Distinctive Features of 1 Peter

     The theme of 1 Peter is hope in the midst of suffering. No less than seven different words for suffering are used in 1 Peter (H. C. Thiessen, Introduction to the NT 279). The noun pathēma (“suffering”) occurs only four times (1:11; 4:13; 5:1, 9), while the verb paskō (to “suffer”) appears twelve times (2:19, 20, 21, 23; 3:14, 17, 18; 4:1, 15, 19; 5:10).

     First Peter is the only NT epistle wherein the name “Christian” appears (4:16); elsewhere in the NT only in Acts 11:26 and 26:28. D. A. Carson and D. J. Moo observe, “apart from the thanksgiving section in 1:3-9 and the ‘stone’ passage in 2:4-10, every paragraph of 1 Peter opens with a command, with theology brought in along the way to ground the command” (An Introduction to the NT 636).

Provenance and Date

     Peter sends greetings from “she who is in Babylon, chosen together with you …” (1 Pet. 5:13).¹ While some have suggested that “she” is a reference to an actual woman, perhaps Peter’s wife, most interpreters understand this to be a metaphoric allusion to the collective members of the church (note KJV).² It is therefore only natural to interpret “Babylon” symbolically as an allusion to Rome. As for the literal Babylon in Mesopotamia,³ there is no evidence that the church was existing there in the mid-1st century AD or that Peter or Mark or Silvanus was associated with that region. Few, if any, would consider Egypt’s Babylon as a possibility either. In late Judaism “Rome began to take on the name and many of the characteristics of Babylon as a world-power hostile to God …” (BAGD 129), and the book of Revelation indicates that 1st-century Christians understood “Babylon” as a symbolic reference to Rome (cf. 14:8; 16:19; 17:5; 18:2, 10, 21). If Nero’s persecution was looming or in its early stages at the time of writing, Peter’s reluctance to expressly identify the Christian community in Rome is understandable.

     Irenaeus stated that Paul and Peter were in Rome at the same time (Adv. Haer. 3.1.1), which corresponds to Paul’s second Roman imprisonment beginning around 64. Mark had been summoned to Rome by Paul about this time (2 Tim. 4:11) and was with Peter at the time of writing (1 Pet. 5:13). Note also there is substantial evidence that Mark’s Gospel originated in Rome or was at least intended for a Roman audience (see Mark's Audience). Nero’s persecution of Christians began in conjunction with Rome’s great fire of July 64, and since Peter directs his readers to “honor the king” (2:13-17), the epistle may have been written before the height of Nero’s persecution.

     A reasonable date for the composition of 1 Peter is mid-64, although sometime slightly (but not considerably) earlier or later is possible. Since both Galatia and Cappadocia are included in the address (1:1) and the two provinces were untied by Vespasian in 72, a date before this time is assumed. Nevertheless, those who reject Petrine authorship propose a much later date, viz. 80-95 (see L. M. White, From Jesus to Christianity 274).

Audience, Destination, and Occasion

     The epistle is addressed to “chosen sojourners of [the] dispersion” in the following regions: Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia (1:1) – present day Turkey. The question is whether these are geographic territories or Roman provinces (including areas where Paul had and had not preached). Probably Roman provinces are in view, as they are listed in the clock-wise direction in which the letter would be delivered. Of the places mentioned, Paul only worked in the southern region of Galatia and in Asia (as far as we know). The statement is made in 2 Pet. 3:15 that “our beloved brother Paul … wrote to you” (cf. v. 1), which is conceivably an allusion to Galatians, Ephesians, Colossians, and perhaps also the letters to Philemon, Timothy, and the Laodiceans (cf. Col. 4:16).

     The initial readers seem to have been predominantly Gentile Christians (cf. 1:14, 18; 2:9-10; 4:3-4) who had not been personally evangelized by Peter (1:12). The occasion of the letter is suffering (1:6; 3:13-17; 4:12-19), which could have involved one of the following scenarios:

§  A general official persecution, which does not seem to fit the context of 1 Peter. The persecution of Nero (64-68) was primarily limited to Rome and did not reach these distant provinces, while the respective persecutions of Domitian (90-95) and Trajan (97-117) were too late.

§  A local official persecution, for which there is no corroborating evidence.

§  A local unofficial persecution, which seems more likely. These Christians were apparently facing hardships such as hostility, suspicion, criticism, discrimination, mocking, and false accusations from the general populace, as were their brethren throughout the Empire (cf. 5:9).

Conclusion

     First Peter is just as relevant today as when it was first written. We are reminded of (a) our living hope of an eternal inheritance in heaven (1:1-12), (b) our call to obedience and holiness (1:13–2:12), (c) our duty to submit to temporal authorities (2:13-25), (d) husband-wife relations (3:1-7), (e) social relations (3:8-12), (f) faithfulness amidst suffering (3:13–4:19), (f) the role of spiritual leaders (5:1-5), (g) reliance on God for victory over evil (5:6-11), and (h) the grace and peace in Christ Jesus (5:12-14).   

     “Be humbled, therefore, under the mighty hand of God, that he may exalt you in [due] time, having cast all your anxiety upon him because with him there is concern for you” (1 Pet. 5:6-7).

