxi. 15 sqq.) or, in abbreviated form, Jona (Matt. xvi. 17). He was probably from Bethsaida (John i. 44), although Mark i. 21, 29 makes him a resident of Capernaum, the apparent contradiction being explicable by the fact that at marriage (cf. I Cor. ix. 5) he had removed to the latter town, making his living by fishing, together with his younger brother Andrew, in the Sea of Galilee (Matt. iv. 18; Mark i. 16; Luke v. 3). Andrew had early become one of the disciples of John the Baptist (John i. 40), and it was this younger brother who brought Peter into contact with Jesus (John i. 42). There is, however, no reason to suppose that he then became a member of the Messiah's circle, or that he was present among the disciples at Cana (John ii. 2), at Jerusalem (ii. 17), in Judea (iv. 2), and in Samaria (iv. 8). It would rather seem that, after returning with Jesus to Galilee, Peter there resumed his trade, so that there is no real discrepancy between the account in the Gospel of John and the synoptic records of the calling
of Peter (John ii. 41 sqq.; Matt. iv. 18 sqq.; Mark i. 16 sqq.), but, on the contrary, the synoptic account presupposes the Johannine, which alone renders it intelligible as the documents now read. With the second calling, however, Peter seems to have become the constant follower of Jesus throughout all his wanderings, so that his incorporation among the twelve apostles (Matt. x. 1 sqq.; Mark iii. 13 sqq.) evidently makes little real change in his relation to Christ.
While Matthew and Luke ascribe a slightly more
marked preeminence to Peter among the apostles
than does Mark, which is based largely
2. Position on Petrine sources, there is no real among the discrepancy between them. Matthew
Apostles, and Luke have included certain passages, omitted by Mark, which emphasize the leadership of Peter (Matt. xiv. 28-31, xvi. 17-19, xvii. 24-27, xviii. 21; Luke v. 3, xii. 41, xxii. 32, xxiv. 12, 34); words ascribed by Mark to the apostles in general are attributed by Matthew and Luke to Peter (cf. Matt. xv. 15 and Luke viii. 45 with Mark vii. 17, v. 31); Peter is expressly mentioned where Mark gives no name (cf. Luke xxii. 8 with Mark xiv. 13); Matthew explicitly stresses the priority of Peter among the apostles (cf. Matt. x. 2 with Mark iii. 16 sqq.; Luke vi. 14 sqq.; Acts i. 13 sqq.); and the position which he held according to Mark (v. 37, xiii. 3, xiv. 33) was little less than that ascribed to him in Matthew and Luke. Nor is this position altered by the relation of Peter to John in the Fourth Gospel. Here John has a certain preeminence because of his greater sympathy with the mind of Jesus, whereas Peter owed his position to his quick decision and action, a position which the Fourth Gospel not only does not minimize, but, on the contrary, brings into full prominence.
Generally speaking, the character of Peter is described with essential harmony in all the Gospels. He appears as an admirable type of the Galilean, well-meaning, confiding, freedom-lov-
3. Charac- ing, and courageous, yet changeable, ter and capricious, and eager for novelty (Jo- Tempera- sephus, War, III., iii. 2; Life, 16-17;
ment. Matt. xi. 7 sqq., 16 sqq.). At first blush it seems strange that Jesus should have given the epithet of " Rock " to one of such character, yet he saw far beneath the surface and grasped the inherent strength and stability that underlay the changing and inconstant exterior. Nor did Peter prove unworthy of this confidence;
Peter the Apostle