Kirsopp Lake

“ There is one incident which must in any case be accepted as it is found in both narratives. This is the denial of Peter. It appears that Peter did not stay with the disciples and neither returned home immediately to Galilee (according to the Galilean tradition) nor sought hiding in Jerusalem (according to the Jerusalem tradition) , but followed the Lord at a distance and was a witness of at least part of the trial before the Sanhedrim. He was detected and accused of being a disciple, which he denied, and so fulfilled the prophecy of Jesus that he would deny Him before the cock crowed. ”

“ PETER, ST, the chief of the Twelve Apostles. He is known also by other names (a) “Simon” (Σίμων) in Mark four times and Luke seven times. This use is only found in narrative before the story of the mission of the apostles it is also found in speeches; Matthew once, Mark once and Luke twice (b) “Simon who is called Peter” is found in Matthew twice and Acts four times. ”

“ There is, of course, nothing improbable in this, and even if 1 Peter be not authentic, it is early evidence for such a tradition, but it is also possible that Peter wrote to converts whom he had not personally made. This tradition is found in Origen (Eus. H.E. iii. 1) , Epiphanius (Haer. xxvii., vi.) , Jerome (De Vir. ill. 1) and other later writers; but it is possible that it is merely an inference from the epistle. Early tradition connects Peter with Antioch, of which he is said to have been the first bishop. ”

“ Gal. ii. 11 and 1 Cor. ix. 5 show that Acts minimizes rather than exaggerates this activity, the Antiochian tradition probably represents a period of missionary activity with a centre at Antioch; similarly the tradition of work in Asia is possibly correct as almost certainly is that of the visit to Rome. But we have absolutely no evidence justifying a chronological arrangement of these periods. Even the silence of Paul in the epistles of the captivity proves nothing except that Peter was not then present, the same is true of 2 Tim. even if its authenticity be undoubted. ”

“ According to him the visit to Capernaum and the healing of the wife's mother preceded the call of Peter, and this was associated with a tradition of a miraculous draught of fishes. The advantage of the Lucan reconstruction, so far as the first part is concerned, is that it supplies a reason for Peter's ready obedience, which is somewhat difficult to understand if he had never seen Jesus before. But it seems probable that this is the motive which led to the redactorial change in Luke, and that the Marcan account, which is traditionally connected with Peter, ought to be followed. ”

“ The Gospel narratives are unanimous in describing Peter as one of the first disciples of Christ, and from the time of his call he seems to have been present at most of the chief incidents in the narrative.History in the Gospels up to the Resurrection He formed together with the sons of Zebedee to some extent an inner circle within the Twelve, and this favoured group is specially mentioned as present on three occasions—the raising of the daughter of Jairus (Mark v. 22-43; Matt. ix. 18-36; Luke viii. 41-56) , the transfiguration (Mark ix. 2 sqq; Matt. xv1i. 1 sqq.; Luke ix. 28 sqq.) ”

“ He thinks there is an allusion to a room in the Temple where the great key was kept; this room was called Kephas, because the key was placed in a recess closed by a stone. There is also a valuable article by W. Kohler in the Archiv ur Religionswiss. treating the question of the keys from the point of view of comparative religion. ”