bring to oar thouglat,,i Luko xji. 42. In vor1. 11, lZ, 14 of the same d,aptm• we ag11lo ice three allraLCJDJI t.> the Lord'• great ,ernu,n (<'.mnp. Matt. v. lli, 12, 10) J while in vn. 19, wl1ero tlie apr,,,tJe bid• the 1affering CJJJ';11ti.an11 to commit (1ra.patr,IJur01MTa.J1) the keeping of theu IOUI, to Ood, we w:m tt, hear tu 8avlour'1 d7ing wordJI, "If..tlin, fou, thy handa I com1111md (1ra.pa.- -,/8,p.a,1,) my •priit.'' When in eh. v. 2 St. Peter 111'ged the fl1'1»bythl t.o "Iced the Sack of God," lie mu11t ha•o hBd in hi• thought.a the 111,wmn word• addrouf!d to laim1141Jf h7 tl1c nll'm Lc,rd (John xxi. 16). v,~. 3 of tbo 1amo chapter, "neither u being lord• over God'• heritage," re-mind• u, ol :Matt. u. 2L. .And in von. 7, 8, 9 we 1eem tt> .ec nminw..eneea of the IOfflWJl on the mount (eomp. Matt. vi. 21,, 28 ; v. 21,; aad vii. 2~), 'rhe,,e and othertimilarcoincidoacet with the Lord'• word11 u report,,A i11 the G01p811 are ,o 1imple aud aaa«ect.d, th411 Mem to c;)Dle 10 nat.a~lly to the writ.er'• thought., that we an led at ~ to infer that tha.t writer ma1t ho one who, like St. John, could declare to othen that which be bad heard, which he had •een with hi• eye,. Some of them point in an e.pecial mannor to the Apo1tle St. Peter a, tbo writer of the Jlpi,tl& • Tb-, argumwt ii ,tron,f;hencd by tbo rC#OIDbJanco, which nitt bet"eea the l&nguaf!e and teaching of the Eputle and thu f1Pceclwt of St. Peter recordetl in tbe AetA ol the .Apo1tlet. The flnt of thote 1pooohM bcgiu with a n:forenCll t.J proph«l1 (Act, i. 16) ; the great Penteco.tal NrmOD fa Act. ii. iJJ fall of prophee1; ,o ia the ,peeeh in Sowmon'• porch, reported io A.ctM ili. ; il1 .A.et.I x. 43 St. Peter apin refenl to tho witMff of the prophet.. Thja oouatant appeal to pt'Opbecy coma natmrally from tlu, mouth of the &pt)lltlo .- t,,,<J~ ht_)
the view of Old 'Jfntamnt Jn'opbecr which we hue in ob. i. 10-12 c,f aar Bpf.t1e. ln vcr. 17 of the amo chapter St. Peter wuu hi. rt:1Mkn LL.at. God jadgotb accordiog to ovar, man'• work without rupect. of ptinrJm; 1M, had al.d long before, when bo recoincl OoruHu the con.t.11riue1 i.n.w the Obriltlan Cburcla, "Of a tntb I poroeive that Goel ia no rt11peetff of penon," (.A.et.a x. 84). In ver. 20 tho won!" foreknown., (r,-tt-,w-J rUOBlhl tho oirproulon uocl by St. Poter on the ,rrn, Da1 of Peat«-.,in, " 'fho dotormlnato coun,u,I and fOl'oknowledgo (•poyt'tW") of God" (Aci. ii. ZJ). And jn tbo Ja.ttor parl of tbo umo •ono tho wordla, "In th-, lut timcaa,'' romlr1d u c,f II tho ltu1t d111•," St. Pater'• nriation of lbo Prophet J Jo1:I'• word11, fn .Aat, fl. 17. la vor11. 8, 21, u alllO in oh. iH. 21, 81. Poter dwell.a on the J•c11urrootloa of Ohri.it III lie lwl dt.111P in h~ 1poocba (A.cbl ii. S:!-:h.i; Ill, lti I Iv, 10). In oh. H. ,t, ho quoti!II P11. cnlii.; ho had uaod tho 11&m , 11uotu.tlon In lit, 1p11C1oh baforo tho Sllnhodna (Act. 1..-. 11~ Tho wol"'h, "w)wrounto al110 th07 woro "ppointvd." of eh. Ii. 8 nmind u• 11omewhal ,,f .Aot. i. 10. Tho prooapL, "Honour all mvn," of oh. IL 17, l\acb a pivalld in Aot, •• 28, '!'ha 1nmowlu1,L nnoommon word a111o.\.J1, U.1141(1 in eh. ii. 1!'.!, uuoun a.l,10 In fH. Potor'• llpOCK!h (Act11 II. 40). Jn th1111amo ch11pl« (Ycrr, 24) SL. t•utctr 1111ua.k• of U111 urri1111 M lho Lrua ( ,-a\ t~>.,,.,) 1 110 ha..l """" u, in two of lal11 11p11uc,lu111 (Atlt1 v. llO 1 •· ::10). Ob. W. II'!, w!J111·11 h11 iMi11t.a ,111 th,i rl11Moou1mu111 or CJhri.t, l,rlng11 to our lho111ht.11 h11 wordit in Acc.. W. U. In lv INTRODUCTION TO
