prison epistles pastorals - drkoinedrkoine.com/pdf/exnt/handouts/exnt24-general2.pdf · 2017. 9....

Early ChurchPrison Epistles

PastoralsGeneral 1

General 2Revelation

General 2

General Epistles 2—1 Peter, 2 Peterand Jude, 1–3 John

General Epistles 2

1. 1 Peter2. 2 Peter and Jude3. 1–3 John

1. 1 Peter

Early Church—General Epistles 2: 1 Peter

1 Peter1. Authorship

A. For Petrine Authorship1. External tradition—unanimous2. Self-designation (1:1)3. Mark as “my son” squares with tradition (5:13)4. Apparent eyewitness (1:8; 2:20–25; 5:1)5. Strong Jewish perspective6. Compares favorably with Petrine speeches in

Acts



B. Against Petrine Authorship1. External tradition is late (not till Irenaeus, 180)2. Language/style (literary Greek)3. Historical issues

lack of concrete knowledge of Jesuslack of known connection to addresseescivil nature of persecution is later datelate canonical process



B. Against Petrine Authorship4. Theological issues

Pauline echo too strong (“in Christ”)doctrinal concerns of a later era

C. Authorship Proposals1. Amenuensis (issue of role of Silvanus, 5:12)2. Pseudonymity (why a Paulinist use Petrine?)3. Anonymous (name added later; no manuscript

evidence)


1 Peter2. Date

A. Early (pre-AD 64)1. Persecution: early?2. Eschatological expectation: early?3. Church order: primitive nature? synagogal?4. Call for state loyalty more probable before fire

of Rome, AD 645. Natural reading of 2 Pet. 3:1’s “former letter”


1 Peter2. Date

B. Late (ca. AD 90–95)1. Muratorian Canon: missing—but fragmentary?2. Judaizing controversy absent3. Geographical spread of Christianity later? (1:1)4. “Babylon” cipher for Rome = post-AD 705. Persecution: later? (if official, civil type)

3. Origin: Rome (traditional, on “Babylon” cipher)


1 Peter4. Destination

A. Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, BithyniaB. Background

1. Jewish Christian? use of OTterms (“diaspora,” “our forefathers,” 1:18)

2. Gentile Christian?use of Greek name “Peter” (1:1)former immoral life (1:14, 18; 2:9–10; 3:5–6; 4:3)


1 Peter4. Destination

A. Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, BithyniaB. Background

1. Jewish Christian? use of OTterms (“diaspora,” “our forefathers,” 1:18)

2. Gentile Christian?use of Greek name “Peter” (1:1)former immoral life (1:14, 18; 2:9–10; 3:5–6; 4:3)


1 Peter5. Occasion/Purpose

A. Occasion1. Author’s knowledge of sufferings, practical

courage, faithfulness2. Silvanus may be traveling through area

B. Purpose1. Strengthen faith, unify believers2. Encourage faithfulness in persecution3. Encourage positive engagement with society


1 Peter6. Theme: living life 'om God bearing suffering

triumphantly7. Outline

A. Introduction (1:1–2)B. Living Life (1:3–4:19)

1. Life from God (1:3–2:10)2. Life in Society (2:11–3:12)3. Life under Trials (3:13–4:19)

C. Exhortations (5:1–11)D. Conclusion (5:12–14)


1 Peter8. Critical Problems

A. Authorship, Date, OriginB. Nature of Persecution

1. Evidence (1:6; 2:11–12; 3:13–17; 4:4, 12–19; 5:9–10)2. Two apparent settings

potential future (1:3–4:11)actual present (4:12–19)



B. Nature of Persecution3. Historical suggestions

general antagonism (but 4:12 seems official)Nero (but his confined to Rome only)Domitian (but not in provinces addressed)Trajan

“wrongdoers” in 2:12 like Pliny’s lettercrime to bear Christian name in 4:12



C. Unity and Genre (Issue of 1:3–4:11)1. Appears as distinct, independent unit2. Same author of rest of 1 Peter (Greek, themes)3. Pre-existing baptism liturgy or sermon?

