To sum up: 1 P is, with the single exception of 1Jn, the only one among the Catholic Epistles ‘of whose authority was never any doubt in the Church.’ No sooner did a theological literature (properly so called) spring up in the Church than this Epistle is quoted by name as the work of St. Peter. In the earliest Christian literature outside
the NT (i.e. A.D. 90-190) it is second only to the Gospels and the Pauline Epistles in the extent of the influence which it exercised on the language and thoughts of writers widely separated from each other in place and in circumstances. The testi- mony which these writers bear to the Epistle is indirect, with one probable exception. here is good reason for thinking that Papias referred to it explicitly as the Epistle of St. Peter. The only natural interpretation of the facts—the early and wide influence of the Epistle on the one hand, on the other the consistent and unwavering attribu- tion of it to St. Peter on the part of all writers from Ireneus’ time onward—is that from the first it was regarded as the work of that apostle.
III. USE oF THE LXX, VocasuLary, LITERARY STYLE.—(i.) The thought and language of 1 P are deeply influenced by the OT, and the writer uses the OT in the LXX version. It is not possible to draw an absolute line between direct quotations and instances of mere appropriation of LXX language. In the former category the following passages may be conveniently classed—1" (Ly 115 19? 207), 1% (Ls 40%), 268 (Is 288, Ps 117 [118], Is 814), 2%. (Ts 43. Ex 19%: | 23" (of. Mal 3!7], Hos 16. δ. ΟἹ (8). 23 (28)), 922. 2. (Ts 539-12. 5), 310. (Ps 3334] 12%), 48 (Pr 10%), 418 (Pr 11%), 5° (Pr 3%). When these quotations are examined textually, it appears that (1) the writer quotes from memory, this conclusion being Beevers by the number of small variations and adaptations (see especially 3'-); (2) in one passage (2°) his reminiscence of the LXX is influ- enced by his remembrance of Ro 9; (3) there is some slight evidence for the conclusion that the LXX text familiar to him resembled that found in sAQ rather than that given by B (cf. von Soden, Hand-Comm. p. 113); see 2° (+ér’ αὐτῷ ; but the addition may be due to Ro 9%), 2" (εὑρέθη Sédos) ; but note, on the other hand, 3'* (-Ὁ ὅτι) ; (4) that in one passage (48) he either himself formulates, or (in view of Ja 5”) more probably adopts, a revised translation of the Hebrew.
Apart from quotations, however, the writer con- tinually weaves into his own language words and phrases which are (possibly unconscious) remini- scences of the LXX.
Most phrases of this kind are indicated by the use of uncial t ᾿Ξ H. To these may bene os it} ao es
«+. τὰς ὀσφύας , * J. Ex ra he fed me 83 (34)%, see Hort’s note), 24 Ἂς σώμωτι αὑτοῦ ie) τὸ ξύλον (Dt 5153), 315 τίς ὁ κακώσων (15 50%), 58 varur νον ὑπὸ τὴν χραταυὰν χώρα (Gn 169 and ἐὺ. Job ), λίων ὠρυόμενος (ε.0. Exk 5925). Moreover, the following words are probably derived from the LXX—érridines, γυναικῶφε, ἐπίλοινε, Ἡράτιυμα, κατακυρήνων, κατασίνων, πληρῶ, σαρώκια, TOTo, συρωσιί, ῥαντισμός, power, συντρίχων (ΡΒ 40 (50)!5). Again, not a few expressions ὦ that the writer of the Epistle was acquainted with some books of the Apocrypha—adugéerm (1 Mac twice, 4 Mac four times, in abstract sense), ἀϑίμωτος (2 Mac thrice, 8 Mac once), iiexeres ψνχῶν (ct. Wis 15 815), κείστης (Jth once, Sir once, 2 Mac thrice, 4 Mac twice), σρέγνωσις (Jth twice), ὑπογραμμός (2 Mac once). The three epithets ἄφδαρτεος, ἀμών arrec, ἀμάραντος (14) occur in Wisdom ; the combination is{erur x. ifspauray (119) in 1 Mac 935,
(ii.) A rough analysis of the vocabulary of the Epistle seems to reveal four main elements—(a) With one of these, that derived from the LXX, we have already dealt. (δ) There is the obvious Christian element, examples of which are φιλα- δελφία (φιλάδελφοτ), χάρισμα. It is er pipes to remember that, though St. Paul’s Epistles are the earliest evidence for the use of such words as these in a specifically Christian sense, it does not follow that their currency was due to him, or that a writer who so uses them is proved thereby to be a literary debtor to him. (c) There is a considerable number of words and expressions in the Epistle which do not occur elsewhere in the NT, and which may be briefly described as classical.*
* For Instances of verbal affinity with Philo see Salmoa, Introduction® p. 60651.
PETER, FIRST EPISTLE
They δτο--ἀναγχαστῶς (Plato), ἀνά χυσις (Philo, Plut., Strabo), drridedepsr (Leian., Plut.), ἀσίχισθα, ἐσιθυμωῶν (Plato), aweysr- i¢Gas (Herod.), arédsens (Plato, Arist. =‘ laying up’), Sieur (Hom.), ἐμαλοκή (Strabo), ἐπικάλυμμα (Menand.), οἰνοφλυγία (Xen., Arist. ; verb LXX twice), ὀμόφρων (Hom., Hes., Pind.), ὁσλίζων (Herod., Thuc.), ὁ σαρεληλνδὼς χρόνος, τατροταράδοτος (Dion H., Diod., | Inscriptions; cf. Deissmann, Neue Bibelstudien B; 94), σροθύμως
Herod., Aesch.); cf. also ἔννοια (Plato, Arist., Polyb.) also in } {ix He 413, ἐσηριάζων (Xen., Dem., Arist.) found also in Lk 6%.
(d) We notice in this Epistle a remarkable series of words for which there seems to be no earlier or contemporary authority—ddorpioerloxomos, ἀμαράν- Twos, ἀναγεννᾶν, ἀνεκλάλητος, ἀπροσωπολήμπτως, ἀρτι- γέννητος (found, however, in Lucian), ἀρχιποίμην