¹ Munro, W., Authority in Paul and 1 Peter: The Identification of a Pastoral Stratum in the Pauline Corpus and 1 Peter (NTSMS 45, Cambridge: CUP, 1983) 21–5.Google Scholar

² Munro, Authority, 19.Google Scholar

³ Walker, W. O. Jr, ‘The Burden of Proof in Identifying Interpolations in Pauline Letters’, NTS 33 (1987) 610–18, p. 615.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

⁴ Fortna, R. T., The Gospel of Signs (SNTSMS 11, Cambridge: CUP, 1970).Google Scholar

⁵ Lake, K. (tr.), The Apostolic Fathers I (London: Heinemann, 1912) 167–9.Google Scholar

⁶ This is a given for most theories of the composition of 1 Peter. Cf. my brief survey in Authority. 6–9.Google Scholar

⁷ Cf. Metzger, B. M., A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament (London: United Bible Societies, 1975) xxiv, xxviii.Google Scholar

⁸ Funk, R. W., Scott, B. B., Butts, J. R., The Parables of Jesus: Redletter Edition (Sonoma, CA: Polebridge Press, 1988).Google Scholar

⁹ Walker, W. O. Jr, ‘Text-Critical Evidence for Interpolation in the Letters of Paul’, CBQ 50 (1988) 622–31, 624–5.Google Scholar

¹⁰ Cf. e.g. Fiorenza, E. S., Women in the Pre-Pauline and Pauline Churches', USQR 33 (1978) 153–66, pp. 153–4;Google ScholarIn Memory of Her: A Feminist Theological Reconstruction of Christian Origins (New York: Crossroads, 1983) 10, 14–15.Google Scholar

¹¹ Walker, W. O., ‘1 Corinthians and Paul's Views regarding Women’, JBL 94 (1975) 94–110;Google Scholar ‘Text-Critical Evidence’, 625.

¹² Fortna, Gospel, 15–22.Google Scholar

¹³ Munro, Authority, 24.Google Scholar

¹⁴ Cf. Munro, Authority, 131–47; Walker, W. O. Jr, ‘Evidences of Interpolation in the Pauline Corpus’, unpublished paper.Google Scholar

¹⁵ Walker, ‘Burden of Proof’, 612.Google Scholar

¹⁶ Munro, Authority, 23.Google Scholar

¹⁷ Munro, Authority, 140.Google Scholar

¹⁸ Barnikol, E., ‘Der nichtpaulinische Ursprung der absoluten Obrigheitsbejahung von Romer 13.1–7’, SNTP 77 (1961) 65–133;Google Scholar Munro, Authority, 18, 140.

¹⁹ Munro, Authority, 140.Google Scholar

²⁰ Dijkman, J. H. L., ‘1 Peter: a Later Pastoral Stratum?’, NTS 33 (1987) 265–71CrossRefGoogle Scholar. Cf. my statement that ‘in shaping Christian tradition according to this model the codes of subordination were evidently intended to parallel Stoic categories of duties just as was the somewhat similar teaching in the writings of hellenistic Judaism. Just how ‘Pastoral’ paideia compares with Roman hellenistic and Jewish precedents, and how each paideia relates to t e social patterns of authority and subjection of the patriarchal household cannot be shown here but is set out in the longer, original version of this study. Though hellenistic Judaism is evidently taken as an example to be followed, the Pastoral material is concerned to achieve dissociation from Judaism…’ among other objectives (Authority, 2); cf. Munro, W., Authority and Subjection in Early Christian ‘Paideia’ with particular reference to the Pauline Corpus and 1 Peter (Columbia University Ed.D. 1974; Ann Arbor, Michigan: University Microfilms) 370–506.Google Scholar Dijkman also errs in saying I ‘totally ignore’ connections with James (cf. Authority 47–8), and automatically assume it is late (268). I do not in fact pronounce on the date of James. Significantly, Dijkman acknowledges the anti- Judaism of the Pastorals, but tries to except 1 Peter (267). It would not have been credible to repudiate Judaism directly in a letter purporting to be from an acknowledged apostle to the Jews (Gal 2. 7), but there is certainly dissociation from any rejection of, or revolt against the Roman imperial system, such as was perceived to characterize the Jews in the first two centuries CE.

²¹ Fiorenza, E. S., Memory, 230.Google Scholar

²² Munro, W., ‘Women, Text, and Canon: The Strange Case of 1 Corinthians 14.33–35’, BTB 18 (1988) 26–31, p. 29.Google Scholar

²³ Fiorenza, E. S., ‘Rhetorical Situation and Historical Reconstruction in 1 Corinthians’, NTS 33 (1987) 386–403, p. 395.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

²⁴ Dijkman, , ‘1 Peter’, 266; Munro, Authority, 37.Google Scholar

²⁵ Metzger, Textual Commentary xxii; Walker, ‘Burden of Proof’, 612.Google Scholar

²⁶ Canon, C. G., The Use of Traditional Materials in Colossians (Macon, GA: Mercer, 1983) 110 n. 24.Google Scholar

²⁷ Cf. e.g. Crouch, J. E., The Origin and Intention of the Colossian Haustafel (FRLANT 109; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 1972) 10–11, 144, 149–51.Google Scholar

²⁸ Walker, ‘Text-Critical Evidence’, 630.Google Scholar

²⁹ Metzger, Textual Commentary, 126.Google Scholar

³⁰ Metzger, Textual Commentary xxiv, xxviii.Google Scholar

³¹ Munro, Authority, 24–5.Google Scholar

³² Walker, ‘Text-Critical Evidence’ 626.Google Scholar

³³ Kümmel, W. G., Feine, P., Behm, J., Introduction to the New Testament tr. 14th ed. (New York: Abingdon, 1966) 222–4.Google Scholar

³⁴ Munro, Authority, 24–5.Google Scholar

³⁵ Metzger, Textual Commentary, 533–6, 540.Google Scholar