The Relationship of the Gospel of Peter to the Canonical Gospels A Composition Critical Argument

A close look at the debate concerning the relationship between the canonical gospels and the Gospel of Peter suggests that the argument for the primitivity of Peter has gained the advantage. However, an examination of the development of compositional practices in the gospel tradition shows that the use of exegetical composition cannot be seen as evidence for Peter's primitivity. This deprives those arguing for a primitive Peter of one of their major arguments. Further, an examination of the relationship between Peter and the canonical gospels shows that this relationship is consistent with the normal pattern of source usage in antiquity. However, Matthew and Luke compose their gospels according a pattern of source usage quite distinct from the normal pattern. It is much more likely that rather than Matthew and Luke both abandoning their already established method of composition in treating Peter, Peter employed the normal method of composition in treating Matthew and Luke.