In my previous post I discussed the legendary account (the earliest we have) of the martyrdom of Paul. In it I mentioned as well the martyrdom of Peter (also legendary, though better known) (many people have heard he was crucified “upside-down”), and realized I may as well post on that as well, since I’ll certainly be getting some questions on it.
Here is what I say about it in my book Peter, Paul, and Mary Magdalene (Oxford University Press).
******************************
By the end of the first and into the second century it was widely known among Christians that

I think the world is getting more topsy turvy.
But Adam didn’t come into the world head first like a newborn; God formed him out of dirt. I’ve noticed that the two Genesis creation stories are virtually ignored in the Bible, until the late books of the NT, which use the story to justify men having authority over women. Why do you think the creation stories are so ignored in the Bible? Were they considered fables, unlike today when some people take them as fact?
I wish I knew. I guess they weren’t “authrotitative scripture” for most writers of scripture! (They may not have even been widely known!)
I always assume that the most direct evidence of Peter is martyred was not Clement but the book of John itself from the late first century documenting the prophecy that Peter was meant to die in old age as a martyr. As if trying to explain the death of the lead apostle and trying to justify it.
Not necessarily crucified or even upside down. Although it would be logical to assume he was crucified if he was regarded as seditious. I know we can’t be sure.
I’m curious is this something that you think is a rational conclusion based on the existing data? From John. Who do you believe the Gospel of John was referring to when it referred to the beloved disciple? I’m of the suspicion that it’s either John the apostle or Nathaniel whom The Gospel seems to give special status to in the first few chapters as in Israelite without guile or deception. I lean towards John because of the evidence of polycarp supposedly knowing him and the johannine letters written in Asia Minor which is a suspected place of this authorship of John along with Revelation. But I’m open to your opinion.
Where does John indicate that Peter will die as an old man?
The issue of the beloved disciple is complicated. My view, which I’ve blogged about (just look up Beloved Disciple) is that it is not an actual figure but a literary construct to show the ideal disciple.
> he was crucified, head downwards
As I understand it, in the standard upright crucifixion death comes from compression of the rib cage. How would it come in the upside down version?
I’m a little confused by the wording, “…having thus borne his witness (or ‘having been martyred’)…” Does that mean that there are different versions of the wording in different copies? Or that “borne his witness” would have been understood as “having been martyred” in the day? It’s not how I would have interpreted “having thus bourne his witness” without more of a steer.
(32) Jesus said, “A city being built on a high mountain and fortified cannot fall, nor can it be hidden.”
Jesus
City on mountain
Cannot
Can
Hidden
Hidden
Can cannot
Mountain on city
Jesus
(81) Jesus said, “Let him who has grown rich be king, and let him who possesses power renounce it.”
Jesus
Him
Grown king
Him
Power
Power him king
Grown
Him
Jesus
(30) Jesus said, “Where there are three gods, they are gods. Where there are two or one, I am with him.”
(31) Jesus said, “No prophet is accepted in his own village; no physician heals those who know him.”
Jesus!
There gods!
Gods are one with Jesus
Prophet in village
Heals who know
Know who heals village
In prophet Jesus
With one are Gods
Gods there!
Jesus!
Hello Dr.Bart Erhman
You have aaid that you think that Jesus thought that he was the messiah in a way. But if so why did he think that? I mean i dont think most of the teachers of his day did have a god complex.
Do we really think that the Romans took request from prisoners on how people wanted to be crucified?
Wasnt crucifixion a punishment for crimes against the Roman state?
Just doesnt seem historically plausible to me, and is more likely Church legend to elevate the provenance of Cephas? Using Occams Razor and all that……
No, I definitely do not think that was the Roman protocol. And Romans crucified a variety of trouble makers, from insurrectionists to slaves to … whomeer they especially wanted publicly to humiliate
My wife and I are off to Vacation in Rome next month in hopes of visiting the Necropolis among other sites. Though I am no longer a Christian, I am still curious if Peter is actually buried there among other “Popes”. I don’t know that I actually believe Peter was ever in Rome personally. Thoughts?
I certainly don’t think we have any idea where Peter was buried. And I’d say there’s not great evidence for him being in rome, though of course it’s possible. He does not appear to have been there when Paul wrote his letter to the Roman church, since he’s not in the greetings Paul sends to his aquaintances in ch. 16. (Probably Paul’s last surviving letter, from the early 60s?)
The Acts of Peter sound more like fiction posing as nonfiction. That’s an educated guess, but I could be wrong.
off the cuff remark:
Why we should NOT comment on certain things. ex Why did John the Baptist comment on other matters than his calling?
that got him killed- not prudent “Context of the Times: John lived in a tumultuous period with political oppression”
Upside-down crucifixion is not a Roman way of doing things. The apostle to the Jews was never in Rome (because there were hardly any Jews). That Babylon symbolises Rome in 1 Pet 5.13 is of course nonsense. That was the Babylon in Parthia where Shimon laboured till his death. Yes, maybe he was crucified – the Parthians crucified upside-down.