Originally posted by vivifyMost Christians that I know of have heard the story.
The Bible doesn't mention Peter being killed, but some Christian traditions hold that he was.
Is this belief considered to be true by most Christians? If so, what basis is there for this to be accepted as true? If not, why do you oppose this view?
Thanks in advance for any insights.
It was in fact described in the Acts of Peter which was deemed apocryphal by the early church. Most of the text concerns a "miracle battle" between Peter and Simon Magus, but the last few chapters do describe the crucifixion of Peter in Rome, under Nero.
According to Wikipedia:
"These concluding chapters describing Peter's crucifixion are preserved separately as the "Martyrdom of Peter" in three Greek manuscripts and in Coptic (fragmentary), Syriac, Ethiopic, Arabic, Armenian, and Slavonic versions. Because of this, it is sometimes proposed that the martyrdom account was the original text to which the preceding chapters were affixed."
This is all I know about it.
-Removed-Some Christians believe that Peter's death adds to their faith because only a madman would subject himself to a death for something he did not firmly believe in, especially within 30 years of Jesus' time on earth.
He was crucified upside down because he felt he wasn't worthy enough to be crucified in the same way as Jesus.
People care.
Note: I am still working on my theism and Christianity.
Originally posted by chaney3Actually, Peter was leaving Rome, getting 'outta Dodge', as it were, because Nero was starting to crack down on the Christians. Jesus appeared to him and asked him if Peter was denying him again. Already feeling guilty of denying Jesus the last time, Peter couldn't take it any more and turned around to go back to Rome, to 'face the music'.
Some Christians believe that Peter's death adds to their faith because only a madman would subject himself to a death for something he did not firmly believe in, especially within 30 years of Jesus' time on earth.
He was crucified upside down because he felt he wasn't worthy enough to be crucified in the same way as Jesus.
People care.
Note: I am still working on my theism and Christianity.
Originally posted by SuzianneOkay, even better.
Actually, Peter was leaving Rome, getting 'outta Dodge', as it were, because Nero was starting to crack down on the Christians. Jesus appeared to him and asked him if Peter was denying him again. Already feeling guilty of denying Jesus the last time, Peter couldn't take it any more and turned around to go back to Rome, to 'face the music'.
This account helps someone stubborn, like myself, to realize that facing death is a better option than denying Jesus.
It helps faith, when help may be needed.
Originally posted by chaney3The same could be said of suicide bombers who sacrifice themselves for political reasons while 'fortified' by their religious convictions or perhaps they sacrifice themselves for religious religions because of their political circumstances. 'How firmly people believed something' is evidence of nothing much aside from the state of mind of the people dying and the notions and beliefs that they internalized during their lifetimes.
Some Christians believe that Peter's death adds to their faith because only a madman would subject himself to a death for something he did not firmly believe in...
1 edit
Originally posted by FMFI cannot dispute your bringing up suicide bombers. To me, they are "madmen".
The same could be said of suicide bombers who sacrifice themselves for political reasons while 'fortified' by their religious convictions or perhaps they sacrifice themselves for religious religions because of their political circumstances. 'How firmly people believed something' is evidence of nothing much aside from the state of mind of the people dying and the notions and beliefs that they internalized during their lifetimes.
Edit: although I don't view the death of Peter as anything close to the same thing.