I’m starting a new study on 1 Peter. I’ll be using the Brazos Theological Commentary by Douglas Harink as a guide. I’ll also consult the Hermmeneia commentary by Paul Achtemeier for scholarly / critical resources. And, in addition to the NRSV and other typical English translations, I’ll be reading along in David Bentley Hart’s recent New Testament translation. I’m also reading the Greek text, with plenty of help from Bibleworks (I claim no strength in the Greek).
I’m particularly interested in Harink’s theological reading of 1 Peter as an exercise in political theology. As I began to dive into this text, I saw in a fresh way how its eschatological vision relates to the formation of a living ecclesial community. That eschatological vision, however, might not look just as you might think. In some respects, it seems like a very “Pauline” vision, with Hellenistic overtones. In other respects, it seems typical of Second Temple Jewish eschatology.
These resonances perhaps should not be surprising given the epistle’s attribution of authorship to the Apostle Peter. Throughout the New Testament, beginning in the book of Acts, we see tension between the “Petrine” and “Pauline” visions of emerging Christianity. You could say that the “Petrine” vision is more rooted in the radical Jewish tradition, and indeed, as Achtemeier notes, scholars debate whether 1 Peter reflects familiarity with the Qumran tradition. Of course, whether the Apostle Peter actually was involved in writing the epistle is hotly debated, and Achtemeier offers a good survey of the arguments. My sense as a non-specialist in this area is that this admixture of Hellenestic and “Qumranic” eschatological elements suggests at least some connection with an authentically Petrine community, although the Apostle likely did not craft the letter’s text itself given its language and historical setting. The role of Silvanus (Silas) here is very interesting (see 1 Peter 5:12). Perhaps Silvanus was a kind of emissary between the Pauline and Petrine communities and wrote 1 Peter based on the Apostle’s general directions or the memory of such directions some time after the Apostle’s death. Achtemeier also addresses this and seems to think it unlikely, but the idea resonates with me. In any event, theologically this text is part of the Church’s canon and therefore we address it as an authentically Apostolic word of scripture, whatever the details of its actual authorship.