The vast array of scriptural passages in the body middle of 1 Peter has required two chapters to do justice to each section. The following conclusions here cover both chapters.
Text and Intertextuality
The use of Isaiah is clear in several cases, but comparisons with the OG Vorlage are not decisive in each case. The allusion to Isa 10:3 in 1 Pet 2:12, differing from OG Isaiah through the omission of two articles, provides a striking example. The brevity of the allusion limits conclusions about the text form Peter used. Has this been cited from memory? Or has the language of scripture been subsumed in Petrine style? These questions assume at the outset that a difference exists, though, between the text read and the text used. So an additional question
123Stanley 1992, 50. The two patterns being: “(1) to bring a manuscript into closer conformity with a particular Hebrew Vorlage, or (2) to clarify or improve upon a rendering perceived to be especially awkward by later readers.”
124Clements 1980, 21; Sweeney 1988, 24. 125Sweeney 1996, 41.
must also be raised: has Peter consulted a text without articles? The absence of articles in the Hebrew version substantiates this possibility. In the end, to champion one source (authorial alteration) over the other (manuscript tradition) without sufficient textual evidence one way or the other is methodologically unsound. Must this allusion, then, be omitted from an investigation of Petrine hermeneutics because of these uncertainties? The answer, this study suggests, is that part of the picture of Petrine hermeneutics is a move toward more subtle employment of scripture at each stage of the letter, and thus to omit this passage would be a disservice.
The address to servants features quotations from Isaiah 53 in 1 Pet 2:22-25. Unlike the block quotes of Isa 40:6-8 in 1 Pet 1:24-25 or Ps 33:13-17 in 1 Pet 3:10-12, the use of Isaiah 53 is comprised of several smaller segments woven into the wider rhetorical unit. This example offers ample material for textual study but raises problems similar to the ones explored in connection with Isa 10:3. The salient differences between OG Isaiah and 1 Peter—apart from numerous truncations of the Isaianic text—are the use of a(marti/an in 1 Pet 2:22 instead of a)nomi/an in Isa 53:9 and the verb forms in 1 Pet 2:24-25 (i0a/qhte instead of i0a/qhmen in Isa 53:5 and
planw/menoi instead of e0planh/qhmen in Isa 53:6). Although there is ample text, the diminished explicitness throughout the rhetorical unit complicates an assessment of the text. Interestingly, the unit demonstrates in microcosm the general trajectory of the letter. The most explicit passage in 1 Pet 2:22 uses two full clauses from Isa 53:9 and is therefore largely recognizable. From here, the allusions are much shorter and at times spliced together. Beginning with this fuller quotation, the differences between the quotation and the Vorlage are minimal, with the inclusion of
a(marti/an being the only variant. With diminishing explicitness comes diminishing correspondence between the alluded text and its Vorlage.
The same holds true for the remaining sections of the body middle; the exception being the quotation of Ps 33:13-17 in 1 Pet 3:10-12, which stands out as the most explicit use of scripture in the body middle. There are several differences between the Greek Psalm and 1 Peter that are not easily reconciled. Stanley’s observation concerning “two basic patterns of revision” are certainly relevant to any account of these differences.123 However, it is quite another question
as to whether the revision occurs in the manuscript tradition or is due to the hand of the author. One of the features observed in the body opening of 1 Peter was the use of catchwords (gězērâ šāwâ). This was particularly prominent in 1 Pet 2:6-10 where the terms li/qoj and lao/j
served as organizing terms for the section. The same device occurs within the body middle and deserves further consideration. Among the results of recent scholarship on Isaiah is the
recognition that there is a thematic unity to the book.124 But what this thematic unity looks like
has been variously conceived. In general terms, the themes of judgment and restoration serve to frame the book of Isaiah on a large scale.125 Rendtorff probes further and suggests that some of
126Rendtorff 1985, 198–200; 1993, 150–164. 127Rendtorff 1993, 149.
128See, for instance, Sweeney 1996 on the use of torah in Isaiah, or Williamson 1998 on kingship in Isaiah. 129Sommer 1996, 156–186.
130Barton 1997, 72; Sheppard 1996, 271–274.
131Harrington 2000, 57; Hägglund 2008, 4. Also the suffering servant: Sawyer 1996, 33; Childs 2001, 422–423, inter alia.
