ChristiaNet MallWorld's Largest Christian MallChristian BlogsFree Bible QuizzesFree Ecards and Free Greeting CardsLoans, Debt, Business and Insurance Articles

Apocalypse Of Peter

What is the Apocalypse of Peter? Why is it not in the Bible?

Join Our Christian Singles and Take The False Gospels Bible Quiz
 ---quincy598 on 9/16/09
     Helpful Blog Vote (2)

Reply to this BlogPost a New Blog



There is a lot of pseudographia in old testament times as well in new testament times and after. Some thing were never included in the cannon because they were just obviously bad such as the infancy gospels about Christ. Others for doctrinal issues differing from the current church leadership at the time. But it is nice to know all of it because a lot can be learned about the history and the culture at that time. Some of the same questions and disputes going on then are going on now.
---The_Friendly_Blogger on 9/19/09


There are some works of pious fiction that did make it into the Old Testament.
---mugwump on 9/18/09


\\King James was in England during printing press and demanded anything during his reign be marked with his name. No humility. Bible was accurate long before him.\\

As a matter of fact, Donald, you are wrong.

In Great Britain, this is called the AUTHORIZED version, not King James version.

And the translation he sponsored was NOT the first English version.

Do you know anything else published during his reign, such as the Book of Common Prayer, that was marked with his name?
---Cluny on 9/18/09


Cluny ... Congratulations on waking up!

You now say "Your answer ignores my question of WHY they were put in the Bible" But NOW is the first time you have asked this question!

And why are you pressing me for an answer to that? I did say "Others will do that better than me" & that was because yuo had already done so in your excellent post of 9/16
---alan8566_of_uk on 9/18/09


Neithe is H2O and believe me God knows chemical compisition of water. King James was in England during printing press and demanded anything during his reign be marked with his name. No humility. Bible was accurate long before him. Give credit to Holy Spirit for protecting writings and handing them down for all generations. Don't credit man or King James.
---donald on 9/18/09




As in everything in the world, God has complete control of His Word. He moved men to put together what was necessary for mankind's salvation. You don't think that the KJV of the bible is the best selling book of all time because people buy it, do you?

But as the end comes nearer, the popularity of the bible shall wane and replaced by other spiritual books not of God.
---Steveng on 9/17/09


||The writings in the Bible are there because they are there.

Those that are not there are not there because they are not there. They are not there because they were not included by those who who put it together.||

Your answer ignores my question of WHY they were put in the Bible (or not, as the case may be).

And it begs another question: WHO is this "those put [the Bible] together" to start with?

Saying "They are in the Bible because they are in the Bible" (or not) is nothing more than circular reasoning.
---Cluny on 9/17/09


Cluny ... seems simple enough to me ...

The writings in the Bible are there because they are there.

Those that are not there are not there because they are not there. They are not there because they were not included by those who who put it together.

The Apocalypse of Peter was not included in the Bible by them. They also omitted Homer and Tacitus, and Julius Caesar, who wrote a lot around that time.
---alan8566_of_uk on 9/17/09


A nonInspired writing. It is not in the Holy Bible for the same reason that all other nonholy books are not included in the Bible.
---Eloy on 9/17/09


Cluny ... I feel it would be quite obvious ... if it is in the Bible, it is in the Bible.

But I can find no mention of the Apocalypse of Peter in the Bible, so I have to assume that it is not in the Bible.

It is not for me to say WHY it is not in the Bible. Others will do that better than me.
---alan8566_of_uk on 9/17/09




\\You'll find that the reason it is not in the Bible is that it is not in the Bible.
---alan8566_of_uk on 9/16/09\\

And what is the reason for a given writing being IN the Bible, alan8566_of_uk?
---Cluny on 9/17/09


What Cluny said is correct. It was considered by many Early Christians as Scripture, but the Church officially declared it uninspired later on.

Read it if you wish.

In IC.XC,
---Ignatius on 9/16/09


The Apocalypse of Peter was a Gnostic writing which the by the end of the fourth century the bishops meeting in council decided not to canonize as part of scripture.
---mugwump on 9/16/09


This apocryphal (or pseudopigraphal) writing was obviously not considered inspired enough to be read at worship--which is originally what the Bible was--but enough people thought it had enough value to be preserved.

Consider it a piece of pious fiction, akin to the Screwtape Letters or Two from Galilee.

If you want to find it and read it, be my guest.
---Cluny on 9/16/09


You can Google this easily enough.

You'll find that the reason it is not in the Bible is that it is not in the Bible.
---alan8566_of_uk on 9/16/09


Copyright© 1996-2015 ChristiaNet®. All Rights Reserved.