The Cradle, the Cross, and the Crown (168 page)

Others object that the reference to Rome as “Babylon” makes a post-70 date necessary, and thus beyond Peter's lifetime.
²⁸
But the available evidence suggests that this was an entirely intelligible allusion.
²⁹
Also, the ecclesiology of the church is said to be more developed than was the case during Peter's lifetime. But again, if one is not predisposed to attribute authorship to a pseudepigrapher writing as a representative of the Roman church, all that one finds in 1 Peter is the office of elder (5:1) that Peter also claims for himself. This hardly speaks of a late ecclesiology; instead, it indicates one that is rather early.
³⁰

That 1 Peter is dependent on Paul is highly questionable. First, the letter is so close to Romans and Ephesians that theological (if not literary) dependence is necessary. Consequently, the theory has frequently been proposed that the writer was a student of Paul.
³¹
If so, this begs the question why a follower of Paul would attribute a letter to Peter and not to his teacher (supposedly Paul). Thus, the idea that the writer was a follower of Paul is waning among scholars, often being replaced with the assumption of a “Petrine school” in Rome.
³²

Much has been made about the nature of the so-called parallels from Paul. Kümmel considered this argument one of many “decisive arguments…against the Petrine authorship of I Pet.
[sic]
.”
³³
Kümmel believed that 1 Peter has departed from a Petrine understanding of fulfilling the law to a Pauline concept of freedom from the law.
³⁴
This argument assumes a disparity between the theologies of Peter and Paul, based largely on Gal 2:11—14, but there is insufficient basis in Scripture for such a divide. Some use this argument to infer a pseudonymous author from a “Petrine community,” while others take it to imply an author from the Pauline circle. However, it is unclear why the letter would not have been attributed to Paul rather than Peter if it was so dependent upon Pauline theology. Bigg examined these alleged parallels in depth and found that the parallels to Ephesians are not very strong, that the resemblances to Romans are superficial, and that the same is true regarding the rest of Paul's letters.
³⁵
In fact, the work in which he found the most intriguing parallels is the book of James.
³⁶
Thus, one finds that the nature of the so-called parallels is not of the sort that demands a literary dependence on Paul.
³⁷
Nothing precludes the apostle Peter from having read and appreciated James, or Paul for that matter.
³⁸
Any continuity can best be explained by a common Christian tradition and perhaps Peter's familiarity with (some of) the letters.
³⁹
In fact, 1 Peter's knowledge of Paul makes the reference to his letter collection in 2 Pet 3:16 all the more plausible. Moreover, it makes a stronger connection between the two letters, suggesting common authorship.

Finally, some doubt Peter's authorship of 1 Peter on account of the addressees of the letter. The assumption is that the remote areas of Asia Minor could not have been evangelized and a well-defined ecclesiological structure been put in place (see 5:1) until decades after Peter and Paul.
⁴⁰
This is an assumption based on a “what-must-have-been” logic rather
than on direct evidence. Christianity was commonly recognized as a thorn in the flesh of the Roman Empire in Bithynia around the year 112 through the letters of Pliny the Younger to Trajan. Pliny interviewed those who claimed to have been Christians, some “as many as 25 years” ago, which was circa 87.

K. Jobes noted several factors that could explain the presence of a well-organized church in the remote areas of Asia Minor. In Acts 2, Pentecost pilgrims from Pontus, Cappadocia, and Asia were among those who heard Peter's sermon. Some may have been among the 3,000 saved who then migrated back to northern Asia Minor and began evangelizing (note that Aquila was a Jew from Pontus; cf. Acts 2:9). The edict of Claudius evicted the Jews from Rome due to disturbances at the instigation of one “Chrestus.” Some Jewish Christians may have been forced to flee to the region. Jobes also conjectured that aggressive Roman colonization would have brought many Christians into the area.
⁴¹
Further, Acts and Paul's letters indicate that aggressive evangelism in Asia Minor was carried out in Paul's lifetime. The expansion of Christianity into these areas more quickly than commonly assumed would thus be entirely conceivable.
⁴²

The case against Peter's authorship of 1 Peter is less than convincing.
⁴³
The recourse to pseudonymity is ultimately unnecessary to answer the questions of its origins. Unless one presupposes pseudonymity in general as a possibility for various NT letters, there seems little reason, either on the basis of internal or external evidence, to deny that the apostle Peter wrote 1 Peter. Thus it seems advisable to take the ascription of authorship in 1 Pet 1:1 at face value.