132Davies 2000, 34–38. 133Watts 2009, 231–233. 134Watts 2009, 232.
135See the summaries in Wagner 2005, 129; 2006, 88–89.
136Goppelt 1993, 113, 242–243. Cf. H. Balz “fobe/w, fobe/omai, fo/boj, ktl.” TDNT 9:213–217.
Holy One of Israel, righteousness and justice.126 He writes, “The deliberate recapitulation of a
certain word or a certain phrase can be a ‘signal’ indicating that there is a connection between the texts in question—a connection to which the reader’s attention is to be drawn.”127 With the
somewhat recent exploration of the redactional unity of Isaiah, the exploration of thematic links within Isaiah has exploded.128 Sommer has correctly cautioned against anachronistically assuming
that our modern endeavor to find thematic links in Isaiah corresponds with how ancient readers approached Isaiah.129 However, the linkages in the text and between texts were certainly
recognized by ancient readers, as evinced by the practice of gezera shawa and the compilation of
florilegia or testimonia. Among the important themes to highlight as they relate to the present project are the themes of fear,130 suffering,131 and the ethics of good and evil.132
The relevance of these thematic connections in Isaiah has been noticed by scholars working on the use of Isaiah in the New Testament. Watts, for instance, suggests an Isaianic “narrative thread” that runs throughout the NT use of Isaiah.133 Such a coherent narrative leads
him away from the view that Isaianic quotations were “the product of isolated and near-sighted proof-texting.”134 Wagner’s work on the use of Isaiah in Romans is another example of how this
has been worked out.135
Similarly, Peter shows an awareness of both the thematic message of Isaiah and the contributing factor key terms play. The most prominent key term is the fo/boj/fobe/w set. In 2:17, the allusion to Prov 24:21 contains the phrase “fear the Lord” (to\n qeo\n fobei~sqe). The quotation of Isa 8:12-13 in 1 Pet 3:14-15 has both noun and verb forms: to\n de\ fo/bon au0tw~n mh\ fobhqh~te. Beyond these instances, the body middle has a high concentration of the key term set (2:17, 18; 3:2, 6, 14, 16).136 One peculiar use occurs in 3:6 where the term draws upon two
scriptural texts: Isa 54:4 and Prov 3:25. Other scriptural texts utilized in the body middle have been shown to contain the key term set in close proximity to the quoted text although the key term is not employed. These passages include Ps 33:13-17 in 1 Pet 3:10-12 where v. 12 contains the noun fo/boj in the Psalmist’s promise to teach the fear of the Lord, Isa 50:9 in 1 Pet 3:13 which is followed by the question, “Who among you fears (o9 fobou/menoj) the Lord?”, and the Noahic section of Isa 54:9-14—which stands behind the reference to Noah in 1 Pet
3:20—promises that his children shall not be afraid. Thus, the narrative of the restoration of divine presence dispels fear on a human level, but also insists upon fear as the proper response to the presence of God.
137Van Unnik 1954, 99–106; Green 1990, 278–289.
Another set of catchwords that deserves attention are those revolving around the verb
poie/w. It was shown how Ps 33:13-17 provides the language for the moral dualism at the basis of Peter’s ethics in the body middle. The terms kakopoie/w and a)gaqopoie/w repeated in 2:11, 15, 20; 3:6, 17 are drawn from Ps 33:15 quoted in 1 Pet 3:11. The use of poie/w in the quotation of Isa 53:9 in 1 Pet 2:22 significantly ties together the two passages, particularly regarding the way they both contribute to the ethical argument constructed around Christ’s example. Related to these is Isa 10:3 alluded to in 1 Pet 2:12 even though verb itself is not quoted. These three passages show how Peter’s ethics derive from his reading of scripture.137 Indeed, a constituent
part of the scriptural narrative is that in the midst of suffering, the servants of the Lord would remain righteous.
