The Preaching of Peter is a 1st to mid 2nd century Christian document, probably written in Egypt. Clement of Alexandria (2nd c.) cited it as if it were a real record of Peter's preaching (“Peter says in the Preaching”). Origen (early 3rd c.) apparently called the same book "the Teaching (or 'Doctrine') of Peter" and said that Heracleon (a late 2nd c. gnostic in southern Italy) used it. Since it came from Egypt and was treated authoritatively by Clement of Alexandria, I would like to please ask here on the Oriental Orthodox forum about it. I am in the process of learning about the possible 1st c. Christian writings because they came from the time of the apostles or those who knew them.
Here are M.R. James' collection of excerpts from the Preaching of Peter in James' book The Apocryphal New Testament: The Preaching of Peter
Here is Ben Smith's collection on his Text Excavation website: The preaching of Peter.
(Question #1) According to scholars, there was a separate, gnostic-influenced document from 180 AD called "Kerygmata Petrou". The distinction between the two documents is a little confusing for me, because Kerygma means "preaching".
On the other hand:
So the book's identity and its reliability is an interesting question. What do you think?
(Question #2) The Encyclopedia of the Bible says that some quotations from it
Scholars suggest that St. Peter likely went to Rome to preach first in about 42-43 AD, that is, about 10 years after Jesus' death. Besides that, didn't Peter go to Phoenicia and Antioch to preach in the 12 years after the resurrection? But maybe that does not really count though if Israel had conquered those places in the past, and Jesus had preached there? Or maybe I am being too strict about the 12 years, and just because Jesus said to go abroad and preach after 12 years doesn't mean that he forbade them from preaching abroad before the 12 years were up, only that he wanted them to concentrate their efforts more abroad after the 12 years.
(Question #3) The Preaching of Peter says:
(Question # 4) Clement of Alexandria may have referred to the Preaching of Peter in passing and found it similar to Paul's teaching on the topic of how God inspired Greek writers to teach about God:
Bp. Theophilus of Antioch (late 2nd c.) quotes the Sibyl, who predicted the future, as saying:
Encyclopedia Iranica says about Hystaspes:
If Heracleon had a copy in Italy, I can understand that the Preaching of Peter could be genuine, as Peter and Valentinus (who lived from 100 to 160 AD) were in Rome. Besides that, Mark was a student of Peter and moved to Alexandria in Egypt.Heracleon was a Gnostic who flourished about AD 175, probably in the south of Italy. He is described by Clement of Alexandria (Strom. iv. 9) as the most esteemed... of the school of Valentinus; and, according to Origen..., said to have been in personal contact... with Valentinus himself. Heracleon - Wikipedia
Here are M.R. James' collection of excerpts from the Preaching of Peter in James' book The Apocryphal New Testament: The Preaching of Peter
Here is Ben Smith's collection on his Text Excavation website: The preaching of Peter.
(Question #1) According to scholars, there was a separate, gnostic-influenced document from 180 AD called "Kerygmata Petrou". The distinction between the two documents is a little confusing for me, because Kerygma means "preaching".
Kerygma (from the ancient Greek word κῆρυγμα kẽrugma) is a Greek word used in the New Testament for "preaching" (see Luke 4:18-19, Romans 10:14, Matthew 3:1). It is related to the Greek verb κηρύσσω kērússō, literally meaning "to cry or proclaim as a herald" and being used in the sense of "to proclaim, announce, preach". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kerygma
On the other hand:
In his work On First Principles, Origen says that the Teaching of Peter is not by Peter or anyone else inspired by the spirit and is not counted among the books of the church. Eusebius in his Church History (iii. 3. 2, A.D. 326) groups the Preaching with the Acts of Peter, the Gospel of Peter, and the Revelation of Peter as not accepted by standard Christianity and not appealed to by church writers. Indeed, of all the works claiming the name of Peter, Eusebius accepted only the first epistle as his work (Church History iii. 3. 1). http://www.intratext.com/IXT/ENG0833/_P1F.HTM
So the book's identity and its reliability is an interesting question. What do you think?
