390 



Ora Delmer Foster, 



TTOua). The first is found not only in I Pt. 4 ; 9 but also in I Tim. 3 ; 

 2 and Tit. 1 ; 8. The second occurs in I Pt. 3 ; 4, and in 

 I Tim. 2 ; 2, while riGuyfio^ is found in Acts 22 ; 2, II Thes. 3 ; 12 

 and I Tim. 2 ; 11, 12. The third is peculiar to I Peter, being 

 found only in 2 ; 17 and 5 ; 9. The exact form of the last is not 

 found in the N. T., but the allied form ayaO-oTcoio? is only in I Pt. 2 ; 

 14. The verbal form ayaO-OTcoiew is common in the N. T. 

 Cf. Mk. 3 ; 4, Lk. 6; 9, 33, 35, Acts 14; 17, and III Jn. 11. It 

 is indeed a favorite word of our author. Cf. I Pt. 2 ; 15, 20, 

 3: 6, 17. 



(7) 



Vis. Ill, 





I Pt. 2 ; 5 



7:v£U[xaTixo^ . . . 



This is indeed suggestive of our Epistle, especially as a develop- 

 ment of the figure. The figure however, is too common to guarantee 

 any degree of certainty for dependence. 



(8) 



Vis. IV, iii, 4 



I Pt. 1 ; 7 



wo-^ep yap zb jirpuaiov Boxip-aTs-ai -zb Boxi[j.iov 6[xwv ttj? mcxswi; %o- 

 Bia Tou xtjpo? . . . o'jToi; xat, }.uTi[j.6T£pov y^puGiou Toii ocTioXku- 

 6[xeTc Boxifj-a^ET'S-c [xsvou Bia xupo? Bs Boxi[j.aKo[jivou. 



Drummond can see no connection here with our Epistle. Bishop 

 Lightfoot is not sure. When taken alone we cannot lay any weight 

 on this parallel, though it is suggestive. 



^9) Sim. IX, xii, 2, 3 



6 jxsv ulbc, ToO ©sot) 

 TraoT]? xy](; xTiascoi; au- 

 Tou TCpoyEvso-Tspoi; la- 

 -IV . . . I;c Icr^aTcov 



TWV Y][JL£pwV T7](; (7UV- 



TsTvsia? cpavspoc sys- 



I Pt. 1 ; 20 



y^pKjTOO 7rpO£yV(0(7JJ.£- 



vou [j.£v xpo xai:a(3oX7]? 

 x6<7[X0!j cpavEpcoS-fvTO? 



/p6v(ov. 



Heb. 1 ; 2 



ETC icr/JX-Ol) Toiv Yj[X£- 



pSv. I Jn. 3 ; 5. 



£X£Tvoi; IcpavEpcoS-Y) 

 Col. 1 ; 15. 



TCpcOTOTOXOC 7:a'77]5 XTl- 

 G-£CO(;. 



These parallels, borrowed from Drummond, show close similarity 

 in thought and phraseology. Yet stress cannot be placed on 

 the likenesses, inasmuch as the same thought and forms of expression 