--Kevin L. Moore

Endnotes:

     ¹ Unless otherwise noted, scripture quotations are the author’s own translation.

     ² The term ekklēsia (rendered “church” in most standard English versions) is a feminine noun (cf. Eph. 5:25-27; Rom. 7:4; 2 Cor. 11:2; Rev. 19:7-9; 21:2, 9), and the above interpretation is consistent with other occurrences of the word eklektos (“chosen,” “elect”) in 1 Peter (1:1-2; 2:9).

     ³ Babylon in Mesopotamia was almost entirely uninhabited at the time of Diodorus Siculus (2,9,9) in 1 BC (cf. Josephus, Ant. 18.9.5-9).

Related Posts: Authorship of 1 Peter, Distinctive Features of 2 Peter

Image credit: https://servantsjournal.com/2014/03/03/1-peter-foreknowledge-of-god-part-i-1-peter-12a/

The Authorship of First Peter

     The NT document historically known as 1 Peter claims to be from “Peter an apostle of Jesus Christ” (1:1).¹ The author writes authoritatively (1:13-25; 2:1-2, 13, etc.), as an eyewitness of Christ’s sufferings (5:1), with parallels between 1 Peter and Peter’s speeches recorded in Acts: (a) Acts 10:34 and 1 Pet. 1:17; (b) Acts 2:32-36; 10:40, 41 and 1 Peter 1:21; (c) Acts 4:10, 11 and 1 Pet. 2:7, 8. First Peter was unanimously recognized in the early church as an authentic document from the apostle Peter.² 

     Nevertheless, a number of modern scholars reject Simon Peter as the author of this NT epistle.³ Here are the main objections:

1. The excellent quality of Greek and the use of the LXX seem at variance with the alleged authorship of a Galilean Jewish fisherman.

2. The close relationship between 1 Peter and the Pauline writings could suggest literary dependence, which is inconsistent with the apparent hostility between the two apostles (cf. Gal. 2:7-14).

3. The “fiery ordeal” (4:12) suggests a universal imperial persecution, which would not fit into the lifetime of the apostle Peter.

4. The church organization implied in 5:1-4, with an established eldership, points to a much later period in the development of the Christian movement.

5. “Babylon” (5:13) as a metaphoric allusion to Rome arose in Jewish apocalyptic works only after the fall of Jerusalem (cf. 2 Baruch 11.1; 67.7; 4 Ezra 3.1-2, 28).

6. References to the life and ministry of Jesus are almost entirely absent from 1 Peter.

Responses to these objections

1. Notwithstanding the fact that Greek was widely used in 1st-century Palestine and most of the populace was bilingual,⁴ the secretarial assistance of Silvanus (5:12) sufficiently answers the criticism regarding how the document was composed (see below).

2. Both the presumed hostility between Paul and Peter and any alleged literary dependence have been greatly exaggerated. If the apostles were proclaiming the same message, we would expect to find a number of similarities between their writings. Furthermore, Paul and Peter shared some of the same coworkers (e.g. Silvanus, Mark), whose contribution and influence are often too easily overlooked.

3. Nothing in 1 Peter necessitates a universal imperial persecution but would include any “fiery ordeal” with which the readers were faced.

4. Organized congregational leadership was in place much earlier than many critical scholars wish to concede (cf. Acts 11:30; 14:23; 15:6; Phil. 1:1). Moreover, the various gifts the readers are admonished to utilize (1 Pet. 4:10-11) imply an earlier period.

5. While it is noteworthy that Jewish apocalyptic literature equates Rome with “Babylon” following Jerusalem’s destruction, this evidence does not consider the oral sentiments prior to the written accounts and represents a Jewish perspective but not necessarily that of suffering Christians under Nero (as in 1 Peter) and Domitian (as in Revelation). 

6. The author’s purpose was not to write a Gospel narrative about the life and ministry of Jesus but a letter of encouragement to suffering Christians.

Peter’s employment of an amanuensis

     In 1 Pet. 5:12 the statement is made, “Through Silvanus the faithful brother, as I regard [him], I have written to you briefly …” The question is whether egrapsa (aorist active indicative 1st person singular of graphō) indicates that Silvanus participated in writing the document or was simply its carrier. While some consider as a legitimate use of graphō the sense of to “bear” a letter,⁵ this is neither its primary meaning nor its most common usage (cf. Rom. 16:22). The verb graphō occurs in the NT 194 times, and in every instance it is used in the sense of “writing,” unless 1 Pet. 5:12 is the only exception.⁶ In reference to the letters Dionysius had been requested to write, the term egrapsa is used (Eusebius, Eccl Hist. 4:23.12), the exact form of the word found in 1 Pet. 5:12.

Conclusion

     When a NT document makes its own claim of authorship and is supported by ample internal and external evidence, a denial of that claim would require either irrefutable evidence to the contrary or a blind, anti-conservative or anti-biblical predisposition. Suffice it to say, the former is unavailable in the case of 1 Peter.

--Kevin L. Moore

Endnotes:

     ¹ Unless noted otherwise, scripture quotations are the author’s own translation.