Internal Evidence
Internally, the portrait of the writer is quite reserved and not characteristic of a pseudepigrapher.
⁴⁴
The author drew an apparent contrast with his readers, noting that they have not seen Christ, likely implying that he had seen him (1:8). He also claimed to be a “witness of the sufferings of Christ” (5:1). Again, one notes the uncharacteristic reserve with which the author staked this claim to first-hand testimony.

Because there is no undisputed sample of Peter's speech and writing, little linguistic evidence exists to analyze the letter(s). But there does seem to be some internal evidence that point to the apostle Peter as the author of 1 Peter. For example, R. Gundry believed there is an almost unconscious “Petrine pattern” in the letter. In 1958, Selwyn listed 30 allusions to the words of Jesus in 1 Peter, calling these the
verba Christi
(“words of Christ”).
⁴⁵
Gundry examined these parallels and found that they were more organic, rather than quotes,
and showing no real literary dependence. Many of them occur in contexts in the Gospels associated with Peter.
⁴⁶
Moreover, there are clear affinities to the speeches of Peter in Acts.
⁴⁷
In addition, Acts 5:29 (“Peter and the other apostles”), Acts 10:39 (“Peter”), and 1 Pet 2:24 employ the phrase “upon a tree”
(epi xylou)
to describe the cross of Christ (as Paul did obliquely in Gal 3:13, citing Deut 21:23).

The book of 1 Peter includes no references to Gnosticism (flowering only in the second century), no depreciation of the state, no glowing honors given to Peter, “and none of the developed apparatus of pseudonymity.”
⁴⁸
Thus, there are no substantial grounds to resort to pseudepigraphy. Conversely, what is known of Peter does fit the letter, and the confidence of the early church—which is especially noteworthy since there were hosts of pseudepigraphical writings that claimed Peter as the author—should be given full weight.
⁴⁹
Thus Robinson rightly affirmed Peter's authorship of 1 Peter, noting that “whatever the intention, [pseudepigraphy] in this case [is] a particularly motiveless exercise which in fact (unlike II Peter) deceived everyone until the 19th century.”
⁵⁰

Date

The date of the letter and its authorship are tightly intertwined. Scholars who reject Peter's authorship usually posit a date in the reign of Domitian (81—96).
⁵¹
As shown above, the arguments for a late date are neither necessary nor convincing. Since the letter was composed during Peter's lifetime, the question arises concerning its exact date of composition.

There are some indications of an early date regardless of authorship. Many point to a primitive theological expression that includes the Suffering Servant of Isaiah 53, the expectation of Jesus’ imminent return, and undeveloped trinitarian formulation.
⁵²
Any assessment of date should also include the reference to elders at 1 Pet 5:1 as the office of oversight in the church. At the time of Ignatius (c. 35—110), a monarchial episcopate had
rapidly taken hold, which also suggests an early date because there is no mention of a two-tiered pastoral office in 1 Peter as was characteristic of the second-century church.

The best indicator as to the date of the letter, given Peter's authorship, is the reference to Rome at 1 Pet 5:13. Most agree that “Babylon” refers to Rome. If so, Peter most likely was in Rome in the mid- to late 60s. The letter gives no hint that there is ongoing persecution, by the state or otherwise, in the environment of the author. This indicates a date prior to the persecution of Nero, which began in approximately
64.
Most likely, 1 Peter was written slightly before then, around 62—63, when the harbingers of this persecution were already on the horizon.
⁵³

