Why did Peter vanish?

[Rachel Rachel]

I've been wondering why Peter all but vanished from scripture after the Resurrection. He was told many times by Yeshua to feed his sheep. But he went to Rome and sent out only one letter that we're sure was from him.
Did he feed Yeshua's sheep?
Why did Paul take over that role?

 

[Winken]

Research Peter's upside-down crucifixion, and ask why they did that to him. Who were they?

 

[Tree of Life]

I've been wondering why Peter all but vanished from scripture after the Resurrection. He was told many times by Yeshua to feed his sheep. But he went to Rome and sent out only one letter that we're sure was from him.
Did he feed Yeshua's sheep?
Why did Paul take over that role?

Have you read Acts 1-15?

 

[EastCoastRemnant]

Have you read Acts 1-15?

He was mentioned in Acts but not to the extent that other disciples were. I think this lack of prominence or noteworthy activity testifies against the notion that Peter was conferred the head of the church title as some would suppose.

 

[Presbyterian Continuist]

Luke's account of the formation and development of the Early Church is the only one that has survived and the only one accepted as part of the canon of NT Scripture. Nevertheless, there are probably traditional accounts of Peter's activities in the Vatican archives. There should be, if the RCC venerate Peter as their first Pope. It may be worth doing some research in that direction.

 

[Hank77]

Paul was an educated Pharisee so I think we could expect that he would be more prone to writing letters and documenting than Peter who was a fisherman. So it makes sense to me that God would use Paul more often in this regard rather than Peter.

 

[Greg Merrill]

God may have wanted to concentrate on having Paul write to the Gentiles of the world, rather than on Peter's
ministry to the far smaller population of the Jews.

 

[Winken]

Peter's ministry did, indeed, look to Jewish law and traditions. His transition from that to simple Faith in Jesus as Savior and Lord was obvious in those early verses in the Book of Acts. He transitioned from "things hard to understand" to utter belief.

 

[A_Thinker]

I've been wondering why Peter all but vanished from scripture after the Resurrection. He was told many times by Yeshua to feed his sheep. But he went to Rome and sent out only one letter that we're sure was from him.

Did he feed Yeshua's sheep?

Why did Paul take over that role?

The first half of the book of the Acts of the Apostles pretty much focuses on Peter and crew.

In the telling, Peter and John heal a lame man, and Peter preaches an early message of the gospel to a gathering of Jews in Jerusalem, converting 3,000 in a day. Later, Peter is freed from prison bonds by an angel, and he is led to travel and preach the gospel message to the Gentile Cornelius and his family, and sees the confirmation of the Holy Spirit upon his work.

Peter is also the christian leader who called out the duplicity of Ananais and Sapphira, ... and later raised the good christian woman Tabitha (Dorcas) back to life.

He continued to be highly involved with the church at Jerusalem, along with James and John.

The latter half of the book of Acts features Paul.

Peter and Paul are, typically, seen as the dynamic duo of the gospel (though that is a bit simplistic), ... with Peter mainly ministering to the Jews ... and Paul mainly ministering to the Gentiles.

 

[visionary]

Yep, I can understand why you would expect more out of Peter. I have often wondered why the role was not greater in documented activities.

 

[Rachel Rachel]

God may have wanted to concentrate on having Paul write to the Gentiles of the world, rather than on Peter's
ministry to the far smaller population of the Jews.

But Yeshua gave Peter the task of feeding his sheep. Not just those of that day but all his flock for all time to come. It seems we'd have more written instruction from him.
And why would the "far smaller population of Jews" be less important?

 

[Dave-W]

Peter's ministry did, indeed, look to Jewish law and traditions.

Hence the difference between Peter's "gospel to the circumcised" and Paul's "gospel to the uncircumcised."

 

[Rachel Rachel]

Luke's account of the formation and development of the Early Church is the only one that has survived and the only one accepted as part of the canon of NT Scripture. Nevertheless, there are probably traditional accounts of Peter's activities in the Vatican archives. There should be, if the RCC venerate Peter as their first Pope. It may be worth doing some research in that direction.

My thoughts exactly.

 

[Rachel Rachel]

Research Peter's upside-down crucifixion, and ask why they did that to him. Who were they?

Would you expand on your reply? I'm curious to know who you believe "they" were.

 

[Tree of Life]

He was mentioned in Acts but not to the extent that other disciples were. I think this lack of prominence or noteworthy activity testifies against the notion that Peter was conferred the head of the church title as some would suppose.

Acts 1-10 is all about Peter.

 

[Greg Merrill]

But Yeshua gave Peter the task of feeding his sheep. Not just those of that day but all his flock for all time to come. It seems we'd have more written instruction from him.
And why would the "far smaller population of Jews" be less important?

I didn't say they were less important, for they are not!! What it "seems" ... obviously is not the case, for we have far more written by Luke, even than Paul, let alone Peter. Isaiah 55:8-9. It is what it is. Glory to God, and blessings to you.

 

[tampasteve]

If we take the stance of Messianic Judaism, as most of us in this sub-forum do, then there is not a ton of extra instructions that are needed from Peter as we can look to the Hebrew scriptures for how the faith is supposed to be practiced by Jewish and non-Jewish believers. The Hebrew Scriptures taken together with the teachings of Yeshua and the writings of Paul and Acts, and especially the Didache, we can have a pretty fully picture of how our faith should be practiced. Remember, Yeshua did not come to create a new religion, but rather to be the Messiach of Judaism. Inherently our faith should be more Jewish than otherwise....but that is not really the view of many mainstream Christians.

 

[EastCoastRemnant]

Acts 1-10 is all about Peter.

I apologize for making the erroneous statement that Peter was little mentioned in Acts and I will agree that the first few chapters had Peter being quoted but John, Barnabas, Stephen, Phillip and Saul/Paul are also mentioned in those first 10 chapters.

 

[visionary]

I guess the author of Acts was not interested in making the story about Peter.

 

[Open Heart]

I'm not sure why you think Peter vanished. He plays a role in the Acts of the Apostles. He is known from other Christian writings to have been a bishop of both Antioch and Rome. He wrote his epistles from Rome (Babylon is a Christian euphemism for Rome).