youssra
Get Complete Project Material File(s) Now! »
CHAPTER 2 THE AUTHENTICITY PROBLEM OF 1 PETER
Peter in the Ancient Church
In respect of a discussion of the authenticity of 1 Peter, it is significant that there was no noteworthy doubt as regards its Petrine authorship before the nineteenth century, except for the fact that Muratorian Fragment did not contain it at the end of second century.1 There seem to be some parallels between 1 Peter and Clement of Rome’s Epistle to the Corinthians.
2 Similarly, Polycarp3 seems to cite 1 Peter in his Letter to the Philippians, although he does not mention his source.
Irenaeus4 adduced it as a Petrine epistle in the second century and shortly after it was attested as Petrine by Tertullian5
and Clement of Alexandria.6 Subsequently it was confidently deemed as Scripture in the early church until the nineteenth century.7 As such, doubt of the authenticity of 1 Peter is a modern tendency.
Critical Questions about the Authenticity of 1 Peter
The authorship of 1 Peter has been a longstanding point of debate. After Cludius (1808) raised doubts about the genuineness of 1 Peter8 , this view was followed by Holtzmann, Streeter, Jülicher, Fascher, Scott, Goodspeed, Beare, Best, Kümmel, Elliott, Goppelt, Conzelmann, Lindemann, Schutter, Achtemeier, Ehrman,
Horrell, Schnelle, and Senior. 9 This line of criticism among modern scholars especially focuses on the linguistic and historical problems of 1 Peter, drawing attention to the practice of pseudonymity in the Greco-Roman world.
The Linguistic Problem
In 1947, a commentary on The First Epistle of Peter was published by Beare. This is seen as a major landmark in the history of the criticism of 1 Peter. As noted in the preface by the author himself, this work is the first English commentary that upholds that 1 Peter is pseudonymous.10 Most of all, it is generally accepted that the author of 1 Peter uses excellent Greek including an elegant style and frequently quotes the Old Testament (LXX).11 However, Acts 4:13 describes the Apostle Peter as an illiterate and ordinary (avgra,mmatoi, kai. ivdiw/tai) person. On this point, Beare contends that “it would be a most unusual feat for him, ‘unlearned and ignorant’ as he was (Acts 4: 13), subsequently to become so versed in the Greek Old Testament as the author of our Epistle.”12 Beare goes on to argue that “he [the author of 1 Peter] writes some of the best Greek in the whole New Testament, far smoother and more literary than that of the highly-trained Paul. This is a feat plainly far beyond the powers of a Galilean fisherman, but that he [the Apostle Peter] should ever become a master of Greek prose is simply unthinkable.”13 Later, this line of criticism was supported by Best14 and Achtemeier.15 While pointing to the use of sixty two hapax legomena, unnoted Semiticisms, and considerable rhetorical characteristics in 1 Peter, Achtemeier deals with this issue in detail and concludes that 1 Peter is a “care of composition.”16 However, Achtemeier’s view seems to be balanced, noting that “the quality of its Greek ought nevertheless not [to] be exaggerated.”17 While acknowledging that the author of 1 Peter employs “a limited range of rhetorical conventions,” Kelly identifies 1 Peter’s style as “unimaginative,monotonous and at times clumsy,” and asserts that “its style certainly does not
deserve the extravagant eulogies it has received.”
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
SUMMARY
KEY WORDS
LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS
Chapter 1 INTRODUCTION
1. Problem Statement
2. Research History
3. Hypothesis and Methodology
Chapter 2 THE AUTHENTICITY PROBLEM OF 1 PETER
1. 1 Peter in the Ancient Church
2. Critical Questions about the Authenticity of 1 Peter
2.1. The Linguistic Problem
2.2. The Historical Problem
2.3. The Practice of Pseudonymity
3. Prevalent Proposals on Authenticity of 1 Peter
3.1. Pseudonymous Theory
3.2. Amanuensis Theory
4. Conclusion
Chapter 3 FIRST-CENTURY LETTER WRITING
1. Writing and Letters in the Greco-Roman World
2. The Practice of Using an Amanuensis
2.1. Official (Business) Letters
2.2. Private Letters
3. The Role of an Amanuensis
3.1. The Reasons for Using Amanuenses
3.2. Amanuensis as a Transcriber
3.3. Amanuensis as a Composer
3.4. Amanuensis as a Contributor
3.5. Liability for the Contents
4. Conclusion
Chapter 4 PAUL AND PETER: FIRST-CENTURY LETTER WRITERS
1. Paul’s Letters and his Co-authors
2. Paul’s Use of Amanuenses and their Role
2.1. Paul’s Use of Amanuenses
2.1.1. Plain Proof
2.1.2. Implied Pointers
2.2. An Amanuensis’ role in Paul’s Letter Writing
3. 1 Peter’s Amanuensis: Why Not Silvanus But Mark?
3.1. Identifying gra,fw dia, tinoj in the Ancient Letters
3.2. Identifying Dia. Silouanou/ . . . e;graya in 1 Pet 5:12
4. Conclusion
Chapter 5 HISTORICAL IMPLICATIONS
1. Mark in Acts
2. Mark in the Pauline Letters
2.1. Mark in Colossians and Philemon
2.1.1. Mark in Col 4:10-11
2.1.2. Mark in Phlm 24
2.2. Mark in 2 Timothy
3. Mark in 1 Peter
3.1. Peter in Rome
3.3. Petrine Group in Rome
4. Mark: Peter’s e`rmhneuth,j a n d t h e E v a n g e l i s t
4.1. Mark as the Interpreter of Peter
4.2. Mark as the Evangelist
5. Conclusion
Chapter 6 LINGUISTIC IMPLICATIONS
1. The Syntax of 1 Peter and Mark’s Gospel
2. The Characteristic Features of Terminology
3 . T h e S i g n i f i c a n t a n d F r e q u e n t U s e o f w ` j
3.1. The Characteristic Use of w`j i n M a r k ’ s G o s p e l
3.2. The Characteristic Use of w`j in 1 Peter
4. Conclusion
Chapter 7 LITERARY IMPLICATIONS
1. The Use of the OT in 1 Peter and Mark’s Gospel
2. The Quotation of Ps 118 (LXX 117):22
2.1. The Quotation of Ps 118 (LXX 117):22 in 1 Pet 2:7
2.1.1. The Relation between Ps 118 (LXX 117):22 and the Two Texts of Isaiah
2.1.2. The Function of the Quotation of Ps 118 (LXX 117):22 in 1 Pet 2:7
2.2. The Quotation of Ps 118 (LXX 117):22 in Mark 12:10
3. The Quotation of and Allusion to the Suffering Servant of Isa 53
3.1. The Suffering Servant in 1 Pet 2:22-25a
3.2. The Suffering Servant in Mark 10:45
4. The Allusion to Ezek 34: the Messianic Shepherd
/ Sheep without a Shepherd
4.1. The Combination of Isa 53 with Ezek 34 in 1 Pet 2:25
4.2. The Allusion to Ezek 34 in Mark 6:34
5. The Quotation of and Allusion to Isa 40:8
5.1. The Quotation of Isa 40: 8 in 1 Pet 1:25
5.2. The Conflated Allusion to Isa 51:6 (Ps 101:27a, LXX) and Isa 40: 8 in Mark 13:31
6. Conclusion
Chapter 8 CONCLUSION
BIBLIOGRAPHY
GET THE COMPLETE PROJECT
MARK AS CONTRIBUTIVE AMANUENSIS OF 1 PETER? AN INQUIRY INTO MARK’S INVOLVEMENT IN LIGHT OF FIRST-CENTURY LETTER WRITING