eh. iY. 5 the words, "to judge the quick and the dead," remind us of Acts x:. 42. In eh. '""· 1 he describes himself as a witness of the life and death of Christ, as he had done in Acts iii. 15 and x. 4,1. He uses the word KAijpo~ in eh. v. 3 and ahio in Acts i. 17; viii. 21. The words" exhorting and testify- ing," in eh.,. 12, remind us of the description of St. Peter's addresses in Acts ii. 40. St. Peter described the Law as a yoke " which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear" (Acts xv. 10) ; we notice that he never mentions the Law in his Epistles. There is also a general resemblance in style between the speeches and the Epistles. St. Peter's style is such as we might expect, full of vivacity, testifying to a strong character, warm affections, and a deep assured conviction. But in the Epistle the original impetuosity and self-confidence of the apostle is seen softened by years, by the lessons of experience, by sustained effort to follow the example of the Saviour whom he loved so dearly, by the gracious help of the Holy Spirit, given, as it always is given, in answer to faithful prnyer. He speaks with the authority of an apostle, but with the gentle- ness of one who knew the power of temptation and the difficulty of stead- fastness, with the humility of one who well remembered how he himself had fallen. His words are forcible, but simple; he has no trains of reasoning, nothing of the subtle logic of St. Paul, but goes straight to the point. On the other hand, his style is less sententious than that of St. Ja mes; hie sentences are connected by relatives or particles; iu particular the particle ~~ is of very common occurrence; the frequent use of the participle in an imperative sentence should also be noticed (see especiaIIy eh. ii. 18; iii. 1, 7, 9, 16; iv. 8). He has a few leading thoughts, which he enforces again and again with intense earnestness. His whole mind is evidently filled with recollections of the Old Testament; he uses its words con- stantly; often, it seems, almost unconsciously, without marks of quotation- he has by long study so assimilated the sacred words that t~ey have become the natural expression of his thoughts.
2. Ezternal Evidence. The external evidence for the authenticity of the Epistle is very strong. The Second Epistle is allowed, even by those who question its Petrine author- ship, to be a writing of the second century, and it bears witness to the First. Tbe earlieRt Christian writers were not accustomed to quote the books of the New Test::..ment by name, or to reproduce the words with exactness. Hence we do not expect to find formal quotations of our Epistle in the apostolic Fathers. But in Clement of Romo there are more than fifteen references to it; some c1ear and certain, such as " hie marvellous light; " others less marked. In Polycarp's' Epistle to the Philippians' (and Polycarp was bishop of one of the Churches addressed by St. Peter) there are so rnar.y undoubted quotations from this Epistle that the modern assailants of its authenticity have no resource but to attack (without any sufficient THE FIIlST EPISTLE GENERAL OF PETER. y