First Epistle of Peter. 463 



probable. Obviously neither author was influenced by the other to 

 any appreciable extent. {Cf. Holtzmann's Commentar zum N. T. 

 Ill, p. 110.) 



(1) I Pt. 1 ; 3 



6 xa-ra to -oXb auTOU slso? ava- xa^oc tov auTOU £>.£0v srrtocrsv -rjiJ-a? 



Titus refers to "salvation" per se, whereas I Peter alludes to a 

 " new birth," a new creation. 



^2) I Pt. 1 ; 7 Tit. 2 ; 13 



£v a-oxaA'j'i>£t 'Iyj(7oD XpiTToti sTCioavstav ty]? BoSyjc . . . 'IyictoO 



Xpi(7T0IJ 



This thought is too common to afford any evidence for dependence. 

 Cf. Col. 3 ; 4, II Tim. 4 ; 18, Heb. 9 ; 2, I Jn. 3 ; 2, etc. 



^3) I Pt. 1 ; 20 Tit. 1 ; 2, 3 



::po£YvcoaiX£vou [j.ev ::p6 xaTa[3o'X-^? ry iTir^yytilu^o 6 (X^euBtj? ©eo? 



xorrij.o'j, cpav£p(o8-£VTO<; §£ £7i' £-7- ::p6 xpovcov a'wovitov, scpav£po)cr£ Bs; 



vaTcov Twv yoovwv xatpoT? iBCoi? tov ■Xoyov auxoO 



The phrasing is closer than the thought of the passage. 



(4) IPt. 2; 9 Tit. 2; 14 

 laor £1? ::£0'.-oiTj<7iv )^!XOV ;:£p!,0U(jiv . . . 



Our author probably borrowed T.z^iT-Mr^Giy from the LXX. Cf. 

 Exod. 19; 5. 



(5) IPt. 2; 12 Tit. 2; 8 



Try avacTTpooYiv b\).o)y sv toT? lb-- loyov -jyi-^, axaTayvwcr-ov, lya 6 



V£<71V £/OVT£C Xa>.YlV, IVa £V 6) 11 IvaVTia? IvTpaTU^, [XYlBkv £XOiV 



xaTaXa^^oucTiv !J[j.wv w? xaxoTcoiwv 7C£p\ u[j.(Sv T^EyEiv cpaOXcv 2 ; 7 

 £x TO)v xalwv £pY(.)v, £7C07CT£UOv-£C CTEOcuTOv 7uap£x6[J.£vo? XU7C0V xalwv 



SocdCG-WG-t -rOV 0£OV, . 17 XpElTTOV £pY(OV . . . 



rap avaS-OTZotoDvTai; Cf. 3 ; 16 



This suggests dependence, yet our author more probably used 

 Rom. 12 ; 14, 17 here. Cf. also II Cor. 8 ; 21, Phil. 2 ; 15, etc. 



