First Epistle of Peter 509 



Against the argument that the longer form in I Peter is a proof 

 of its priority may be advanced the general consensus of even con- 

 servative opinion regarding the alleged dependence of Romans 

 and Ephesians on I Peter. Cf. Sanday's Com. on Rom. p. Ixxvf. 

 ]\Iany of the " illustrations of I Peter," no doubt, were originally 

 from the 0. T., but they do not appear to have been dragged in 

 unnaturally. They have been called out by a concrete situation, 

 whereas the passage in James is lacking not only in local coloring 

 but also in clearness of purpose. The phrase alluded to above may 

 be " a softening down of James' harder expression," but as a matter 

 of fact the tendency was towards an increase in the fanaticism for 

 suffering as we approach the second Century. Cf. Acts 5 ; 41 

 and the Epistle of Ignatius to the Romans. 



Again, in I Peter, the successful endurance of the present trial 

 has an important bearing on the condition of the Christians at the 

 imminent " parousia," a most vital and burning issue, whereas in 

 James it is advanced merely as a motive for " patience." Jas. 

 1 ; 2 has nothing to recommend its priority in this context. On the 

 other hand I Pt. 1 ; 6 is the continuation of a line of thought begun 

 in the preceding verses, i. e., (3) God has begotten the believers 

 to a lively hope (4) of an inheritance reserved for those (5) who are 

 kept through faith unto salvation, (6) in which thought they may 

 find comfort in the present persecutions (7) which will turn out to 

 their good in the approaching parousia. 



In view of the foregoing considerations the position of Mayor 

 and Monnier seems untenable. The probabilities are in favor of 

 the dependence of James on I Peter, at this point. 



I Pt. 1 ; 23 Jas. 1 ; 18 



The " birth " here is accomplished " by the word of God," or 

 " of truth." Mayor thinks that ; " I Peter expanded the simpler 

 thought of James " (p. xcvi), to which Monnier adds : " d'une 

 fa^on oratorie" (p. 269). Yet the avaysYswYiijivoi of 1 ; 23 refers 

 back to the avaYswr^o-ai; of i ; 3 which shows close sequence of 

 thought. Some have felt a difficulty here in finding a logical 

 connection of Jas. 1 ; 18 to its context. (See note on Ex. 11.) 

 'Atoxusw is peculiar to James, being found only in 1 ; 15, 18, while 

 avocYsvvato occurs only in I Pt. 1 ; 3, 23. The closeness of thought 

 and phraseology make dependence probable. The priority seems 

 also to belong to I Peter. 