This use of key terms is significant for showing how Peter read scripture. A picture emerges concerning these catchwords. In some cases, linking terms bring together passages from Isaiah that are far flung (e.g., Isa 8:14 is linked with Isa 28:16 through the use of li/qoj and Isa 10:3 is linked to Isa 53:9 through the use of poie/w). The Psalter appears twice in the body opening and middle with Ps 117:22 linked with the stone passages of Isaiah in 1 Pet 2:6-8 and with Psalm 33 used twice (1 Pet 2:3 and 3:10-12). The book of Proverbs is also drawn upon through the use of allusion (1 Pet 3:6; 4:7). Apart from the quotation of the Levitical holiness formula (1 Pet 1:16), an allusion to Exo 19:6, and the appearance of Sarah in 3:6 and Noah in 3:20, very little from the Pentateuch is utilized. This limited number of scriptural books is perhaps due to limited availability. But what we can observe is that Isaiah is read both as self- interpretive and as interpreted alongside other texts. As will be explored further below, Peter draws these terms and themes into his argument about what the church is and how it is to act.
Explicitness without Markedness
The findings of the body middle permit a consideration of questions arising from the reader-centered approach. To what extent would the audience be able to perceive the scriptural discourse present throughout the section? In the body opening, 1 Pet 2:6-10 shifts away from the markedness observed in 1 Pet 1:16, 24 and 2:6. This shift continues in the body middle where sizeable portions of Isaiah are utilized without clear markers. This trajectory away from
markedness challenges the criteria of scholars championing the reader-centered approach. The flaw of this approach occurs not in its desire to understand the use of scripture in epistolary literature from the vantage point of the reader vis-a-vis the author but from an overly simplified view of the audience. The trajectory in 1 Peter points to an expectation that the audience will continue to comprehend the use of scripture without the aid of rhetorical markers. The dynamic between author and reader is more complex than the reader-centered approach has allowed to date.
However, the upshot of diminishing explicitness is a corresponding decline in
comprehensibility. If the audience is composed of readers/hearers of various levels of expertise, then with diminishing explicitness comes a loss of some portion of the audience’s ability to fully comprehend Peter’s use of scripture in every instance. This does not mean that less skilled
138The light hand evinced in the body middle and closing might be favorably compared to the brush technique of the Impressionists, whereas the more detailed citation practice in the body opening may be compared with the realism of, say, the Pre-Raphaelites.
hearers are sidelined or that the letter is intended for the more skilled section of the audience. Interestingly, at the same time that Peter decides to utilize a more subtle scriptural discourse, he also employs largely architectonic rhetorical devices such as the household code (2:18–3:9), creed (3:18) and vice list (4:3). So, the whole audience benefits from a rhetorically marked argument while skilled members of the audience benefit from the continued use of scriptural texts.
What I am arguing here is that the act of using scripture without markedness is as intentional as using scripture in otherwise explicit modes (e.g., introductory formulae). The quotations that are more marked occur at the outset of the letter. As the letter progresses, Peter adopts an approach that incorporates scripture more subtly than at the beginning. Peter is no obscurantist. Instead, having established the scriptural basis for his address to the churches of Asia Minor early in his letter, the scripturally informed argument proceeds not so much on the force of quotation, but through the evocation of a large-scale scriptural narrative to which the discrete scriptural texts refer.138
These observations reinforce the two points expressed at the conclusion to Chapter 3. Subtlety in the use of scripture requires scholars not to limit arbitrarily the field of study to only the most explicit instances of scriptural quotation—to do so unnecessarily decreases an already small sample. The decision to limit our study of epistolary use of scripture to the most explicit examples is based on the assumption that the most unskilled reader must be the arbiter of reader competence. The alternative is not to assume the audience contains monolithically proficient readers. Instead, one must account for varying abilities among the audience. Additionally, the presence of illiterate yet highly competent hearers means that assessments of competence cannot assume literacy as the only factor in our study of the audience. Limiting the data based on an inaccurate picture of the original audience leads to an inaccurate picture of the author’s
hermeneutics and exegetical practices. In the case of the body middle, the picture of Peter’s use of scripture would be severely stunted without the insights gained from his subtle use of scripture. In fact, the move to subtlety itself reveals much about his use of scripture and the assumptions he has about his audience.
