494 Ora Delmer Foster, 



which have nothing else in common. Our author thinks of the ark 

 as a symbol of salvation by water baptism, whereas Q alludes to 

 the unconcern of Noah's contemporaries in view of the approaching 

 destruction as analogous to the conditions at the imminent parousia. 

 There is, therefore, no necessary connection between these passages. 



(6) I Pt. 4 ; 10 Mt. 24 ; 45 = Lk. 12 ; 42 



xaT£(jTY](7sv 6 xuptoi; sm v^? oixs- 

 Tsta? auToO tou Botivat, au-TroT(; 



TYjV TpO(pY]V £V Xatpw 



Clearly this parallel, cited by Dean Plumtre, does not show the 

 dependence of our Epistle upon " Q " to be any more probable than 

 upon Paul. Cf. I Cor. 4 ; 1, 2, Tit. 1 ; 7. 



(7) I Pt. 5; 6 Mt. 23; 12 = Lk. 14; 11 



TaTiSivojO-YiTS o5v UTUO TY]v xpa- "Oa^iq \}<hb)(yzi lauTOv TaTusivcoQ-Yio-s- 



Traiav /sTpa tou ©sou, iva ujxac Tai, xai odTt? TaTTsivojo-si lauTOv 



!j6o)(jr| £v xaipw 6'j*o)QTj(jSTai 



Chase, Holtzmann, Monnier and others have recorded this very 

 suggestive parallel. The citation in " Q " resembles the thought of 

 our Epistle at this point more than any other N. T. passage. But 

 that the Christian should be humble is a very common teaching in 

 the Pauline Epistles. Cf. Rom. 12 ; 16, II Cor. 7 ; 6, 10 ; 1, 11 ; 7, 

 12 ; 21, Eph. 4 ; 2, Phil. 2 ; 3, 8, 4 ; 12, Col. 2 ; 18, 23, 3. ; 12, etc. 

 II Cor. 11 ; 7 is a very close parallel to I Pt. 5 ; 6. This logion 

 pertains to social distinctions whereas, I Peter alludes to the Christi- 

 ans' resignation during the fiery ordeal of persecution, which is 

 viewed as a providential neans of exaltation. Consequently there is 

 not such a close resemblance here as at first appears. Hence it 

 cannot be asserted from this parallel that our author was acquainted 

 with " Q," nor that he remembered a saying that he had heard from 

 the lips of Jesus. 



(8) I Pt. 5; 8 Mt. 5; 25 = Lk. 12; 58 

 6 dcvTTtBtxo? irw aviriBtxfo 



Dean Plumtre gives this among other resemblances to show that 

 " one of the most dominant influences upon St. Peter was the per- 

 sonal teaching of our Lord." But it would seem that a single word 

 like this, occurring as it does in contexts differing so widely, could 

 no real evidential value. 