D. Theological Issues1. Church and Israel: replacement, inclusion, two

covenants, two religions?2. “Descent into hell” (1 Pet. 3:19): a 2nd cent.

reading canonized by 4th cent. Apostles Creed


General Epistles 2

1. 1 Peter2. 2 Peter and Jude3. 1–3 John2. 2 Peter and Jude

Early Church—General Epistles 2: 2 Peter, Jude

2 Peter and Jude1. Authorship—2 Peter

A. Against Petrine Authorship 1. Substantial style differences2. Greek philosophical traditions vs. Galilean3. Early Catholicism, Paul’s collected letters4. Virtual complete dependence on Jude5. Canon process weakest, slowest of all6. Use of “testament” genre is pseudonymous7. Predictable shifts of future, present tenses


2 Peter and Jude1. Authorship—2 Peter

B. For Petrine Authorship1. Style differences are secretarial2. Greek philosophical ideas more common than

allowed (cf. Philo, Josephus)3. Not late: “our ancestors” = Jewish forefathers;

Paul’s “letters” not necessarily a collection4. Use of sources common (thus, use of Jude)5. Canon weak, but stronger than any excluded6. Not all “testaments” were pseudonymous


2 Peter and Jude2. Date—2 Peter

A. Early Petrine (Pre-AD 64)1. Peter, late in ministry, probably Rome2. Traditional martyrdom, fire, AD 64

B. Later Petrine Pseudonymous (AD 80–90)1. Later disciple, after war2. Preserving Petrine traditions

C. Later Non-Petrine Pseudonymous (100–115)1. Later generation of believers2. Later issues of developing church


2 Peter and Jude3. Occasion/Purpose—2 Peter

A. Occasion1. Heresy and skepticism2. Not same situation as Jude

B. Purpose1. Combatting a libertine heresy (Epicurean?)2. Answering second coming skeptics

4. Theme: true knowledge of God affirms the apostolic tradition, which includes belief in the parousia and ethical living


2 Peter and Jude5. Outline—2 Peter

A. Introduction (1:1–2)B. True Knowledge Transforms (1:3–11)C. False Knowledge Corrupts (2:1–22)D. Second Coming Truth (3:1–18)


2 Peter and Jude6. Critical Problems—2 Peter

A. Authorship, Date, OriginB. Genre—mixed

1. Letter genre? Opens like letter, but not in body or in conclusion (which is a doxology)

2. Jewish “testament”? If so, three parts:announce impending death (1:12–15)summarize ethical teaching (1:3–11)reveal future events (2:1–3; 3:1–4)



C. Identity of False Teachers—Epicurean?1. Theodicy skepticism (God not involved)2. Ethical skepticism (morality does not matter)

D. Literary Relationship to Jude (cf. Synoptic Prob.)1. Basic possibilities

copying (Jude or 2 Peter)tradition (oral or written)


2 Peter and Jude



D. Literary Relationship to Jude (cf. Synoptic Prob.)2. Majority opinion: 2 Peter copied Jude

Length of Jude: why write if little original? Usage of 2 Peter: why use so little of source?Editing process: specific word changes easier to explain if 2 Peter using Jude


2 Peter and Jude1. Authorship—Jude

A. Against Jude Authorship1. Perspective: looks back on apostolic era

faith once-for-all entrusted (v. 3)apostolic predictions (v. 17)

2. Catholicism: “the faith” as if a fixed body of doctrine seems more like early Catholicism

3. Language/style: wide breadth of vocabulary with rhetorical nuances



B. For Jude Authorship1. Perspective: simply reminders of what all

personally learned from the apostles2. Catholicism: primitive church elements

present (vivid return expectation; no church officers; “faith” like Paul’s “gospel” in Gal. 1:23)

3. Language/style: widespread use of Greek allowed casual pickup



B. For Jude Authorship4. Content: consistent with early, Palestinian

Jewish leaderuse of Scriptureuse of Jewish literatureeschatology



C. Provisional Conclusion1. Evidence mixed, but generally positive2. Family relationships

“brother of James”straightforward, simple designationlikely the famous brother of Jesus, early leader of Jerusalem church in Acts

brother of Jesus (Mt. 13:55; Mk. 6:3), but did not obtain statue, leadership that James did



C. Provisional Conclusion3. Impact of First Jewish War

dissolution of Palestinian Christianityinfluence, leadership of both brothers lost

James was martyred by high priest (62)Jude, not as influential, fell into obscurity