     ² The earliest apparent allusion to this epistle is in 2 Pet. 3:1, where the statement is made: “This now, beloved, I write a second epistle to you.” Not counting possible allusions in other writings (e.g. Clement of Rome, Epistle of Barnabas, Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs), 1 Peter is quoted by Polycarp in his letter to the Philippians (1, 2, 5), Tertullian (Scorp. 6, 12), and Clement of Alexandria (Strom. 3.11; Inst. 1.6), and is mentioned by name by Irenaeus (Adv. Haer. 4.9.2; 4.16.5; 5.7.2). Eusebius notes Papias’ use of it (Eccl. Hist. 3.39.17) and classified 1 Peter among the “undisputed” NT writings (Eccl. Hist. 3.3.1; 3.4.2).

     ³ R. E. Brown, Introduction to the NT 718-19; B. D. Ehrman, The NT: A Historical Introduction 400-401; R. E. Van Voorst, Reading the NT Today 493-94; L. M. White, From Jesus to Christianity 272-74.

     ⁴ A. T. Robertson, Grammar 26-29; cf. D. A. Caron and D. J. Moo, An Introduction to the NT 240, 624, 644-45.

     ⁵ See H. Elliott, First Peter 872-73; P. J. Achtemeier, First Peter 7-9; W. A. Grudem, The First Epistle of Peter 23-24. The following examples are submitted in BAGD (167): IRo 10:1 [Ignatius to the Romans]; IPhld 11:2 [Ignatius to the Philadelphians]; ISm 12:1 [Ignatius to the Smyrnaeans]; Pol 14 [Polycarp to the Philippians]. However, J. B. Lightfoot, A. Roberts, and J. Donaldson translate all of these instances of graphō as “write” rather than “bear” (see Early Christian Writings). 

     ⁶ Some would point to Acts 15:23 as another exception (cf. BDAG 207; ESV, NASB, NIV, N/RSV), but the context does not demand a modification of the usual sense. It is true that the letter was sent with Judas-Barsabas and Silas (vv. 22, 27, 30-32), but someone had to write the letter on behalf of the group, and the most straightforward meaning of v. 23 is that these two men served as amanuenses (N.B. multiple letters would have been needed for the plurality of Gentile congregations). Even if 1 Pet. 5:12 is interpreted as Silvanus having merely been the letter-carrier, this does not rule out the probability that Peter used an amanuensis (which was the common practice of his day) nor does it discount Silvanus as both letter-carrier and amanuensis (cf. Acts 15:22-32).

Related Posts: Authorship of 2 Peter, Distinctive Features of 1 Peter

Image credit: https://thetheology.org/forums/1-peter/

The General Epistles: An Introduction

     Since at least the 4th century, the seven NT epistles of James, Peter, John, and Jude have been collectively known as the “catholic” or “universal” or “general” epistles, mainly to distinguish them from the writings of Paul. This joint designation is intended to convey the sense of a broad, indefinite address to all Christians as opposed to a particular congregation or individual. C. R. Holladay suggests that one of the reasons these epistles were collectively so designated early on was because they were accepted and read by the church in general (A Critical Introduction to the NT 469).  

     Apparently 1 John was the first to receive the appellation that was eventually applied to all seven epistles for the sake of convenience (see Eusebius, Eccl. Hist. 2.23.25; 5.18.5; 7.25.7), although 2-3 John were not initially written for the universal church and 1 Peter has a geographically limited address (cf. also 2 Pet. 3:1). The General Epistles bear the respective names of their authors, in contrast to the Pauline letters which bear the names of the recipients. While some have included Hebrews in this list, most recognize as the “General Epistles” only James, 1 Peter, 2 Peter, 1 John, 2 John, 3 John, and Jude. The writings of James and 1 Peter are principally ethical, Jude and 2 Peter eschatological, and the Johannine epistles christological and ethical.

     B. M. Metzger observes that “our New Testament would be infinitely poorer without the variety of emphases supplied by the general letters…. As sunlight is composed of a variety of colors, so the spectrum of early Christian theology represented in the New Testament letters is remarkable for its diversity of emphases as well as for its unity in fundamentals” (The NT: Its Background, Growth, and Content 283).

  

Book	Approx. Date	Writer(s)
James	45-50	James the Lord’s brother (1:1)
1 Peter	64-65	Peter and Silvanus (1:1; 5:12)
2 Peter	64-65	Peter (1:1)
Jude	65-67	Jude the Lord’s brother (1:1)
1, 2, 3 John	90-95	John the apostle

     Five of these writings were contributed by apostles of Jesus Christ, while the other two were written by the Lord’s half-brothers. Chronologically they comprise the earliest and among the latest of the NT documents.¹

--Kevin L. Moore

Endnote:
     ¹ For more chronological details, see K. L. Moore, A Critical Introduction to the New Testament 201-21.

Related Posts: Epistle of Jacob, Epistle of Judas, Distinctive Features of 1 Peter, Distinctive Features of 2 Peter, Introducing the Johannine Epistles

Image credit: http://stpaulsucc.org/fellowship-groups/bible-studies/