The 'Gospel of Peter' is pseudepigraphical. No serious scholar accepts
Peter as the author. It is dated to the second half of the second century!!!
Even if it did contain a limited merit - it could not pass scrutiny from
the apostolic fathers as being reliable. Consequently - it had to be
rejected. Why is their judgement challenged all these years later with less knowledge than they had at their fingertips?
Possibly the main reason for their decision is that so much of the content is wild,
extravagant and simply beyond all belief.See some of this rubbish and you begin to see what a good job was done in producing the New Testament canon.
The 'axe to grind brigade' are at work again!