D. Brief Biography1. Brother of Jesus (Mt. 13:55; Mk. 6:3)2. Post-resurrection faith (Mt. 12:46; Mk. 3:31; Lk.

8:19)3. Possible itinerant, diaspora ministry (1 Cor. 9:5)4. Possible grandsons in reign of Domitian (so

Hegesippus, according to Eusebius, Hist. Eccl. 3.19.1–20.8)


2 Peter and Jude2. Date—Jude

A. Paucity of Information on JudeB. Pre-War Guess (50s or 60s)

3. Occasion/Purpose—JudeA. Occasion: original treatise on salvation

interrupted by need to refute heresyB. Purpose: polemical

4. Theme: exposing false teachers, superficiality


2 Peter and Jude5. Outline—Jude

A. Introduction (vv. 1–4)B. Polemical Midrash (vv. 5–23)C. Doxology (vv. 24–25)

Text Applicationvv. 5–7 vv. 8–10

v. 11 vv. 12–13

vv. 14–15 v. 16

vv. 17–18 v. 19


2 Peter and Jude6. Critical Problems—Jude

A. Authorship, Date, OriginB. Genre—Midrash?

1. Follows midrashic patternstate a text, example, pointgive an applicationsimilar to sermon built around texts

2. Purpose of exposing false teachersC. Literary Relationship with 2 Peter (see 2 Peter)


2 Peter and Jude6. Critical Problems—Jude

D. Identity of False Teachers—Jewish?1. Advocate sexual license (“scoffers”)2. Claim divine inspiration (“dreamers”)3. Slander angels—how?

by despising the Law? (given by angels at Mt. Sinai in Jewish tradition)by claiming superiority?

4. Abuse fellowship meals (indulgent)5. Provoke division, devoid of Spirit


General Epistles 2

1. 1 Peter2. 2 Peter and Jude3. 1–3 John3. 1–3 John

Early Church—General Epistles 2: 1–3 John

1–3 John1. Authorship

A. General Overview1. 1 John = unspecified2. 2–3 John = “the elder”3. Church tradition: John the Apostle (first

attribution: Irenaeus, AD 180)



B. Gospel Connections (1 John)1. Common themes2. Common external tradition3. C. H. Dodd: argued theological differences

futurist eschatology (not realized esch.)sacrifical atonement (not “lifting up”)Spirit force (not personal Paraclete)

4. Papias: muddies the waters by inferring two Ephesian leaders named John


1–3 JohnCommon Themes• life• light• truth(• abiding• God’s Son• world as hostile• laying down life• new commandment(• Father/Son relationship• salvation as “knowing” God



C. Summary Observations1. 1–3 John hang together2. Show connections to Gospel of John3. Show distinctions from Gospel of John4. Epistles, Gospel from same community

2. Date: AD 80–100A. Ireneaus: has John in Ephesus till Trajan (AD 98)B. Heresy: seems proto-gnostic (early form) of 2nd

cent. Docetism


1–3 John3. Origin

A. Technically—unknownB. Traditionally—Ephesus (Irenaeus tradition

through Eusebius, Hist. Eccl. 5.20.4–5)


1–3 JohnIrenaeus on John the Apostle

“When I was a boy in Asia Minor, I knew you at Polycarp’s house . . . I can describe the very place in which the blessed Polycarp used to sit and discourse . . ., and how he recounted his close association with John and with the rest of those who had seen the Lord.”( —Irenaeus, Letter to Florinus( —Eusebius, Hist. Eccl. 5.20.4–5


1–3 John4. Destination

A. Explicit Destination1. 1 John—unspecified2. 2 John—“the elect lady”3. 3 John—Gaius (known to author)

B. Implicit Destination1. All three situations seem plausibly connected2. Likely Ephesian house churches connected to

author and his leadership


1–3 John5. Occasion/Purpose—1 John

A. Occasion1. Internally: traumatic schism of community by

false prophets with heretical doctrine2. Externally: heresy distorts Johannine Gospel

traditions three waysfalse Christologyunrealistic ethicsoverhyped Spirit emphasis


1–3 John

Mirror-Reading Assertions1. “If we say . . .”2. “Those who deny . . .”Such statements reveal the assertions of the heretical teachers about the person of Christ, Christian ethics, and the Spirit.


