Christian dating after 40

Rated 4.35/5 based on 563 customer reviews

In defense of Petrine authorship, a variety of indications have been cited taht are held to represent such reminiscences. Again, the reference to 'witness' in 5:1 is taken to mean Peter is calling himself an eyewitness to the passion of Jesus, a witness reflected supremely in -25.

For example, the alteration of first and second person in 1:3-9 is claimed to show that while the readers have not seen Jesus (v. The difficulty with finding assurances of the report of an eyewitness is that these verses are patently drawn from Isaiah 53, and hence may owe more to the author's demonstrable reliance on the OT, and even to a notion of the fulfillment of prophecy by Jesus, than to the reminiscences of an eyewitness." ( (fellow elder).

The apostle Peter probably knew some Greek, but 1 Peter does not look like the product of an unlettered (Acts ) Galilean fisherman.

It employs a sophisticated vocabulary incorporating several NT , and its author appears to have some command of the techniques of Hellenistic rhetoric.

Yet many distinctive elements of Pauline theology (e.g.

justification by faith) are entirely absent from 1 Peter, and even where characteristic Pauline expressions, such as 'in Christ' are employed, they are hardly used in a distinctively Pauline manner (see 1 Pet ).

Furthermore, if this were the case, then Peter would not be the real author of I Pet in any sense." ( 20, and the subscripts at the end of letters by Paul (in the Byzantine text tradition) confirm that the Greek is used of the carrier of the letter. While it may be impossible to disprove such an idea, Eric Eve writes: "One cannot save Petrine authorship by arguing that Peter employed a secretary.

Wayne Grudem adds: "Moreover, the fact that Peter calls Silvanus , argues strongly for Silvanus as the bearer (note Paul's similar commendation of the bearers of his lettersin 1 Cor. If one argues that this secretary was Silvanus, the travelling companion of Paul (e.g. Kmmel writes: "I Pet contains no evidence at all of familiarity with the earthly Jesus, his life, his teaching, and his death, but makes reference only in a general way to the 'sufferings' of Christ.

Peter's teaching cannot be systematized into a theological school of thought, but there is enough distinctiveness about it to differentiate it from Paul's approach.

Knowledge of any of these writings would point to a date later than the apostle Peter is meant to have perished, in the Neronian persecutation (c. Indeed, the thought and tenor of the epistle would seem to place it towards the end of the first century" ( assumes that Silvanus is the real author to whom Peter gave the responsibility for the actual writing.

Some think that they can prove that clearly common elements in language exist between I and II Thess, I Pet, and Acts , which indicates a common authorship by Silvanus. , no New Testament author ever explicitly mentions or commends an amanuensis elsewhere." ( Greek) was used in Palestine to facilitate trade and by speculating that the apostle made an extraordinary development in his Greek literary skills during his missionary career, without a formal education, citing John Bunyan (author of ). Achtemeier writes: "The type of Greek found in 1 Peter reveals that whether or not the author was born a Greek, he had enjoyed some level of formal education, if not an 'advanced' education in rhetoric or philosophy, at least a 'middle' education that would have included, along with geometry, arithmetic, and music, a reading of such classical authors as Homer. Michaels writes: "The notion that Peter had help in the composition of this letter does not stand or fall with the theory about Silvanus.

One who was a member of the original circle of the Twelve, an apostle, the one to whom the risen Jesus first appeared, need hardly have resorted to this title that appeared late in the development of early Christian ecclesiology." (, p. is by no means as self-evident as has been supposed.

400) Donald Guthrie writes: "That Peter would not describe himself as a fellow-elder . Quite apart from the fact that the term 'elder' seems to have been used as late as the time of Papias as a description of apostles, and therefore could not have been regarded in the primitive church as an inferior title, the context almost demands such a description for the exhortation of the elders to have its fullest effect.

Leave a Reply