Originally posted by Nemesio
Whodey will no doubt deny these claims, but you can read about this yourself in any mainstream,
non-literalist publication on Scripture, including the prefatory remarks in the Roman Catholic Bible
(that is, a tradition committed to Christ and Scripture).
So you seem to think it mainstream to dismiss any writing of the apostle Peter from the cannonized Bible? Wiki states, "The NT includes 2 letters (epistles) ascribed to Peter. Both demonstrate a high quality of cultured and urban Greek, at odds with the linguistic skill that would ordinarily be expected of an Aramaic-speaking fisherman, who would have learned Greek as a 2nd or 3rd langauge. However, the author of the first epistle explicitly claims ot be using a secretary, and this explanation would allow for discrepancies in style without entailing a different source. The textual features of these two epistles are such that a majority of scholars doubt that they were written by the same hand. This means at the most that Peter could not have authored both, or at least that he used a different secretary for each letter. Some scholars argue that theological differences imply different sources, and point to the lack of references to 2 Peter among the early church Fathers.
Of the 2 epistles, the first epislte is considered the earlier, and hence more likely to be geniune. A number of scholars have argued that the textual dicrepancies with what would be expected of the biblical Peter are due to it having been written with the help of a seretary or as an amanuensis. Indeed in the first epistle the use of a secretary is clearly described: "By Silvanus, a faithful brother unto you, as I suppose, I have written briefly, exhorting, and testifying that this is the true grace of God wherein ye stand" (1 Peter 5:15). Thus, in regards to at least the first epistle, the claims that Peter would have written Greek poorly seem irrelevant. The references to persecution of Christians, which only began under Nero, cause most scholars to date the text to at least 80 AD, which would require Peter to have survived to an age that was, at that time, extremely old, and almost never reached, particularly a common fisherman. However, the Roman historian Tacitus and the biographer Suetonius both record that Nero's persecution of Christians began immediatly after the fire that burned Rome in 64 AD. Such a date, which is in accord with Christian tradition, especially Eusebius, would not have Peter at an improbable age upon his death. On the other hand, many scholars consider this in reference to the persecution of Christians in Asia Minor during the reign of the emperor Domitian."
Also of interest is the gospel of Mark. Wiki says, "Traditionally, the Gospel of Mark was said to have been written by a person named John Mark, and that this person was an assistant to Peter, hence its content was traditionally seen as the closest to Peter's viewpoint. According to Eusebius's "Ecclesiastical History, Papias recorded this belief from John the Presbyter:
"Mark having become the interpretor of Peter, wrote down accurately whatsoever he remembered. It was not, however, in exact order that he related the sayings or deeds of Christ. For he neither heard of the Lord nor accompanied him. But afterwards, as I said, he accompanied Peter, who accommodated his instructions to the necessities (of his hearers), but with no intention of giving a normal or chronological narrative of the Lord's sayings. Wherefore Mark made no mistakes in thus writing some things as he remembered them. For of one thing he took especial care, not to omit anything he had heard, and not to put anything fictional into the statements--Eusebius."
Also Irenaius wrote about this tradition:
"After their (Peter and Paul's) passing, Mark also, the disciple and interpreter of Peter, transmitted to us in writing the things preached by Peter."
So here we have two works which are the first epistle of Peter and the gospel of Mark that are more than likely heavily influenced by Peter himself. That is, according to Wiki. What say you?