1–3 JohnThree Main Errors

1. Christological Denialsa. Jesus as Christ, or the Father and Son (2:22–23)b. Jesus as Christ come in the flesh (4:1–3)

2. Ethical Claimsa.( Sinlessness (1:8, 10)b.( Intimacy with God without ethical walk (1:6; 2:4, 6)c.( Loving God but not some believers (2:9; 4:20)

3. Spirit Claimsa. Deeper spiritual insightb. Knowing God, being in the lightc. Special prophetic insight, Spirit anointing (2:20, 27; 4:1)


1–3 JohnJohannine Response

1. Christological Correctionsa.( Jesus is the Christ come in the flesh (2:22)b.( Rejection of material/spiritual dualism (4:2)

2. Ethical Correctionsa.( God is light = God is holy = moral demands (1:5; 2:7–11)b.( God is love = reflecting Jesus’ love to all (4:8; 3:10–24;

4:16–5:5; 3:16–18)3. Spirit Corrections

a.(( All believers have knowledge, but the fundamental test is ethical (2:3, 20, 27)

b.( All believers have the Spirit, but the fundamental test is corporate (4:1–6)


1–3 John5. Occasion/Purpose—1 John

B. Purpose1. Polemical: to combat heresy by exposing its

Docetic error and challenging libertine ethics2. Pastoral: to calm, stabilize, encourage

traumatized congregations by:recalling fundamental Johannine beliefs about God/Christ and living out beliefsassuring security in God’s love in spite of false teachers’ success attracting adherents


1–3 JohnGnosticismThe trajectory of second-century Gnotic belief

systems already had to be developing by the late first century. Theirs was a salvation by knowledge. They were dualistic: the material world was evil, the spiritual world was good. Therefore, the Christ Revealer/Redeemer could not possibly have been manifested in the flesh. He only “seemed” to be flesh, or secretly inhabited the body of Jesus of Nazareth, but departed just before the crucifixion. (“Docetic” comes from the Greek word for “seem,” “appear.”) Divine insight into one’s heavenly origin allows the spirit’s release from the prison of the material body to return to heaven. Thus, ethics is immaterial to salvation.


1–3 John6. Occasion/Purpose—2, 3 John

A. 2 John1. Occasion: heretical teachings have grown

worse; elder loosing ground in some churches2. Purpose

to restate warning against hereticsto urge rejecting their representativesto reinforce Johannine community identity


1–3 John6. Occasion/Purpose—2, 3 John

B. 3 John1. Occasion: crisis of authority, power struggle;

Diotrephes unilaterally rejects all outside representatives, including the elder’s, and excommunicates any who disagree

2. Purposeto commend/introduce Demetriusto condemn Diotrephesto encourage Gaius (as new patron?)


1–3 JohnChurch Hierarchy

“The style of church pictured by the Johannine Gospel and letters—a community of brothers and sisters, apparently without any hierarchy of leaders apart from the benevolent figure of the now aged John himself—might have seemed a romantic ideal, impractical in the face of forces which threatened the church’s existence.”

“. . . the kind of situation which made the emerging pattern of ‘elder-bishops’ or ‘monarchial episcopate’ attractive” [and became dominant only a few decades later by the time of Ignatius of Antioch].

—Stephen Travis, ExNT, p. 301


1–3 John7. Themes—maintain true Johannine teachings and

lifestyles, encourage unity and fe*owship, resist Diotrephes

8. OutlinesA. 1 John

1. introduces themes2. develops themes in recurring patterns

B. 2–3 John: typical Greco-Roman letter format


1–3 John9. Critical Problems

A. Authorship, Date (1–3 John)B. Genre (1 John)

1. Neither begins nor ends like a letter2. “Circular” for multiple house churches?

C. Heresy (1–3 John)1. Developed by mirror-reading 1 John2. Docetic character: seems to reflect early form

of 2nd cent. Gnosticism


1–3 John9. Critical Problems

D. Diotrephes (3 John)1. Precise nature of relationship and actions (official leader? rogue layperson? official edicts?)

2. Exact form of elder’s disagreement

prison epistles pastorals - drkoinedrkoine.com/pdf/exnt/handouts/exnt24-general2.pdf · 2017. 9....

Documents