First Epistle of Peter. 501 



(2) I Ft. 1 ; 13 Lk. 12 ; 35 



Btavoia; 'jj^-wv [jivai 



Certainly this parallel, cited by Holtzmann and Plumtre, need not 

 detain us. The phrase is not of the sort that suggests dependence 

 Furthermore, a closer resemblance to our Epistle here is to be found 

 in Paul. Cf. Eph. 6 ; 14, which uses the common phrase in a tropical 

 sense more in accord with I Pt. 1 ; 18 than with Lk. 12 ; 35. 



(3) I Pt. 1 ; 13 b Lk. 17 ; 30 



sv azoy.y.7:j'bzi '\T^'JoZ Xpio-xoo 6 uio? tou avQ-pwTiou aTTOxaXuTtTre-^ai 



The a.%o'/i(x.l'j'\ti(; of Christ is too common in the Pauline Epistles to 

 make it necessary for us to suppose that there is any literary con- 

 nection here. Cf. II Thes. 1 ; 7, I Cor. 1 ; 7, I Thes. 4 ; 16, etc. 



(4) I Pt. 2 ; 12 Lk. 10 ; 44 



sv Tipipa Irdcy^o-^zTtC tov xaipov -y)? lizKyy-o-r^c 



That the word smcrxoTiYi is used in this sense only in these two 

 places in all the N. T. seems quite significant. It would not be 

 wise, however, to place too much stress upon this usage, which is 

 probably accidental. 



(5) I Pt. 2 ; 23, 4 ; 19 Lk. 23 ; 46 

 ;:ao£BiBou Bs tco xpivovT!, Bixaiw? riairsp, si? XsTpa? (you T.oc^cczib-z- 



4 ; 19 TdGzo) -/vTto-rri xapaTiO-so-Q-o)- [j.m x6 7iV£tJ[j.a \)Sjo 

 rrav -zdc, '\iu/6(.c . . . 



Though ::apaTiQ'Yi[J.i is a common word in the N. T., it is em- 

 ployed just in this way but rarely. I Peter uses xapaBiBo)ij,i and 

 7:apaTi&-rj[j.t interchangeably, consequently this resemblance has but 

 little value as a datum for literary dependence. For similar usage 

 of TTapaTtG-r^p see Acts 14 ; 23, 20 ; 32. Cf. also Acts 7 ; 59 for 

 similar idea. 



(6) I Pt. 4 ; 5 Lk. 16 ; 2 



01 a7coBo)C70U(nv loyov Toi . . . xpiv- a%oboc ~w J^oyov -zr^i okovo[j.ia; 



OVTl . . . (jOU 



Cf. Mt. 12 ; 36, 22 ; 21, Mk. 4 ; 20, Acts 19 ; 40, etc. 



