The First Epistle of Peter

 

 

Rex Banks

 

 

 

Lesson 24

 

Authorship

 

 

Internal Evidence

 

(1)          The writer of First Peter introduces himself as “Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ” (1 Pet 1:1).  He claims to have been a “witness of the sufferings of Christ” (5:1) in contrast to his readers who had not seen Christ (1:8).

 

(2)          Significantly, “First Peter in thought and language stands in close relation with the apostle’s discourses as recorded in Acts.  By comparing 1 Pet 1:17 with Acts 10:34; 1:21 with 2:32-36 and 10:40, 41; 2:7, 8 with 4:10, 11; 2:17 with 10:28 and 3:18 with 3:14 one will perceive how close the parallel between the two is” (International Standard Bible Encyclopaedia).  Examples include the following:

 

·        1 Pet 2:4 and Acts 4:11 - Jesus is the rejected stone.

 

·        1 Pet 1:17 and Acts 10:34 - God judges without respect of persons.

 

·        1 Pet 1:20 and Acts 2:23 - Jesus was “foreknown.”

 

·        1 Pet 2:24 and Acts 10:3, 9 - The cross is (lit) “the wood.”

 

Many other similarities are apparent.

 

“In verses 3, 21, as also in 1 Peter 3:21, St. Peter dwells on the resurrection of Christ as he had done in his speeches (Acts 2:32-36; 3:15; 4:10)…  The words, “whereunto also they were appointed,” of 1 Peter 2:8 remind us somewhat, of Acts 1:16.  The precept, “Honor all men,” of 1 Peter 2:17, finds a parallel in Acts 10:28.  The somewhat uncommon word used in 1 Peter 2:18 occurs also in St. Peter’s speech (Acts 2:40)...  In 1 Peter 5:1 he describes himself as a witness of the life and death of Christ, as he had done in Acts 3:15 and 10:41” (B. C. Caffin Pulpit Commentary).

 

(3)          The writer makes allusions to his experiences with the Lord during His earthly ministry.  “For example, he refers to 2:20-25 which contains references to buffeting (see Mark 14:65), following Jesus (Mark 8:34), following his footsteps (Mark 10:32), and Jesus being the Shepherd (Mark 14:27) and bearing sins (see reference to redemption in 1:18; Mark 10:45).  There are many such resemblances” (Carson et al).  The indelible influence of the Lord upon Peter is evident throughout this epistle.

 

 

External Evidence

 

(1)          Unger’s Bible Dictionary has:

 

“The early church presented almost unanimous agreement on the Petrine authorship.  No other book has stronger attestation of authenticity than 1 Peter.  2 Peter 3:1 is the earliest acknowledgment of the first epistle.  The book seems to be alluded to in the epistle of Barnabas and in Clement’s epistle to the Corinthians.  Polycarp quotes it in his epistle to the Philippians.  Ireneaus is the first to quote it by name.”

 

(2)          Some caution that “Similarities in expression (found in 1 Clement, Ignatius, Barnabas, Didache, Hermas and 2 Clement) which have been adduced are not so striking as to prove familiarity; they can easily be accounted for as derived from common Christian teaching”  (W. C. van Unnik Interpreters Bible Dictionary). However:

 

·        Many are convinced that some of the many similarities of language with 1 Clement strongly suggest that Clement of Rome was familiar with 1 Peter when he wrote to the Corinthians in about 96 AD. 

 

·        In his letter to the Philippians, Polycarp (69-155 AD) has numerous undoubted references to 1 Peter.  For example:  “Wherefore gird up your loins and serve God in fear and truth, forsaking the vain and empty talking and the error of the many, for that ye have believed on Him that raised our Lord Jesus Christ from the dead and gave unto him glory and a throne on His right hand” (Polycarp 2.1; 1 Pet 1:13, 21).

 

·        According to Eusebius, Papias “an ancient man who was a hearer of John and a companion of Polycarp” made use of testimonies from the first Epistle of John and from that of Peter likewise” (Church history 3.39.1, 15).

 

·        Ireneaus is the first person to quote 1 Peter by name and he does so more than once.  For example, in his Against Heresies (ca 180 AD) he says:  “And this it is which has been said also by Peter:  ‘Whom having not seen, ye love; in whom now also, not seeing, ye believe; and believing, ye shall rejoice with joy unspeakable’” (5.7.2 ).

 

Summing up, “one is allowed to say that ca. A.D. 125, 1 Peter was well known by leading churchmen in Asia Minor” (Unnik).  In the words of Eusebius, “One epistle of Peter, that called the first, is acknowledged as genuine.  And this the ancient elders used freely in their own writings as an undisputed work” (3.3.1).  External evidence for the authenticity of the epistle is very strong.  Its absence from the Muratorian canon is probably due to the fragmentary condition of this document.

 

 

 

 

Objections

 

Only in the modern era and with the rise of the so called Tubingen school has the traditional view on authorship been challenged.  Among the various objections to Petrine authorship are the following:

 

·      “First there is the quality of the Greek, some of the finest Greek in the whole NT.  Peter surely spoke Greek, but could these beautiful periodic sentences have been written by a Galilean fisherman?  Would such person, assuming he was literate, have learned to read and write Greek?  Is there any reason to believe that Peter studied Greek over the years, ending up with a finer style than Paul’s?”  (Peter H Davies, New International Commentary).

 

In this context, it is also pointed out that the author uses the Septuagint rather than translating the Hebrew.

 

In our discussion of James we stated that “Galilee was studded with Greek towns, and it was certainly in the power of any Galilean to gain a knowledge of Greek” (Mayor).  Some like Edwin A. Blum have quite correctly pointed out that “it is impossible to know to what extent Peter’s home was bilingual.  It is also very difficult to determine how much fluency in Greek a man like Peter could have achieved.  Since use of Greek was widespread in the Middle East, one who was addressing Gentile converts would naturally use the Sept” (Expositors Bible Commentary).  Moreover, there appears to be evidence of a Semitic influence in 1 Peter:

 

“In 1 Peter this abundance of diverse tradition has been skilfully integrated in a composition consistent in style and coherent in theme.  The letter was written in a polished Greek revealing numerous traces of literary refinement.  The near-classical employment of the article and exact use of tenses is coupled with a more Semitic appreciation of rhythm and parallelism (2:14, 22-23; 3:18; 4:6, 11; 5:2-3)” (Anchor Bible Dictionary).

 

However, the real challenge to Petrine authorship becomes evident when the language and style of 1 Peter and 2 Peter are compared.  The problem is that the polished Greek of 1 Peter is very different from the language and style of 2 Peter.  Allegedly the language and style of 2 Peter is noticeably inferior to that of 1 Peter, making it quite improbable that both were written by the same individual.

 

In this context there has also been a great deal of discussion about 5:12 where Peter says that he had written to the brethren “through Silvanus” (dia Silouanou).  This may suggest that Silvanus (or Silas) was the bearer of the epistle (compare Acts 15:23) but it may also suggest that he played a part in the composition of the letter.  Eusebius records that in his letter to the Romans, Dionysius refers to Clement’s letter to the Corinthians and says:

 

“To-day we have passed the Lord’s holy day, in which we have read your epistle.  From it, whenever we read it, we shall always be able to draw advice, as also from the former epistle, which was written to us through Clement (dia Klêmentos)” (Church History 4.23.11).

 

Here the words “through Clement” suggest that Clement’s role was to write on behalf of one church to another and thus the words “through Silvanus” may well mean that Silvanus (who was likely the prophet of Acts 15:32 and companion of Paul) played an active part in the composition of 1 Peter.  This may well explain some elements of style and language in 1 Peter.  Peter assures the recipients that he regards Silvanus as a “faithful brother.”  Paul’s confidence in this man is evident from the fact that he joined his name with his own in several of his epistles (1 Thess 1:1; 2 Thess 1:1) and he is described as one of the “leading men among the brethren (Acts 15:22)  

 

·        “Second there is the use of Paulisms” (Davies).  “(Some) modern thinkers, taking as a thesis that the Gospel as set forth by the Apostle of the Circumcision differed widely from the doctrines of St. Paul, have proceeded to make an eclectic Christian literature, out of which the First Epistle of St. Peter has been rejected.  Its language is too much in harmony with accepted writings of St. Paul.  It can only have been compiled by some later hand to promote the opinion that there was no discord between the teachings of the first Christian preachers” (J. R. Lumley, The Expositors Bible).

 

In response, it needs to be pointed out that it is a mistake to draw a sharp contrast between Peter and Paul (as the Tubingen school did).  What’s more, “similar parallels (between Peter and Paul) could be drawn to other literature...(and) each of these categories of parallels is that of a traditional literary form, which one would expect to be widely transmitted in the church:  useful OT texts, ethical categories, vice lists, and so on.  And even then most of these traditional pieces are applied differently in 1 Peter than in Paul” (Davies).

 

Others have suggested that Peter writes shortly after Paul’s death to reassure those who were converts of Paul.  Accordingly Peter echoes the very language of Paul, thus confirming his oneness with the great apostle to the Gentiles.    

 

·        Allegedly, references to persecution (1:6; 3:13-17; 4:12-19; 5:9) indicate that this letter must have been written during the persecutions of Domitian (90-100 AD) or Trajan (111 AD), which occurred long after the traditional date for Peter’s death.  According to this argument, this letter was written at a time of empire wide persecution, whereas the Neronian persecution which Peter experienced was restricted to Rome.

 

In fact, nothing in the letter requires us to understand that an empire wide persecution of Christians was taking place, or that the difficulties experienced by Peter’s audience were caused by the civil authorities.  On the one hand there are no references to courts, judges or confiscation of property while on the other hand the civil authorities are viewed in a positive light (2:13-14, 17).

 

“An attempt to link 1 Peter and the Christian suffering it describes to a general persecution of Christianity initiated by Rome (Beare 1970: 28-38; Windisch-Preisker Katholischen Briefe HNT, 76-77) has justifiably been rejected by the majority of scholars…  Nor is a state persecution envisioned where respect for the emperor and civil law is enjoined (2:13-17) and a positive outcome of good behaviour is anticipated (2:11-12; 3:13-17).  The nature of the hostility encountered-verbal abuse and reproach (2:12, 3:16, 4:14), curiosity concerning Christian hope (3:15), anger at the severance of former social ties (4:4) - likewise makes the theory of a state-sponsored persecution both improbable and unnecessary.  Details of the situation point rather to social polarization and conflict which was local, disorganized and unofficial in character” (Anchor Bible Dictionary).

 

·        Since Peter fled when Jesus was arrested (Matt 26:56; Mk 14:50), some argue that he would not have claimed to be a witness of Christ’s sufferings as the author of 1 Peter does (5:1).  Of course this objection completely ignores the fact that Peter was present at Gethsemane and did witness some events at a distance (Lk 22:54 ff; Jn 18:10 ff).   

 

Other quibbles have been raised (eg since Peter was an apostle he could not have been an elder - 5:1) but none hold water and there are no grounds for denying that the apostle Peter wrote this first letter which bears his name.

 

 

Peter the Apostle

 

 

The Scriptural Record

 

(1)          Peter was the son of Jonah/John (Matt 16:17; Jn 21:15, 17) and the brother of Andrew.  Along with James and John, sons of Zebedee, he was involved in the business of fishing in the Sea of Galilee.  He appears to have spent much of his time in Bethsaida (Jn 1:44) and later Capernaum, where he seems to have shared a dwelling with this mother-in-law (Matt 8:14-15).  First a disciple of John the Baptist, he was brought to Jesus by Andrew (Jn 1:36, 40-42).  One of the original apostles - he is very prominent among them, and along with James and John, he is one of the “inner circle” and was present when the others were not (Mk 5:22-23, 35-43; Matt 17:1 ff; 26:37).

 

(2)          Impetuous and full of good intentions, Peter was quick to affirm loyalty to the Lord but yet denied him three times (Lk 22:31-34, 54-60).  He wept bitterly at his failure and was later comforted by the risen Christ (Mk 16:7).  Three times the risen Lord tells Peter “Feed my sheep” (Jn 21:15-17).  He preaches the first gospel sermon on the day of Pentecost (Acts 2:14) and later opens the door of faith to the Gentiles in the form of Cornelius (in keeping with the promise of Matt 16:19).

 

(3)          Acts chapters 1-5 (which focus upon the early post-Pentecost days of the Jerusalem) tell of his outstanding work in the early church.  Evidently his wife accompanied him on his missionary journeys (1 Cor 9:5).  In Acts 12:3 ff we read of his escape from the hands of Herod Agrippa 1 and in 15:6-14 we are told of his prominent participation in the Jerusalem conference (ca 51 AD).  In Gal 2:11, reference is made to Paul’s rebuking him in Antioch.  Other than his reference to himself in 1st and 2nd Peter, nothing more is said about him in Scripture.  Jesus’ words in Jn 21:18 suggest that he was destined to suffer a martyr’s death.

 

 

Tradition

 

(1)          Church tradition concerning Peter presents us with several challenges.  In particular, the apostle’s alleged association with the church at Rome has been the subject of great debate because it is largely on the basis of this supposed association that the Catholic Church argues for the pre-eminence of Rome in spiritual matters.  Under the heading Rome, the Catholic Encyclopaedia has the following:

 

“The significance of Rome lies primarily in the fact that it is the city of the pope.  The Bishop of Rome, as the successor of St. Peter, is the Vicar of Christ on earth and the visible head of the Catholic Church.  Rome is consequently the centre of unity in belief, the source of ecclesiastical jurisdiction and the seat of the supreme authority which can bind by its enactments the faithful throughout the world.  The Diocese of Rome is known as the “See of Peter,” the “Apostolic See,” the “Holy Roman Church,” the “Holy See” - titles which indicate its unique position in Christendom and suggest the origin of its preeminence…  It is here that the history of the Church can be traced from the earliest days, from the humble beginnings in the Catacombs to the majestic ritual of St. Peter’s.”

 

(2)          Was Peter involved in the establishment of the Roman church?  Ireneaus  (ca 180) speaks of “tradition derived from the Apostles, of the very great, the very ancient, and universally known Church founded and organized at Rome by the two most glorious Apostles, Peter and Paul” (Against Heresies 3.3.2).  He goes on to speak of “the faith preached to men, which comes down to our time by means of the successions of the bishops” (ibid).  Clearly intent upon establishing the authority of the church at Rome, Ireneaus continues:

 

“For it is a matter of necessity that every Church should agree with this Church, on account of its preeminent authority, that is, the faithful everywhere, inasmuch as the Apostolical tradition has been preserved continuously by those [(faithful men), ed. note] who exist everywhere” (ibid).

 

According to Eusebius, Dionysius of Corinth (ca 170 AD) wrote:

 

“You have thus by such an admonition bound together the planting of Peter and of Paul at Rome and Corinth.  For both of them planted and likewise taught us in our Corinth.  And they taught together in like manner in Italy and suffered martyrdom at the same time” (Church History 2.25.8).

 

But clearly Paul was not involved in the foundation and organization of the church at Rome as Ireneaus claimed.  Paul himself says that he had “often…planned to come to (them)” but had been prevented thus far (Rom 1:13).  Moreover, if Peter had been involved in the foundation and organization of the church at Rome, Paul could not have failed to mention this fact in his letter.  Ambrosiaster, a fourth century writer records that the Romans “...had embraced the faith of Christ, albeit according to the Jewish rite, without seeing any sign of mighty works, or any of the apostles” (Zondervan Illustrated Bible Backgrounds Commentary: Volume 3; Romans to Philemon).  Clearly too, despite the claim of Dionysius, Peter was not involved in planting the church at Corinth (1 Cor 3:6, 15).

 

(3)          Is there good evidence for Peter’s twenty-five year episcopate in Rome as our Catholic friends claim?  This claim seems to be based mainly (but not exclusively) upon statements by Eusebius and Jerome.  Eusebius has:   

 

“For immediately, during the reign of Claudius, the all-good and gracious Providence, which watches over all things, led Peter, that strongest and greatest of the Apostles, and the one who on account of his virtue was the speaker for all the others, to Rome against this great corrupter of life (i.e. Simon).  He, like a noble commander of God, clad in divine armor, carried the costly merchandise of the light of the understanding from the East to those who dwelt in the West, proclaiming the light itself, and the word which brings salvation to souls, and preaching the kingdom of heaven” (2.14.6).

 

According to Jerome:

 

“Simon Peter the son of John from the village of Bethsaida in the province of Galilee, brother of Andrew the Apostle, and himself chief of the Apostles, after having been bishop of the church of Antioch and having preached to the Dispersion - the believers in circumcision, in Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia and Bithynia - pushed on to Rome in the second year of Claudius to overthrow Simon Magus, and held the sacerdotal chair there for twenty-five years until the last, that is the fourteenth, year of Nero”(Lives of Illustrious Men chapter 1).

 

However, it is surely significant that Paul does not send greetings to Peter in the Roman epistle (ca 56-58 AD) or mention Peter’s association with the church at Rome.  This despite the fact that he does mention or greet over twenty individuals in this epistle.  Moreover, Paul makes no reference to Peter in the prison epistles which were written sometime from Rome between about 61-63 AD.  Finally, when 2 Timothy is written, Paul is again a prisoner in Rome (2 Tim 1:8, 16; 2:9).  This time Paul does not anticipate release (2 Tim 4:6-8).  Tradition has it that Paul was beheaded in the last year of Nero’s reign (probably 68 AD).  Again, there is no mention of Peter in 2 Timothy.  Surely this failure to send greetings to Peter or to acknowledge his work at Rome is inexplicable if Peter “held the sacerdotal chair there for twenty-five years” in that city.    

 

(4)          Is there good evidence that Peter visited Rome and/or that he suffered a martyr’s death in that city?  J. A. Hart says that “we may fairly conclude that from the end of the first century it has been the unchallenged belief of the Christian Church that St Peter was put to death at Rome in AD 64” (Expositors Greek Testament).  Others understand tradition to place his death at about 67 AD, just prior to Nero’s demise in 68 AD.  Materials relevant to this discussion include the following:

 

·        Clement of Rome states that “Peter…when he had at length suffered martyrdom, departed to the place of glory due to him” (The First Epistle to the Corinthians Chapter 5).  Clement does not mention Rome or Nero but since he writes from this city and also refers to Paul’s execution, some have taken his words to mean that Peter was martyred in there. 

 

·        Writing to the church at Rome, Ignatius says:  “I do not, as Peter and Paul, issue commandments unto you.  They were Apostles; I am but a condemned man:  they were free, while I am, even until now, a servant” (Epistle to the Romans 4.4).  From this statement some have drawn the conclusion that Peter and Paul issued commands to the church at Rome, indicating that Peter had a special relationship with this church.  This conclusion is unwarranted. 

 

·        We have seen that according to Eusebius, Dionysius (ca 170 AD) recorded that Peter and Paul “taught together in like manner in Italy and suffered martyrdom at the same time.”  

 

·        In the third century Tertullian speaks of Rome as the place “where Peter endures a passion like his Lord’s” (The Prescription Against Heretics), having been “made fast to the cross” in the reign of Nero (Scorpiace, 15:3).   

 

·        Eusebius claims that according to Origen, “Peter appears to have preached in Pontus, Galatia, Bithynia, Cappadocia, and Asia to the Jews of the dispersion” (3.1.2).  Citing Origen as the source of his information, Eusebius says that Peter “at last, having come to Rome…was crucified head-downwards; for he had requested that he might suffer in this way.”  This is the first known reference to Peter’s having been crucified “head-downwards.”

 

·        Jerome has the following:

 

“At (Nero’s) hands (Peter) received the crown of martyrdom being nailed to the cross with his head towards the ground and his feet raised on high, asserting that he was unworthy to be crucified in the same manner as his Lord…  Buried at Rome in the Vatican near the triumphal way he is venerated by the whole world” (Lives of Illustrious Men, Chapter 1).

 

Some give little credence to the traditions linking Peter with Rome, pointing out that similar traditions crediting Peter with the establishment and oversight of the church at Rome are clearly untrustworthy.  They also argue that the later traditions about Peter’s martyrdom in Rome contain more details than earlier accounts, suggesting that legendary material has been added in order to bolster the authority of the church at Rome.

 

 

 

Addressees

 

Peter addresses his letter to “those who reside as aliens, scattered throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia and Bithynia” (1:1), which are all places in northern Asia Minor, or modern Turkey.  References to the experiences of the addressees (eg 1:6-9), to elders (5:1 ff) and the inclusion of personal greeting indicate that Peter has a particular group in mind.  Since Peter speaks of “those who preached the gospel to you” (1:12) it is unlikely that these are converts of the apostle Peter. 

 

Barnes lists five views as to the identity of the addressees, but in my view, only three are worth mentioning:

 

·        Christians who had been born native Jews and who were “scattered” throughout this region.  This is based chiefly upon 1:1 and the fact that Peter was apostle to the Jews (Gal 2:7).  Also, Eusebius says that “Peter appears to have preached in Pontus, Galatia, Bithynia, Cappadocia, and Asia to the Jews of the dispersion” (Church History 3.1.2).

 

·        Gentiles exclusively (based chiefly upon such passages as 1:18; 2:10; 4:3 which speak of idol worship in the past.

 

·        Christians converted from both Jews and Gentiles with no particular reference to their extraction.

 

In view of 1:18 which speaks of “the futile way of life inherited from your forefathers,” it does seem likely that Peter is speaking primarily to Gentile Christians who have abandoned their tradition of idol worship (see too 1:14 – “the former lusts which were yours in your ignorance” and 2:10 –“you were once not a people”).  However, although Peter is likely addressing those who were for the most part, of pagan origin, there would have been Jewish converts in the churches in these provinces.  As we have seen in our discussion of James, the term “scattered” (diaspora) would have held special significance for them.  In this context we notice that the letter contains a number of OT references and quotations.

 

The bottom line is that although most of Peter’s addressees were likely out of a heathen background, the apostle is addressing all who are Christians regardless of their origin.  It is likely he calls them “strangers and aliens” (2:11) to make the point that the world is not their home.

 

 

Composition:  Date, Place and Circumstances

 

(1)          “Babylon” is declared to be the place of composition (1 Pet 5:13).  Some regard this use of “Babylon” as figurative but are divided as to whether this is a reference to Rome or Jerusalem.  Still, others believe that Peter is using “Babylon” literally, some arguing that the Peter was writing from a city of this name in Egypt, others arguing that Peter is speaking of Babylon on the Euphrates river.  Since Egyptian Babylon was a small, insignificant town, Peter would surely have mentioned its location had this been the place of composition - otherwise most would have assumed that he was writing from Babylon on the Euphrates River.  Moreover, there is no evidence that Jerusalem was ever called “Babylon.”  This leaves the suggestion that by “Babylon,” Peter means either Rome or the city of Babylon on the Euphrates River.

 

(2)          Naturally enough the Catholic Encyclopaedia strongly defends the view that Rome was the place of composition.  We read:

 

“(The) great majority of critics, with all Christian antiquity, agree that it was written at Rome itself, designated by the metaphorical name Babylon (v, 13).  This interpretation has been accepted from the most remote times, and indeed no other metaphor could so well describe the city of Rome, rich and luxurious as it was, and given over to the worship of false gods and every species of immorality.  Both cities had caused trouble to the people of God, Babylon to the Jews, and Rome to the Christians.  Moreover this metaphor was in use among the early Christians (cf. Apoc., xiv, 8; xvi, 19; xvii, 5; xviii, 2, 10, 21).  Finally, tradition has not brought us the faintest memory of any sojourn of Peter at Babylon.”

