Authorship Of 1 Peter Essay Research Paper — страница 2

  • Просмотров 325
  • Скачиваний 10
  • Размер файла 15
    Кб

author but this source doubts it. The difference is style with 1 Peter expresses that they do not have the same authors. The author is unknown, but wrote in the spirit of Peter, condemning heresy. Rome is considered to have been the place of authorship. Since there is proof that 1 Peter was written in Rome, and due to the fact that 2 Peter is heavily influenced by it, then 2 Peter was also written in Rome. The influence that 1 Peter has on 2 Peter proves this. 2 Peter is also considered to have been written in the middle of the second century. A third source is The Interpreter’s Dictionary of the Bible. It expresses that the beginning of 1 Peter definitely shows that the author is Peter himself. Also, the author stating that he was an eyewitness to Jesus backs up the belief

that he is the author. There is no evidence why he wrote it. Only the belief that he did it to fortify the faith of who he was writing to could have been the explanation. There are arguments against Peter being the author. These come from claims that he only speaks of Jesus’ death and resurrection. The only explanation is that he is less concerned with his life, and more concerned with the fact that his death brought grace. This source states that there is no proof that can say Peter was not the author. If Peter is the author, then the date of the writings can fall around 64 or 67 C. E. This source also discusses the authorship of 2 Peter. The apostle Simon Peter is considered to have authorship. This is considered to be an unclear fact though. The purpose of 2 Peter is clearer

than the authorship. It is to go against the skepticism of the Parousia. It is considered to be written around the second century, long after the apostolic age. A fourth source is The Anchor Bible Series. This source discusses that the question of the author’s identity is raised in the text. Silvanus is questioned to be the author. He could be Peter’s secretary, his collaborator, or the true author. Paul is noted to be the author, but the mention of Silvanus in the text puts questions on this fact. The theological character of 1 Peter seems to have some of Silvanus’s touch in it. The language of 1 Peter also suggests this. The author has heavy influence of Pauline writings, and this shows that Peter might not be the author. For Peter to base a lot of 1 Peter on Pauline

writings would make him switch from his Jewish beliefs to a more Gentile Christianity. It could be possible but very doubtful. The language of 1 Peter is more toward a Greek style than that of a Galilean fisherman, which was what Peter was. This could possibly show that he must have collaborated with someone, which was Sivanus. 2 Peter’s author presents himself as the apostle Peter. This would be Simeon Peter. This source believes that it was a follower of Peter that wrote 2 Peter though. The author’s purpose seemed to have been to preserve the apostolic tradition. Also, 2 Peter does not have any personal information about Jesus, showing that he could not have been Peter. The language is portrayed as Hellenistic, and not of a Galilean fisherman. This shows that the author is

unknown. There is no other evidence that tells who the author could have been. The latest 2 Peter was written could have been 90 C. E. It is also believed that since the author wanted to have the identity of Peter, then the place of authorship was Rome. As noted above, there are different views on the authorship of 1 and 2 Peter. Some of the bible scholars contrast each other and others are agree upon certain facts. For 1 Peter there is very many questions as to who the author is. The evidence points mostly to Peter being the true author. Silvanus has also been considered to be the author. If the evidence is examined closely, he could have only been Peter’s scribe. Some say that he was the author, or either he helped Peter write the letter. The text has many different

influences that come from Peter though, so Silvanus might not have had anything to do with the writing of the letter. 2 Peter’s author will probably stay anonymous. Although Simeon Peter could have been the author there is strong evidence that he was not. It could have been someone who wanted to uphold the apostolic tradition, so this person wrote as Peter. The author only portrayed himself as Peter and was not actually Peter himself. Bible scholars will probably continue to study the authorship if 1 and 2 Peter. One day they might find hard evidence to who the author really was. Until then they can only use the text of the Bible to research the authorship. For 1 Peter, the authorship has more evidence showing Peter was the author. 2 Peter’s author could have been Peter but