There is also Clement of Alexandria's commentary on 1 Peter:Clement of Alexandria gives priority to Mark for this triple tradition passage (Mk 10:17-31) . . .
“"Marcus, my son, saluteth you." Mark, the follower of Peter, while Peter publicly preached the Gospel at Rome before some of Caesar's equites, and adduced many testimonies to Christ, in order that thereby they might be able to commit to memory what was spoken, of what was spoken by Peter wrote entirely what is called the Gospel according to Mark. As Luke also may be recognised by the style, both to have composed the Acts of the Apostles, and to have translated Paul's Epistle to the Hebrews.”
https://www.earlychristianwritings.com/ ... ments.html
Other than another attribution of the Gospel to Mark, the note that Peter preached “before some of Caesar's equites” is interesting. This seems to accord with what is in the Acts of Peter, and has Peter preaching to the Roman nobility. Would Clement have obtained this information from the Acts of Peter, or some tradition or other source?
Also interesting is “As Luke also may be recognised by the style . . . “ I think the fragment only exists in a Latin translation, so perhaps there is some issue with translation, but is Clement indicating 1 Peter may actually have been written by Luke? (Not to mention Hebrews.)
Finally, Clement states “what is called” the Gospel of Mark. Interesting turn of phrase, perhaps indicating some sense of lack of finality during his time as to a fixed tradition of accepted Gospels?
Statistics: Posted by Mrvegas — Sun Nov 03, 2024 9:06 am