The Gospel of Peter: Introduction, Critical Edition and Commentary (review)

In the winter of 1886-87, a French archaeological team working in Akhmim, Egypt, unearthed a small codex containing four ancient texts. The first of these texts, occupying nine parchment pages, was quickly identified as a fragment of the Gospel of Peter, and over the last century, scholarly explanations of the fragment's provenance, identity, and theology have proliferated. In his comprehensive commentary on the Gospel of Peter, Paul Foster offers a sober and learned treatment of a text that has tended to generate controversy and speculation.

Foster's lengthy introduction begins with an informative account of the fragment's discovery, followed by a detailed history of scholarship. Foster shows that the same basic questions have been debated by scholars ever since Swete's 1893 commentary; later in the introduction, Foster himself deals with the same questions about literary dependence, patristic references to a Petrine gospel, and the theological tendencies of the fragment. After describing the physical features of the Akhmim codex, Foster devotes thirty pages to other fragmentary texts that have been linked with the Gospel of Peter. Rehearsing his past exchanges with Dieter Lührmann on this issue, Foster cogently argues against Lührmann's proposed identification of P.Oxy. 2949 and P.Oxy. 4009 as earlier fragments of the text discovered at Akhmim. Foster's commentary treats only the text of P.Cair. 10759, the fragment preserved in the Akhmim codex.

Throughout the introduction, Foster is wary of overreaching beyond available evidence. He has no patience for scholars who, following Serapion's link between the "so-called Gospel of Peter" and the "Docetae" (quoted by Foster on pp. 105-6), attempt to find docetic elements in the Akhmim fragment. For Foster, the text cannot properly be labeled as docetic. Later on, his discussion of the date and place of composition exemplifies his hesitation to commit himself beyond the known facts, which are few. He eventually concludes that "a date some time in the second half of the second century is perhaps to be preferred" (172), and suspects that the Gospel of Peter originated in Syria. However, he immediately qualifies this conjecture as "a plausible possibility" that is "ultimately unprovable" (174). Foster's tentative guess at a Syrian origin marks the far limit of his speculation, a far cry from the hypotheses of scholars like Crossan and Mirecki, who have boldly proposed a first-century origin for the Gospel of Peter. While these speculative proposals have gained more attention in recent decades, Foster is surely right in his assertion that the "majority of critical scholarship . . . still prefers to locate the text in the second century" (170). The Gospel of Peter is an early example of popular biblical interpretation in the late second century, not a source underlying the canonical gospels.

Foster helpfully includes photographs of P.Cair. 10759 (images that are also available online). Facing pages pair the black-and-white photographs with transcriptions of the Greek text (178-95); Foster also juxtaposes transcriptions of the Greek text with facing English translation (198-205). In spite of his misgivings, he adds transcription and translation of P.Oxy. 2949 and P.Oxy. 4009.

The next three hundred pages are commentary on the text of the Gospel of Peter. Foster proceeds chapter by chapter, giving the Greek text, his English translation, detailed text-critical notes, and verse-by-verse commentary. The commentary largely addresses issues of literary dependence, examining connections between the Gospel of Peter and the canonical gospels, the Epistle of Barnabas, Justin Martyr, various apocryphal acts, and other early Christian writings. As he argues in the introduction, Foster considers the Gospel of Peter to be dependent upon the canonical gospels. He offers numerous instances of reliance upon Matthew, Mark, and Luke, but he concedes that dependence upon John "cannot be demonstrated with any degree of certainty" (145). He likewise rules out dependence upon Justin Martyr, Melito of Sardis, or known apocryphal texts.

In...