(Question #2) The Encyclopedia of the Bible says that some quotations from it
The 12 year period of preaching only in Israel is interesting. Does it sound correct?record a post-resurrection discourse of Jesus, in which He bids the disciples to go out into the world after twelve years “that no one may say: We have not heard it,”... The twelve-year period (evidently of mission confined to Israel) appears also in other lit[erature.]
Scholars suggest that St. Peter likely went to Rome to preach first in about 42-43 AD, that is, about 10 years after Jesus' death. Besides that, didn't Peter go to Phoenicia and Antioch to preach in the 12 years after the resurrection? But maybe that does not really count though if Israel had conquered those places in the past, and Jesus had preached there? Or maybe I am being too strict about the 12 years, and just because Jesus said to go abroad and preach after 12 years doesn't mean that he forbade them from preaching abroad before the 12 years were up, only that he wanted them to concentrate their efforts more abroad after the 12 years.
(Question #3) The Preaching of Peter says:
I am not sure what he means about "serving angels". By "serving the month and the moon", does he mean that they observe their feasts based on whether the moon is seen? Or does he mean that they practice astrology? The Zodiac has been found in art in one or two ancient synagogues in the Levant.Neither worship ye him as do the Jews, for they, who suppose that they alone know God, do not know him, serving angels and archangels, the month and the moon: and if no moon be seen, they do not celebrate what is called the first sabbath, nor keep the new moon, nor the days of unleavened bread, nor the feast (of tabernacles?), nor the great day (of atonement).
(Question # 4) Clement of Alexandria may have referred to the Preaching of Peter in passing and found it similar to Paul's teaching on the topic of how God inspired Greek writers to teach about God:
I would like to ask if you happen to be familiar with what Greek writers Clement of Alexandria is referring to in his passage? I think that he means that the Greek writers taught monotheism and belief in the Messiah or God's Son.And further, he[Paul] shows that the same God that furnished both covenants was the giver of Greek philosophy to the Greeks, by which the almighty is glorified among the Greeks. And it is clear from this. Accordingly, then, from the Hellenic training and also from that of the law are gathered into the one race of the saved people those who accept faith, not that the three peoples are separated by time, so that one might suppose three natures, but rather trained in different covenants of the one Lord, by the word of the one Lord.
For, in addition to the preaching of Peter, the apostle Paul will show that, as God wished to save the Jews by giving to them prophets, and also by raising up prophets of their own in their own tongue as they were able to receive the beneficence of God, he distinguished the most excellent of the Greeks from the common herd, saying: Take also the Hellenic books, read the Sibyl, how it is shown that God is one, and how the future is indicated. And, taking Hystaspes, read and you will find much more luminously and distinctly the son of God described, and how many kings shall draw up their forces against Christ, hating him and those that bear his name, and his faithful ones, and his patience, and his advent.
Bp. Theophilus of Antioch (late 2nd c.) quotes the Sibyl, who predicted the future, as saying:
God is one,
Who rules alone, supremely great, unborn,
Almighty and invisible, himself
Alone beholding all things, but not seen
Is he himself by any mortal flesh.
Appendices
Encyclopedia Iranica says about Hystaspes:
HYSTASPES, ORACLES OF (Gk. Khrēseis Hystaspou), a collection of prophecies ascribed to Vištāspa, the patron and follower of Zarathustra, whom the Middle Iranian and part of the ancient tradition also identified with Darius’s father (J. Bidez and F. Cumont, I, p. 215, n. 3). The text of the work is not extant, except for resumés in Greek and Latin, attributable to the Oracles if they mention the name Hystaspes and contain prophetic material.
..
It is not easy to obtain a definite picture about the Hystaspes oracles from these data [preserved in Christian writers' records like Lactantius'], even if we acknowledge the fact that the work included several prophecies with different contents. What is obvious is the juxtaposition of explicitly Christian (nos. 2, 5) and non-Christian or neutral (nos. 1, 3, 4) statements. Ernst Kuhn is probably the only scholar to have given unequivocal support to a Christian origin of the oracles. ... All other investigations lead to the assumption of a Christian rearrangement of a non-Christian collection of oracles, in which the precise “heathen” proportion is problematic:
HYSTASPES, ORACLES OF – Encyclopaedia Iranica
Last edited: