1 Peter Introduction

INTRODUCTION TO 1 PETER

AUTHORSHIP

Internal evidence for the Apostle Peter's authorship
1. specifically stated in 1 Pet. 1:1
2. allusions to the words and life experiences of Jesus and the Twelve
  1. examples taken from E. G. Selwyn's The First Epistle of St. Peter, 1946
    
    (1) 1 Pet. 1:3 – John 21:27
    
    (2) 1 Pet. 1:7-9 – Luke 22:31; Mark 8:29
    
    (3) 1 Pet. 1:10-12 – Luke 24:25ff; Acts 15:14ff
    
    (4) 1 Pet. 3:15 – Mark 14:29,71
    
    (5) 1 Pet. 5:2 – John 21:15ff
  2. examples taken from Alan Stibbbs' The First Epistle General of Peter, 1971
    
    (1) 1 Pet. 1:16 – Matt. 5:48
    
    (2) 1 Pet. 1:17 – Matt. 22:16
    
    (3) 1 Pet. 1:18 – Mark 10:45
    
    (4) 1 Pet. 1:22 – John 15:12
    
    (5) 1 Pet. 2:4 – Matt. 21:42ff
    
    (6) 1 Pet. 2:19 – Luke 6:32; Matt. 5:39
    
    (7) 1 Pet. 3:9 – Matt. 5:39
    
    (8) 1 Pet. 3:14 – Matt. 5:10
    
    (9) 1 Pet. 3:16 – Matt. 5:44; Luke 6:28
    
    (10) 1 Pet. 3:20 – Matt. 24:37-38
    
    (11) 1 Pet. 4:11 – Matt. 5:16
    
    (12) 1 Pet. 4:13 – Matt. 5:10ff
    
    (13) 1 Pet. 4:18 – Matt. 24:22
    
    (14) 1 Pet. 5:3 – Matt. 20:25
    
    (15) 1 Pet. 5:7 – Matt. 6:25ff
3. words and phrases similar to Peter's sermons in Acts
  1. 1 Pet. 1:20 – Acts 2:23
  2. 1 Pet. 2:7-8 – Acts 4:10-11
  3. 1 Pet. 2:24 – Acts 5:30; 10:39 (esp. use of the Greek term xylon for cross)
  4. 1 Pet. 4:5 – Acts 10:45
4. contemporary first century missionary comparisons
  1. Silvanus (Silas) – 1 Pet. 5:12
  2. Mark (John Mark) – 1 Pet. 5:13
External evidence for the Apostle Peter's authorship
1. accepted early and widely by the early church
  1. similar phrasing, possibly quotes, by Clement of Rome in his Letter to Corinthians (A.D. 95)
  2. similar phrasing, possibly quotes, in the Epistle of Barnabas (A.D. 130)
  3. alluded to by Papias, the Bishop of Hieropolis (A.D. 140) in a quote from Eusebius' His. Eccl.
  4. quoted by Polycarp in his Epistle to the Philippians 8:1, but he does not mention 1 Peter by name (Polycarp died in A.D. 155)
  5. quoted by Irenaeus (A.D. 140-203)
  6. quoted by Origen (A.D. 185-253). Origen believed that 1 Pet. 5:13, where Peter calls Mark "my son," means he wrote Peter's Gospel.
  7. quoted by Tertullian (A.D. 150-222)
Reasons for questioning the Apostle Peter's authorship
1. it is not listed in the Muratorian Fragment, a list of canonical books compiled in Rome between A.D. 180 and 200
2. the Greek is good, polished Koine Greek, which is surprising from an "uneducated" (a grammatos, cf. Acts 4:13) Galilean fisherman
3. it sounds so much like Paul's writings in Romans and Ephesians
4. its description of persecution described in 1 Peter better fits a later date
  1. Domitian (A.D. 81-96)
  2. Trajan (A.D. 98-117)
Possible answers to modern scholarship concerns
1. The Muratorian Fragment is damaged and missing at least one line of text (cf. B. F. Westcott's A General Survey of the History of the Canon of the New Testament, 6^th ed. p. 289).
2. Peter was not uneducated (cf. Acts 4:13), but merely untrained in a recognized rabbinical school. Apparently most Jews in Galilee were bilingual from birth. The other major issue in this discussion is Peter's use of a scribe. The wording of 1 Pet. 5:12 suggests he may have used Silvanus (Silas).
3. Both Peter and Paul often quoted
  1. hymns
  2. liturgical or training material (catechism documents) common in the early church
  3. they also had some contact with each other through the years (i.e. Acts; Galatians; and 2 Pet. 3:15-16)
  4. For me the most probable reason for the similarity between Peter and Paul's writing can be explained by Peter's use of Paul's missionary companion Silas (Silvanus) as a scribe
4. 1 Peter does not necessarily reflect an Empire-wide persecution. Peter's affirmation of believers needing to be subject to government (cf. 1 Pet. 2:13-17) would be unusual in a day of official Empire-wide persecution.
  Nero's (A.D. 54-68) growing mental illness (e.g. grandiose claims) encouraged local emperor cults, especially in Asia Minor, to instigate local persecutions. 1 Peter fits Nero's day better than Domitian's (A.D. 81-96) or Trajan's day (A.D. 98-117). It is even possible that some of the persecution is coming from Jewish groups as well as local governmental officials or emperor cults.
There is nothing in 1 Peter itself which demands a later period or author.

DATE

The date is obviously related to authorship.
Tradition links Peter's and Paul's deaths in Rome under Nero, probably A.D. 65. If so, then 1 Peter had to have been written about A.D. 63-64. There may be some evidence of this in that the same phrase used to begin the book of Revelation, which I think was written about A.D. 64 in Nero's reign, is used twice in 1 Pet. 1:7,13 (i.e. "a revelation of Jesus Christ").
A mid-first century date is probable if 1 Peter is alluded to by Clement of Rome (A.D. 95).
A. T. Robertson believes Peter died in A.D. 67-68 and wrote 1 Peter in A.D. 65-66. I think he died in A.D. 64-65 and wrote just before this.
A new book by John A. T. Robinson, Redating the New Testament, gives credible internal and external evidence for all the books of the NT to have been written before A.D. 70 (with the possible exclusion of 2 Peter). This book has been very thought provoking to me and has challenged the traditional guesses I was given in seminary.

RECIPIENTS

Typical of first century letters, the recipients are noted in 1 Pet. 1:1 as "those who reside as aliens scattered throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia." These Roman provinces (assuming Galatia is northern ethnic Galatia) are located in northern modern Turkey. These areas are apparently places that Paul did not evangelize (cf. Acts 16:6) nor did Peter (cf. 1 Pet. 1:12). Possibly these churches originated from Jewish converts who returned home after Pentecost (cf. Acts 2:9-11).
Although these churches may have originally been started by Jewish believers at the time of Peter's writing, they were mostly Gentile
1. formerly ignorant of God (1 Pet. 1:14)
2. futile ways of life inherited from their forefathers (1 Pet. 1:18)
3. now God's people (1 Pet. 2:9-10, a play on Hosea 1:9-10; 2:23)
4. among the Gentiles (1 Pet. 2:12)
5. lists of Gentile vices (1 Pet. 4:3-4)
The book does contain Jewish elements
1. the use of the terms "aliens" and "diaspora" reflect a Jewish setting (cf. John 7:35; Acts 7:6)
2. the use of OT Scriptures
  1. Exodus 19 (cf. 1 Pet. 2:5,9)
  2. Isaiah 53 (cf. 1 Pet. 1:19; 2:22,24,25)
    
    However, these examples do not necessarily reflect a Jewish church, but
3. the transfer of OT titles from Israel to the church (i.e. "a kingdom of priests")
  1. 1 Pet. 2:5
  2. 1 Pet. 2:9
4. a church training document (i.e. catechism materials for new believers), which employed OT Messianic texts
  1. 1 Pet. 1:19 – Isaiah 53:7 (i.e. Lamb)
  2. 1 Pet. 2:22 – Isaiah 53:5
  3. 1 Pet. 2:24 – Isaiah 53:4,5,11,12
  4. 1 Pet. 2:25 – Isaiah 53:6
Although Peter was called specifically to minister to Jews (cf. Gal. 2:8), he, like Paul, worked with both Jews and Gentiles (cf. Acts 10). Cornelius' conversion showed Peter the radical inclusiveness of the gospel! 1 Peter reflects this new realization.

PURPOSE

1 Peter has both a doctrinal and practical aspect. However, as Paul divided his letters into a beginning section on doctrine and a concluding section on application, Peter merges the two. His book is much more difficult to outline. In many ways it reflects a sermon more than a letter.
The major issue discussed is suffering and persecution. This is done in two ways.
1. Jesus is presented as the ultimate example of suffering and rejection (cf. 1 Pet. 1:11; 2:21,23; 3:18; 4:1,13; 5:1).
2. Jesus' followers are called on to emulate His pattern and attitude (cf. 1 Pet. 1:6-7; 2:19; 3:13-17; 4:1,12-19; 5:9-10).
In light of the suffering and persecutions so common in the early years of Christianity, it is not surprising how often the Second Coming is mentioned. This book, like most NT writings, is thoroughly eschatological.

GENRE

This book has a typical first century Greco-Roman opening and close
1. 1 Pet. 1:1-2
  1. author
  2. recipients
  3. prayer
2. 1 Pet. 5:12-14
  1. closing greetings
    (1) from whom
    (2) to whom
  2. prayer
The main body of the letter resembles a sermon more than a letter. Some have assumed it was
1. first a sermon
2. first a baptismal liturgy
3. first pieces of early church catechism material combined
The letter seems to close at 1 Pet. 4:11 with a doxology, but no Greek manuscript stops at this point. It is possible that 1 Pet. 4:12-5:11 is a purposeful summary of the entire letter.
I personally believe that 1 Peter functions as a cyclical letter to churches which Peter did not personally start, much like Paul's Colossians (sent to Colossae, Laodicea, and Hierapolis, cf. Col. 4:13), but also a general encouragement to believers to watch out for coming problems, much like Paul's Galatian and Ephesian letters.
This cyclical genre explains the lack of a personal opening and closing to the letter. It also explains the lack of specific examples of persecution.

CANONIZATION

I include the category of canonization in 1 Peter because the issue is so controversial with 2 Peter.
1 Peter is listed in Eusebius' Eccl. His. 3:3:25, as being part of "the undisputed books." In the ancient church it was never doubted as a true letter from the Apostle Peter.
The issue of canonicity is exacerbated because of the number of spurious writings attributed to Peter. The early church never accepted any of these, recognizing only 1 Peter and the disputed 2 Peter as truly from the Apostle.
1. Acts of Peter
2. Acts of Peter and Andrew
3. Acts of Peter and Paul
4. The Passion of Peter and Paul
5. The Acts of Peter and the Twelve
6. Apocalypse of Peter
7. Gospel of Peter
8. Passion of Peter
9. Preaching of Peter
10. Slavonic Acts of Peter

(For a discussion of each of these pseudonymous writings see the Zondervan Pictorial Encyclopedia of the Bible Vol. 4; pp. 721-723, 732-733, 740.) None of these writings supposedly attributed to Peter were ever seriously considered to be part of the canon of the NT. This, in and of itself, says much about the inclusion of 1 and 2 Peter.