First, let’s look at the Protestant Got Questions site, to review what it is:
Question: “What is the Apocalypse of Peter?”
They say this is why it is left out:
The Apocalypse of Peter was not accepted by early Christians into the collection of scriptures that became the Bible. There were some early Christian writers who considered it inspired, but the general consensus left it out of the final canon of Scripture. Not only do both versions of the text include imagery clearly drawn from Greek mythology, but the Apocalypse of Peter also diverges from well-established Biblical principles. For these reasons, the Apocalypse of Peter was not included in the list of books of the Bible.
Next, lets visit a Bible forum at Why did the Apocalypse of Peter not make it into the canon? , and survey a couple plausible answers:
The Muratorian Fragment shows that people always had doubts, and it eventually became clear that it was written well after Peter had died.
Eusebius, in his 4th-century History of the Church, writes “The so-called Acts of Peter, however, and the Gospel which bears his name, and the Preaching and the Apocalypse, as they are called, we know have not been universally accepted, because no ecclesiastical writer, ancient or modern, has made use of testimonies drawn from them.”
It’s depiction of Hell has far more to do with Hellenistic notions of Hades than Hell as described by Jesus. For example, nowhere in Scripture is it suggested that the damned shall be tortured by demons. This is a purely Greek notion. Nobody has power over anyone in hell. The demons will suffer there just as much as the human damned… Peter himself in Scripture says that they are chained. So the depiction of humans being tortured by demons, since it contradicts Scripture, is obviously uninspired. It also contradicts the Bible when it suggests universal salvation. Yet we are told in Revelation “he who is filthy, let him be filthy still”, and in the OT we’re told, “where the tree falls, there let it lie.” Scripture assures us that our acts in this life have eternal consequences in the next. This book suggests the opposite… again, uninspired.
These are examples of the heavy influence of Greek mystery cults, most notably the Sybilline prophecies, plus which, it contains references to literature written after Peter was martyred.
Finally, let’s look at the best answer at Yahoo’s Is the Apocalypse of Peter book a false doctrine?
Best Answer: Yes, there are things in the Apocalypse of Peter which contradict Biblical doctrine. The link posted by another answerer above has some pretty good info. The REASONS it was not included in the Bible are that the book does not meet the definition of canon.
The Bible is a compilation of books considered by scholars to be Canon.
Canonicity is determined by God. A book is not inspired because men made it canonical; it is canonical because God inspired it. It is not the antiquity, authenticity or even religious value that makes a book canonical or authoritative. On the contrary, a book is valuable because it is canonical and not canonical because it is or was considered valuable. Inspiration determines canonization, and confusion at this point not only dulls the edge of authority but it mistakes the effect (a canonical book) with the cause (inspiration of God). Canonicity is DETERMINED or established authoritatively by God; it is merely DISCOVERED by man.
HOW did man discover or become aware of what God had done? How did the church fathers know when they had come upon a canonical book? There were 5 basic principles that were used in order to DISCOVER the books which God had DETERMINED to be canonical. It is instructive to look at these principles individually in their actual historical operation.
IS IT AUTHORITATIVE? This is perhaps the first and most important question that was asked by the fathers. Does this or that book speak with authority? Can it be said of this book as it was of Jesus, “And they were astonished at his teaching, for the taught them as one that had authority” (Mark 1:22)? Does this book come with a divine “Thus saith the Lord”? Does it have a self-vindicating authority that commands attention as it communicates?
IS IT PROPHETIC? The next question to be asked was: Was this book written by a man of God? It seemed reasonable that THE WORD OF GOD INSPIRED BY THE SPIRIT OF GOD FOR THE PEOPLE OF GOD would not be given through anyone other than a MAN OF GOD (II Peter 1:20; Hebrews 1:1). Thus, a book was judged as to whether or not it was genuinely written by the stated author who was a spokesman in the mainstream of redemptive revelation, either a prophet (whether in the Old or New Testament times) or an apostle.
IS IT AUTHENTIC? This question of the Fathers asked, “Does the book tell the TRUTH about God, man, etc., as it is already known by previous revelation?” And is it a record of facts as they actually occurred? Obviously, a book cannot contradict known truth and still be truly God’s.
IS IT DYNAMIC? Another question was asked by the fathers, although sometimes only implicitly: Does the book come with the POWER of God? They believed the Word of God was “living and active” (Hebrews 4:12), and consequently ought to have a transforming force for edification (II Timothy 3:16) and evangelization (I Peter 1:23). If the obeyed message of a book did not affect its stated goal, if it did not have the power to change a life, then God was apparently not behind its message. A MESSAGE of God would certainly be backed by the MIGHT of God.
WAS IT RECEIVED? The capstone of the questions was: Has this book been ACCEPTED generally by the PEOPLE of God? Compared to modern standards, transportation was slow and communication was poor during the first centuries of the Christian era. Thus, the full canonical lists were not universally agreed upon in any official way for a few centuries. This meant that when final decision was made and, in many cases even long before that, the collection and listing of books was being done by people to whom the book was not originally directed. So they necessarily had to depend upon testimony, circulation, and usage, and the above mentioned four principles in order to make a final decision about the acceptance of the given books.
Source(s):
