Hostname: page-component-7b7567c8c-2n9c9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-15T23:19:35.829Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Nature and Purpose of I Peter

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  05 February 2009

C. F. D. Moule
C. F. D. Moule
Affiliation:
Cambridge
Get accessRights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

This article springs in part from a critical consideration of Professor F. L. Cross's I Peter, a Paschal Liturgy (Mowbray, 1954), and is an attempt, first, to define difficulties which seem to me to stand in the way of accepting his thesis, and then to offer an alternative suggestion. But first of all, I must express my gratitude to Dr Cross for the stimulus of his lecture and my admiration for the skill and brilliance with which he handles the material. My only hope is that my own attempts at a solution of the problem of I Peter are advanced with anything like as much modesty as his: for I have no doubt that they will need the more clemency.

Information

Type
Articles
Information
New Testament Studies , Volume 3 , Issue 1 , November 1956, pp. 1 - 11
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1956

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Page 2 note 1 See Carrington, , The Primitive Christian Catechism (1940), and Selwyn's commentary; and a useful summary of the position in Bo Reicke, ‘The Disobedient Spirits and Christian Baptism’, Acta Sem. Neot. Upsal. xiii (1946), p. 229. But see also the serious difficulties in the way of this argument regarding I Peter exposed by C. L. Mitton, ‘The Relationship between I Peter and Ephesians’ (J.T.S. n.s. I, i (1950), pp. 67 ff.). He argues for the dependence of I Peter on Ephesians. Yet, are his examples conclusive?Google Scholar

Page 2 note 2 But, as Knox, W. L. pointed out (reviewing Selwyn in Theology, vol. 49 (1946), p. 343), if Silvanus drafted the Thessalonian Epistles, it is hard to believe that he was up to the style of I Peter.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Page 2 note 3 The Primitive Church (Macmillan, 1929).

Page 5 note 1 Miss Guilding has a very interesting suggestion to make about I Peter in relation to Psalms and lections: but I will not spoil her story by telling it prematurely. It does not substantially alter mine.

Page 7 note 1 A partial parallel is to be found in the Epistle to the Romans, if (as T. W. Manson argued in B.J.R.L. xxxi, ii (Nov. 1948)) it was used both for Rome and, with ch. xvi added, for Ephesus.

Page 8 note 1 J.B.L. Ixxii, iii (1953).

Page 8 note 2 In v. 34 the need only be those imprisoned by Jewish authorities (Acts, v. 18).

Page 9 note 1 See Bo, Reicke, op. cit. p. 226.Google Scholar

Page 9 note 2 Mr H. Chadwick remarks that there is plenty of evidence that, after A.D. 64, the Christians were liable at any time to be arrested; but that whether this happened or not depended on the whim of the Governor. E.g. Origen, In Matt. Comm. Ser. 120, discusses whether a pagan Governor who exercises his discretion so as to protect the Church will be rewarded by admission to heaven.

Page 11 note 1 Unless I Peter is demonstrably dependent on Ephesians: see C. L. Mitton in J.T.S. I, i cited above.