Christology and Ecclessiology
The body middle of 1 Peter develops the connection between christology and
ecclesiology already present in the body opening. The household code provides structure to this in significant ways. The suffering servant of Isaiah 53 applies to the suffering of Christ and provides a theological framework for understanding the death of Christ. However, the foray into christology in 1 Pet 2:21-25 was not for christology’s sake. The framing rhetoric is cast in the language of example (u9pogrammo/j; 2:21) and placed within the servants’ section of the household code (2:18-25). Peter’s use of Isaiah 53 was sensitive to the servant-servants motif whereby the term “servant” in the singular runs throughout Isaiah 40–53 and shifts to the plural use of “servants” in Isaiah 54–66. The use of the phrase “servants of God” (qeou~ dou~loi) in
139Hays 1989, 121.
2:16 demonstrates this sensitivity. This observation has important implications for understanding Peter’s use of scripture and the contents of 1 Peter.
The complementary relationship between christology and ecclesiology derives from Peter’s reading of scripture.139 Isaiah provides a narrative that accounts for both the suffering of
Christ and the suffering of Christ’s followers. The body opening uses a similar device by employing a singular and plural reiteration of li/qoj and li/qoi. The divine election of the stone interpreted as Christ and the vocation of the people of God portrays the relationship between Christ and believers in structural terms. The connection of christology and ecclesiology
progresses into the body middle. Here, Peter accounts for suffering by employing the language of Isaiah 53–66 through the use of the servant-servants motif. Just as the suffering servant has suffering disciple servants in Isaiah 54–66, so the suffering Christ now has disciples who suffer. Isaiah 54 establishes the plural servants motif (Isa 54:17) by drawing upon two patriarchal figures: the barren woman (Isa 54:1-8) and Noah (Isa 54:9-14). These two patriarchal figures establish a pattern followed by Peter. The arrangement of the household code is peculiar when compared to the codes in Ephesians and Colossians. However, this peculiarity makes sense when the Isaianic pattern is understood. The suffering servant material from Isaiah 53 is quoted in the servant section of the household code (1 Pet 2:18-25), and the wives section (3:1-6) follows upon this, alluding to the barren woman of Isaiah 54. The patterning of the household code on Isaiah points to the role the servant-servants motif plays in Peter’s argument. The pattern extends beyond the household code into the further argument about suffering when Noah enters the scene. The depiction of Noah in Isaiah 54 as an afflicted one (54:11) who has no need to fear (54:14) provides the connection to the Petrine argument that Christ’s disciples are suffering servants. Thus, the Noahic baptism in 1 Pet 3:21 serves as a hinge between christology and ecclesiology through participation in both suffering and resurrection.
What this study has thus-far revealed is that when Peter turns to scripture, he is not asking questions about christology but about the church. This is not to say that his thoughts on Christ do not undergo development in his reading of scripture. It is simply that his main concern is to address the church. His hermeneutical understanding of the church as the people of God shapes his reading of scripture. At the same time, scripture shapes his understanding of what it means to be the people of God. Isaiah’s contribution to this understanding cannot be
underestimated, for in Isaiah the depiction of God’s suffering servants is set within the larger narrative of the restoration of God’s presence among his people.
Christ, Church and Ethics
The body middle of 1 Peter features an extended ethical argument that deserves special attention, particularly as it relates to Petrine use of scripture. The moral dualism provided by Ps 33:13-17 contributes greatly to the ethical admonition to do what is good (a)gaqopoie/w) even when surrounded by those who do evil (kakopoie/w). There are hints of cosmic and
140Gammie calls for greater precision in classifying types of dualism (1974, 356-385). 141Dryden 2006, 27, 187.
142Dryden 2006, 15–36 on the genre of paraenetic epistle and 37–54 as it applies to 1 Peter. 143Dryden 2006, 174–189.
144Dryden 2006, 187.
presented throughout.140 In 1 Pet 3:22, the placement of Christ in heaven at the right hand of
God might indicate that the material world is the domain of evil. The phrases “on the day of visitation” in 2:12 and “the end of all things is at hand” in 4:7 suggest that the present is the time of evil. However, throughout the body middle, the contest between good and evil occurs
spatially and temporally in the present world.
The contest between good and evil places the believer in the cross-hairs of injustice. In the face of slander and social ostracism, the elect are called upon to respond with good conduct even if evil or sinful actions were more expedient. This line of reasoning is fundamentally scriptural. With Ps 33:13-17 as the largest block quotation of the body middle, it supplies the language for Peter’s moral dualism and thereby demonstrates how it is consistent with scripture. On its own, this argument based on moral dualism is stark and leaves the audience to its own