1. Introduction of the Issue
Who is Mary Schtuppsucker?!
And now, a close examination of The Gospel of Peter. First, a comparison up to 16:8:
It's clear that GPeter follows GMark reMarkably well for 16:1-8. Most of the additions in GPeter here are commentary on GMark's basic narrative.
We've seen that GPeter follows GMark remarkably well for 16:1-8. But, it's generally thought that GPeter was written after GMatthew. We've already seen that GMatthew also follows GMark remarkably well for 16:1-8 so the question is, who was GPeter following, GMark, GMatthew or both?
Let's do a comparison than of the three:
Comparison of Peter 50-57 to GMark 16:1-8/GMatthew 28:1-8
We can see than from the above that to 16:8 GPeter follows GMark better than it follows GMatthew = GMark 16:1-8 was likely the main source for GPeter 50-57.
And now a comparison of the LE with post-resurrection narrative in The Gospel of Peter (the part that is extant):
Comparison of Peter 58-60 to the LE
Also related to GPeter's acceptance of 16:8 as the ending is that since it is accepted that the women did not tell anyone, the author needs a supposed witness to tell, hence GPeter is written in the first person (Peter). GPeter accepts that Peter had totally given up on Jesus including not believing that he would be resurrected.
Another difference is that GPeter refers to the twelve disciples while the LE refers to eleven.
|Now we are getting somewhere!|
- 1) GPeter follows GMark remarkably well to 16:8.
2) The timing of the post-resurrection narrative in GPeter is completely different from the timing of the LE.
3) There are no significant parallels here between GPeter and the LE.
4) GPeter is more of a reaction to 16:8 than the LE is.
Conclusion = GPeter is evidence for 16:8 as original.