(44) I Pt. 2 ; 17 Rom. 12 ; 10 a 



t:y]v aB£}.(p6TrjTa ayaT^oc" tt] cpt,}.aB£X(pia £?? a}.}vT^>.oy? cpt>.6- 



o-Topyoi 



Close parallels both in form and meaning, yet our author reverses 

 the order. 



(45) I Pt. 2 ; 17 Rom. 13 ; 7 



TOV 0£6v (po[3ET(78-£, TOV ^iXGlkicC ax6B0T£ 'TO) TOV <p6(30V TOV (p6|3ov • 



(46) I Pt. 2; 18, 19 Rom. 13; 5 

 67roirao-o-6[j.£voi ... 19 Bia o-'jv£tBr,- Bio avayxY] uTwOTOcTo-Ea-O-ai ou [;.6vov 

 Tiv 0£oD UTCocpspEi Tii? X'JTTac 'Tzm- Bia TYjv opyYjv, a}.la /.at Bia tyjv 

 )^wv aBtxw^ (7'jv£tBrj'7t,v 



The last two parallels should be considered together. The form 

 is similar, but the background is different. Dependence may read- 

 ily be inferred from these passages. 



(47) I Pt. 3; 18 Rom. 8; 11 



^woTcoiYjQ'Eii; Be xvEO^j-aTi zb IIv£3[j.a toO £y£ipav-o? Trj(70t3v 



£K V£Xp(OV 



This entire verse is thoroughly akin to the Pauline teaching on 

 the subject. The suffering of Christ for sins accords with " gave 

 himself for our sins " (Gal. 1 ; 4) and " died for our sins " (I Cor. 15 ; 

 3). It is significant also that the well known Pauline antithesis 

 of the crdcp^ and 7:v£D[j.a appears here. (Cone Com. p. 214.) 



(48) I Pt. 3 ; 21 Rom. 4 ; 25, 10 ; 9 



Bi' avao-i:aa-£OK 'Itj(7o3 XpiTTOu r^yipb'r^ Bia tyjv BixatwOTv yj^.wv. 



xicTTEUGT]? sv -zr\ xapBia <70u oxi 6 



BeO? aUTOV Tjy£I,p£V £X V£Xp(OV, 



It was noted in the parallel I Pt. 1 ; 21 = Rom. 4 ; 24 that these 

 authors saw in the resurrection of Jesus, a special power or proof 

 which would beget faith, which in turn would lead to justification, 

 hence " salvation." Our author parallels Paul's whole train of 

 reasoning with the simple phrase Bi' ixvocgzugzok. apparently im- 

 plying what Paul explicitl}^ states. 