 

(3)          However, some point out that there is no evidence that Rome was called “Babylon” at this early date (long before the book of Revelation) and that therefore the recipients of this letter would not have understood it thus.  They also point out that in the other NT epistles the real name of the place of composition is mentioned.  This is sometimes countered with the suggestion that Peter uses “Babylon” in order to protect the church at Rome during a time of persecution.

 

(4)          As we have seen, some traditions linking Peter with Rome are clearly unreliable.  Clearly Peter was not involved in the establishment of the church and clearly he did not hold “the sacerdotal chair there” for twenty-five years.  However, he may have visited Rome and he may have been there when 1 Peter was written.  Eusebius has the following:

 

“This account is given by Clement, in the sixth book of his Institutions, whose testimony is corroborated also by that of Papias, bishop of Hierapolis.  Peter mentions Mark in his first epistle, which they say he composed in Rome itself; and it is said that he indicates this by referring to the city metaphorically as Babylon in these words:  ‘the church that is at Babylon, elected together with you, saluteth you; as also my son Mark’ 1 Peter v. 13” (2.15).

 

Jerome wrote:

 

“Mark, disciple and interpreter of Peter according to what he heard Peter relate, wrote a brief Gospel as requested by the brothers in Rome.  When Peter heard, he approved and ordained it on his authority for reading in the churches, just as Clement wrote in the sixth book of the Hypotyposes, and Papias the Hierapolitan bishop.  Peter also mentioned this Mark in the first epistle, under the name of Babylon figuratively signifying Rome:  she who is in Babylon chosen together with you, sends you greetings and so does Mark my son” (Lives of Illustrious Men, Chapter 1).

(5)          Some incline to the view that Peter wrote from Babylon on the Euphrates River. They point out that according to Josephus, in the days of Hyrcanus (less than 40 years before the Christian era) there were “Jews in great numbers” at Babylon (Antiquities 15.2).  They reason that it would not be surprising if the apostle to the circumcised (Gal 2:7) visited this city.  Adam Clarke reasons:

 

“In like manner, though a figurative use of the word Babylon is not unsuitable to the animated and poetical language of the Apocalypse, yet St. Peter, in a plain and unadorned epistle, would hardly have called the place where he wrote by any other appellation than that which literally and properly belonged to it.”

 

Others respond that according to Josephus (Antiquities 18.9. 5-9), the Jews at this time had largely been driven out of Babylon and were restricted to adjacent towns.

 

(6)          Although it is not possible to fix the exact date of this epistle, most who accept Petrine authorship are of the view that it was written in the 60s.

 

·        In July 64 AD Rome suffered a terrible fire that burned for six days and it was widely rumored that Nero was responsible.  Tacitus records that “to stop the rumor (Nero) falsely charged with guilt, and punished with the most fearful tortures, the persons commonly called Christians, who were hated for their enormities” (Annals).  Likely this persecution began in about 65 AD.  Some point out that when Peter wrote to the brethren in Asia Minor, a time of trial was pending (1 Pet 4:7, 12), but as yet there is no reference to martyrs and martyrdom.  Things are not as bad yet as in Rome and there is no suggestion of the legal persecution that was at a later date to take place under Trajan.  Christians are to disarm the fury of their attackers (3:13) and shame their accusers by their lives (3:16).  It is argued that this seems to point to a time during or just before Neronian persecution.  There it is suffering, but Christianity is not yet illegal, and persecution is erratic and irregular.  Of course this argument is based on the assumption that Nero’s persecution extended beyond Rome and into Asia Minor.

 

·        “(There) are numerous points of correspondence between the Ephesian letter of Paul and First Peter - similarities that can be accounted for on the hypothesis that the letter to the church in Ephesus was in the hands of Peter prior to the writing of his own epistle” (Guy N. Woods, New Testament Commentary on Peter John Jude).  Examples include:  1 Pet 1:3; Eph 1:3; 1 Pet 1:1; Eph 1:4; 1 Pet 1:1; Eph 5:18; 1 Pet 1:15; Eph 4:1; 1 Pet 1:1-12; Eph 3:5, 10; 1 Pet 1:5; Eph 1:19; 1 Pet 1:14, Eph 2:3.  Given our date for the Ephesian epistle, this would place the time of composition sometime after about 63 AD.  If Peter did die during the Neronian persecution, the letter must have been written within a few years of that date. 

 

·        Mark was with Peter at the time of writing (1 Pet 5:13).  When Colossians was written (ca 61-63 AD), Mark was with Paul at Rome (Col 4:10) and was considering a trip to Asia Minor.  It is likely that when 2 Timothy is written about 67 AD, Mark is at Ephesus (2 Tim 4:11).  Some who favour Babylon as the place of composition incline to the view that Mark was with Peter in this city sometime between the writing of Colossians and 2 Timothy.  Others think it likely that Mark returned to Rome as Paul had requested (2 Tim 4:11) and there met up with Peter.  Either way this suggests a date in the mid to late 60s.