Provenance

First Peter specifically mentions “Babylon” in 5:13 as the place from which the letter was sent. Three options arise from this description. First, the location could be Mesopotamian Babylon. However, at this time the city was all but deserted.
⁵⁴
Second, there was a Babylon in Egypt, but it was an insignificant military outpost, and there is no evidence of any Christian mission there until much later.
⁵⁵
The third and best option is Rome. In this case, the term is metaphorical, designating the center of Gentile power. Even most of those who do not hold to Peter's authorship and espouse a later date still consider Rome to be the geographical source of 1 Peter.
⁵⁶

Destination

First Peter 1:1 identifies where the recipients of the letter lived, which was northern Asia Minor (modern Turkey). Peter listed a series of Roman provinces in an unusual order, “to the temporary residents of the Dispersion in the provinces of Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia” (1:1). This would include a crescent-shaped region of northern Asia Minor.
⁵⁷

The more difficult question is, “Who were the recipients of the letter?” Earlier commentators claimed that the original readers were Jewish converts in these towns.
⁵⁸
This is primarily based on taking literally Peter's opening address, “To the temporary residents of the Dispersion” (1:1). In this sense, both “temporary residents” and “Dispersion”
(parepidēmos
and
diaspora)
would indicate Jewish believers, as would the term “alien”
(paroikos)
in 2:11 (see also
paroikia
, “time of temporary residence,” in 1:17).

But most modern interpreters understand these terms to be metaphorical in light of 1:18, “For you know that you were redeemed from your empty way of life inherited from
the fathers”; and 4:3, “For there has already been enough time spent in doing the will of the pagans: carrying on in unrestrained behavior, evil desires, drunkenness, orgies, carousing, and lawless idolatry.” It is improbable that Peter would have referred to Judaism in this way. More likely, he was referring to Gentiles as part of the newly constituted people of God in continuity with the old covenant community.

Occasion

Persecution is a common theme in 1 Peter and serves as the occasion for the writing of this letter. While Peter may have been anticipating the persecution of Nero in Rome, his readers were most likely already experiencing private persecution or some localized state persecution. They suffered from various trials (1:6); endured grief from suffering unjustly (2:19); were accused and their Christian life denounced (3:16); were slandered
(4:4);
suffered fiery ordeals (4:12); shared in the sufferings of the Messiah (4:13); were ridiculed for the name of Christ (4:14); and suffered according to God's will (4:19). But they were not (yet) being executed as criminals.

Purpose

Persecution was not an abstract notion for the believers in Asia Minor; they were undergoing fierce repercussions for their faith. Peter encouraged believers to endure in the face of difficult times. He did this by promoting a biblical worldview among the believers. They needed to understand who (or whose) they were and then face their situation from this vantage point. The essence of this exhortation is in 1:5—6, “[You] are being protected by God's power through faith for a salvation that is ready to be revealed in the last time. You rejoice in this, though now for a short time you have had to be distressed by various trials.”

LITERATURE

Literary Plan

Remarkably, there is virtual unanimity regarding the structure of 1 Peter in the recent scholarly literature.
⁵⁹
The literary plan of 1 Peter is marked by the presence of the direct address, “dear friends”
(agapētoi)
, in 2:11 and 4:11, which divides the letter into three parts: 1:1-2:10; 2:11-4:11; and 4:12-5:14; 1:1—2 constitutes the opening greeting and 5:12—14 the final greeting and benediction. The major topic of the first part is believers’ identity as God's chosen people due to their salvation through Christ and their rebirth by the Holy Spirit. The address in 2:11 shifts the focus from believers’ identity to their consequent responsibility as “aliens and strangers” in a world hostile to Christ, which involves proper submission to authorities in the spheres of government, the workplace, and the
home. The address in 4:12 (following a doxology in 4:11) introduces an appeal to submission in yet another context, the church.

Peter addressed “temporary residents” in parts of the “Diaspora” (1:1—2). The letter opens with a thanksgiving to God for his spiritual blessings bestowed on the recipients (1:3—12), followed by an exhortation to holy conduct (note esp. the quote of Lev 11:44—45; 19:2; 20:7 in 1:16). In keeping with this continuity with OT Israel, Peter elaborated on the similarity of identity between Israel and the recipients, many of whom would have been Gentile believers, in a series of OT references applied to the readers (2:4—10).