1 De specialibus legibus, i. (de templo), §§ 67-70 (Cohn and Wendland, vol. v. pp, 17f.; ii. p. 223, Mangey).
community were selected to perform. In these and other ways the Jews of Palestine became acquainted with the Greek language and, so far as they engaged in religious discussion with their visitors or hosts of the Dispersion, with the Old Testament in Greek also. ‘The translation known as the Septuagint was still a triumphant achievement, through which the Jews of the Greek world were retained within the fold of Judaism and the Greeks outside were offered knowledge of the Law. And even when the Christian missionaries began to utilise in the interests of their own creed the laxities of the Septuagint, the non-Christian Jews produced the ‘Greek versions of Aquila Symmachus and Theodotion. In fact, so far as and as long as any sect of Judaism engaged in missionary enterprise knowledge of the Greek language and the Greek Bible was indispensable to its agents.
It is therefore entirely in keeping with the tradition that this document is the Epistle General of St. Peter, the Apostle of the ‘Circumcision, that it should be written in passable Greek and bear evident traces of familiarity with the Septuagint. In order to prove that Jesus was the deliverer for whom the prophets had looked, he was bound to appeal to the Scriptures, and to the Scriptures in that ‘version which was established as the Bible of the Greek Dispersion.
If in spite of these and other considerations it is felt that the ‘general style of the Epistle is too literary for one who had lived the life and done the work of St. Peter, there is still another line of defence for the traditional view. In other words, it is still possible to believe that the document as it stands gives a just and true account of its own origin. In the postscript! the author says, “J write (or I have written) to you, briefly by means of Silvanus the faithful brother, as I reckon him”’,
If the phrase I write by means of Silvanus may be taken to imply that Silvanus was not only the bearer of the Epistle but also the trusted secretary who wrote out in his own way St. Peter’s message, then all the difficulties derived from the style of the document and its use of Pauline ideas vanish at once. And in any case this mention -of Silvanus proves that St. Peter was closely associated with the sometime colleague of St. Paul, who had actually helped to preach the Gospel in Syria, Cilicia and Galatia.2, For there seems to be no reason for questioning the identification of the Silas of the Acts with the Silvanus of the Pauline Epistles and this Epistle.
The interpretation of the phrase διὰ Οιλουανοῦ is still in dispute. Professor Zahn* maintains the view that ‘‘Silvanus’ part in the
ly. τὸ. 2See Acts xv. 23, 40 f.; xvi. 1-8. 3 Introduction to the New Testament (English Translation, 1go9), vol. ii. p. 150.