 

Although these and other arguments are not conclusive, and although the facts are capable of differing interpretations, it does seem likely that 1 Peter was written sometime in the 60s.

 

 

Purpose, Theme, Characteristics

 

(1)          Some form of the word “suffering” or “suffer” occurs some sixteen times in the letter, and it is clear that the pervasive theme is that of suffering as a Christian.  The recipients of this letter were in the midst of trials and difficulties, and in my view, it is likely that they “were not suffering from a persecution instituted by the state, but from social ostracism, and from the enmity of fanatical Jews and hostile pagans” (Erdman).  It is clear that Peter’s “supreme object is to comfort and encourage them amid the persecutions and the sufferings to which they were unjustly subjected, and to fortify them against the heavier trials that were impending” (International Standard Bible Encyclopaedia).

 

(2)          In large measure this comfort and encouragement is provided by the emphasis upon the hope which Christians have as a result of their relationship with God through Christ, a hope that will be realized with the revelation of Jesus Christ.  This is the keynote of this letter and the words “joy,” “grace” and “glory” occur twenty-six times:

 

·        God has caused Christians “to be born again to a living hope” (1:3).  This hope is grounded upon “the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead” and it is described as “an inheritance” which is “imperishable and undefiled and will not fade away, reserved in heaven” for the Christian (1:4).  What’s more, Christians are “protected by the power of God through faith” so that the “salvation ready to be revealed in the last time” (ie at Christ’s return) is secure (1:5).

 

·        These suffering Christians are to “fix...(their) hope on the grace to be brought to” (them)...“at the revelation of Jesus Christ” (1:13).  That hope is in God who “raised (Jesus)...from the dead” (1:21) meaning that Christ’s resurrection, ascension and glorification form the basis of our faith and hope in God.

 

·        Christians are to be “ready to make a defence (apologia) to everyone who asks (them)...to give an account (logos, “a rational account of” – Reineker and Rogers Linguistic Key to the Greek New Testament) of the hope (confident expectation) that is in (them)...”  This is especially important in a world of sneering, fault finding opponents.

Hope in the midst of trial, firmly grounded upon present and future glory promised to Christians is central to this encouraging and consolatory epistle.  OT prophets and angels had longed to understand the promise of salvation now possessed by these believers (1:10-12).  The promise to these brethren is:  “After you have suffered for a little while, the God of all grace who called you to His eternal glory in Christ, will Himself perfect, confirm, strengthen and establish you” (5:10).

 

(3)          Hope the midst of trials makes it possible to rejoice in the midst of those trials.  Conscious of the blessings of son ship, the Christian can “greatly rejoice” despite the fact that “for a little while” (in comparison with eternity) they have been “distressed by various trials” (1:6).  The overcoming of trials manifests “proof of ...faith” (1:7), and this faith will lead to the sharing in Christ’s praise, glory and honor (Jn 17:22) at His return (1:7).  This belief means that they “greatly rejoice with joy inexpressible and full of glory” (1:8).  They should not be surprised at the “fiery ordeal” of suffering which comes upon them “for...testing” (4:12).  To the extent that they share “the sufferings of Christ,” they are to “keep on rejoicing,” knowing that at the revelation of His glory (ie when Christ returns), they will rejoice, sharing His glory as they had shared His sufferings (4:13).

 

(4)          The example of Christ is an encouragement to the suffering saint to patiently endure unjust persecution.  If “for the sake of conscience towards God a man bears up under sorrows when suffering unjustly,” this “finds favour” with God (2:19).  The Lord approves of patient endurance in the face of unjust suffering (2:20) because “Christ also suffered...leaving an example (hupogrammas - model, pattern to be copied in writing or drawing) to follow (2:21).  He was blameless (2:22, cf Isa 53:9), He did not revile His tormentors (2:23) and He trusted Himself to God (2:23).  These Christians are to do the same.  They are not to repay evil for evil or insult for insult but are to give a blessing instead (3:9), trusting in God (4:19).  Christ suffered in the flesh (4:1 - unto death 3:18) and “therefore” Christians are to “arm” themselves with the same “purpose/mind” (thought, resolve) meaning that they must have the same attitude in suffering which Christ had.  For the one who follows Christ, suffering is not “some strange thing” at which to be astonished (4:12).

 

(5)          A great deal is said in this epistle about the need for holy living in the midst of a godless world.  It is clear that many of the addressees are from a pagan background and they must realize that the gospel has called them to break with past heathen practices.  Thus Peter tells them:  “As obedient children, do not be conformed to the former lusts which were yours in your ignorance (ie when they were idol worshipers), but like the Holy One who called you, be holy yourselves also in all your behaviour; because it is written, “You shall be holy for I am holy” (1:14-16).  Again:  “Beloved I urge you as aliens and strangers to abstain from fleshly lusts which wage war against the soul” (2:11).  And:  “For the time already past is sufficient for you to have carried out the desire of the Gentiles, having pursued a course of sensuality, lusts, drunkenness, carousels, drinking parties and abominable idolatries” (4:3).  It’s not easy to be out of step with those around us, particularly when we once shared their lifestyle.  Christians are not to engage in activities which warrant punishment (2:20; 3:16-17; 4:15). 

 

(6)          This reminder about the importance of holy living is particularly necessary in view of the fact that many unfounded charges are evidently being brought against these brethren.  There was a real danger that Christianity would be perceived as a pernicious influence upon society and a danger to Roman order.  Christianity was a new religion and its adherents would not participate in idol worship, emperor worship or such like.  By living as exemplary citizens and respecting all honourable relationships, Christians would disarm their critics.   

 

Again hope is the great incentive.  Those around them “slander...(them) as evildoers” (2:12), and Peter is aware of those who “revile...(their) good behaviour in Christ” (3:16), who “malign” them (4:9) and revile them (4:14).  Evidently this antipathy springs from the fact that these Christians “do not run with them into the same excess of dissipation” which characterized the lives of their critics (4:4).  These Christians are to “silence the ignorance of foolish men” (2:15) who bring groundless accusations against them by keeping their behaviour excellent as they live in their midst (2:12).  They are to “keep a good conscience so that in things in which (they)…are slandered, those who revile (their)...good behaviour in Christ may be put to shame” (3:16) having been exposed as liars and slanderers.  In a word, Christians are to disarm their critics by their exemplary lifestyle.

 

In 1 Pet 2:1-10, Peter uses a variety of figures, most taken from the Old Testament to describe God’s holy community.  Having put aside such things as “malice…guile…hypocrisy…envy and all slander,” Christians are to grow by means of the “pure milk of the word” (2:1-3).  They are part of a chosen priesthood, and they come to Christ offering a spiritual sacrifice (2:4-5); they are “a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people for God’s own possession” so that they may “proclaim the excellencies of Him who has called...(them) out of darkness into His marvellous light” (2:9) - they constitute a holy community in the midst of a godless people.

 

(7)          Specifically, Christians living in the midst of pagans are to manifest holiness in their all their relationships, which means:

 

·        submitting to the civil authorities (2:13-17) “whether to a king as one in authority, or as governors as sent by him for the punishment of evildoers and the praise of those who do right.”

 

·        being subject to masters “with all respect,” whether those masters are just or unjust (2:18-20).

 

·        being subject to one’s husband (3:1-6).

 

·        caring for one’s wife (“grant her honor as a fellow heir of the grace of life...” - 3:7).

 

·        carrying out one’s duties to one another (“let all be harmonious, sympathetic, brotherly, kind hearted and humble of spirit, not returning evil for evil, or insult for insult, but giving a blessing instead...” - 3:8-12).

 

(8)          Among the many Old Testament allusions and phrases in 1 Peter are the following: 1:16 (Lev 11:44; 19:2; 20:7); 1:24-25 (Isa 40:6 ff); 2:6-10 (Isa 28:16; Psa 118:22; Isa 43:20 ff; Hos 1:10; 2:23); 2:22-25 (Isa 53:4-9); 3:10-12 (Psa 34:12-16); 4:18 (Prov 11:21); 5:5 (Prov 3:34).    

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Brief Outline

 

(1)          Salutation (1 Pet 1:1-2).

 

(2)          Future Hope and Current Difficulties (1 Pet 1:3-9).

 

(3)          Salvation, Prophets and Angels Past Revelation (1 Pet 1:10-12).

 

(4)          Holiness (1 Pet 1:13-2:13).

 

A call to be Holy (1 Pet 1:13-21).

To Love One Another (1 Pet 1:22-25).

To Long for the Word (1 Pet 2:1-3).

To Offer Up Spiritual Sacrifices (1 Pet 2:4-10).

To Abstain From Fleshly Desires (1 Pet 2:11-12).

 

(5)          Submission (1 Pet 2:13-3:12).

 

To civil Authorities (1 Pet 2:13-17).

To Masters (1 Pet 2:18-25).

To Husbands (1 Pet 3:1-6).

Husbands Corresponding Duties to Wives (1 Pet 3:7).

General Mutual Submission (1 Pet 3:9-12).

 

(6)          The Suffering and Persecution of Christians (1 Pet 3:13-4:19).

 

The Blessings of Suffering for Righteousness (1 Pet 3:13-17).

Christ’s Example of Suffering (1 Pet 3:18-22).

Christians Have Died to the Old Life (1 Pet 4:1-6).

Live Faithful Lives (1 Pet 4: 7-11)

Suffering as Christians (1 Pet 4:12-19).

 

(7)          Final Exhortations on Various Topics (1 Pet 5:1-9).

 

Duties to Elders (1 Pet 5:1-9).

 

(8)          Conclusion (1Pet 5:10-14).