Robert E. Picirilli_Allusions to 2 Peter in the Apostolic Fathers.pdf

(1349 KB) Pobierz
Journal for the Study of
the New Testament
http://jnt.sagepub.com
Allusions to 2 Peter in the Apostolic Fathers
Robert E. Picirilli
Journal for the Study of the New Testament
1988; 10; 57
DOI: 10.1177/0142064X8801003304
The online version of this article can be found at:
http://jnt.sagepub.com
Published by:
http://www.sagepublications.com
Additional services and information for
Journal for the Study of the New
Testament
can be found at:
Email Alerts:
http://jnt.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts
Subscriptions:
http://jnt.sagepub.com/subscriptions
Reprints:
http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav
Permissions:
http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav
Downloaded from
http://jnt.sagepub.com
by Dolly Chaaya on May 10, 2008
© 1988 SAGE Publications. All rights reserved. Not for commercial use or
unauthorized distribution.
57
ALLUSIONS
TO 2 PETER
IN
THE
APOSTOLIC
FATHERS
Robert
E.
Picirilli
Free
Will
P.O.
Box
50117,
3606
Baptist
Bible
College
West End
Avenue, Nashville,
TN
37205,
USA
I
began
this
study
to
see
whether
anything
in
the
Apostolic
Fathers
might
shed
any
light
on
the
interpretation
of
2
Peter. Other
motivations
have
been
added
along
the
way.
I
soon ran
into
the
claims
of
some
that
2 Peter is
not
alluded
to at
all in
the
corpus
of
the
Apostolic
Fathers.
Edwin
Abbott
provides
an
outstanding
example
of
this. Of 2 Peter he said:
’Up
to
the
time
of Clement
of Alexandria
(i.e.
c.
200)
there
is
no
trace
of its
existence’;’
‘It
is
not
distinctly quoted by
any
Christian
writer till
the third
century’;2
and,
’It
was
rejected
in
the earliest
days
by
the
silence
of
the
Fathers’.3
(F.W.
Farrar
partly
answered
Abbott
in
later
issues of the
same
periodical,’
but
not
on
this
point.)
My
survey
complete,
I
was
pleased
to
see
Theo
Donner
calling
for
a
reexamination
of the
use
of
the New Testament in the Fathers and
other
early
Christian
literature:
There
has
been
little
of
that close
analysis by
which
such
echoes, allusions,
and
veiled
references
might
be
discovered.
The
5
search has all
too
often
focused
on
explicit
quotations
instead.~
too
The
method
of
my
study
has involved
two
stages.
First,
I
determined
to
make
my
own
fresh
survey
of
the
Apostolic
Fathers,
completely
uninfluenced
by
other
judgments
as
to
what is
or
is
not
a
possible
allusion
to
2
Peter.
This
survey
indicated several
possibilities
worth
exploring,
and
each
was
examined
critically
in
the Greek
text.
In
this,
I
used the
two
volume
set,
with Greek
text
and
translation,
edited
by
Kirsopp
Lake,6
which includes 1 and
2
Clement,
Ignatius’
seven
epistles, Polycarp’s epistle
to
Philippi,
the
Martyrdom
of
Polycarp,
the
Didache,
the
Epistle
of
Barnabas,
The
Shepherd of
Hermas,
and
the
Epistle
to
l3iognetus.
Downloaded from
http://jnt.sagepub.com
by Dolly Chaaya on May 10, 2008
© 1988 SAGE Publications. All rights reserved. Not for commercial use or
unauthorized distribution.
58
Having
critically
examined
and made
judgment
about each
of the
passages that struck
me as
possible
allusions,
I
proceeded
to
consult
the work
of
others
to
compare
their
judgment
and results. The
most
serious studies that
came
to
my
attention
were:
(1)
B.B.
Warfield’s
articles
(1882-83)
in
reply
to
Abbott,
with its limited
treatment
of
allusions;7
(2) J.B. Mayor’s
commentary
on
Jude
and
2 Peter
(1907),
with
thorough
citations;8
(3)
Charles
Bigg’s
ICC volume
on
Peter
and
Jude
(1901),
with
very
complete listings
and
some
critical
evaluation;9
(4)
Richard Bauckham’s
recently published
volume in
the
Word
Biblical
Commentary
series,
with careful
citations
of the
Fathers and
a
theory
all his
own;tO
and
(5)
the work
of
a
committee
of
the
Oxford
Society
of Historical
Theology
entitled
The New
Testament in the
Apostolic
Fathers
(1905).11
I
have tried
to
weave
these
findings
into
my
own
analysis;
the
only
thing
that
needs
to
be
said
now
is that those who
specially
investigated
allusions
to
2 Peter
in
particular
(Warfield,
Mayor, Bigg)
found
several. Others
(like
the
Oxford
Society,
examining
for
the
entire New
Testament)
tended
to
agree
with Abbott’s
assessment,
cited above.
I
should
also
mention
in
particular
two
critical editions of the
Apostolic
Fathers
(in
addition
to
the
Lake
edition
just
indicated).
The classic
set
is
Lightfoot’s
(1869-90),
with
two
parts
in
five
volumes,
but
dealing only
with
Clement,
Ignatius,
and
Polycarp. 12
A
more
recent set
is that
edited
by
Robert
M.
Grant,
in
six volumes
covering
all
the
Apostolic
Fathers
(English
text
only).13
Both these
sets
provide
commentary
that includes
references
to
scriptural
allusions.
Lightfoot
makes reference
to
several
parallels
in
2
Peter,
but remains
noncommital
on
the
question
of dependence.
Grant and
his associates
apparently
reflect
the outlook
of
Abbott and the
Oxford
Society.
u ’
1 and
2 Clement
-
_
There
are
possible
allusions
to
2
Peter in
several
places.
1. In 1
Clem. 7.5-8.5 the writer extols God’s grace in
providing
for
and
seeking
repentance:
’In
generation
after
generation
the Master
has
given
a
place
of repentance
(IlETavoiaç
r6nov
eo<DKev)
to
those
who will
turn to
him’,
says
Clement,
citing
Noah
and
Jonah
as
examples.
He
observes
that the
prophets spoke
of repentance
and
quotes
(without
identifying)
Ezek.
33.11,
’As
I
live,
says
the
Lord,
I
do
not
will
(ou Pobkopctt)
the
death of the
sinner,
but his
repentance’.
Downloaded from
http://jnt.sagepub.com
by Dolly Chaaya on May 10, 2008
© 1988 SAGE Publications. All rights reserved. Not for commercial use or
unauthorized distribution.
59
One does
not
have
to
see an
allusion,
here,
to
2 Pet.
3.9;
the
statement
is biblical
enough,
and
both
may
have
been
dependent
on
Ezekiel 33. The
phrase
most
nearly
parallel
is in
8.5,
’desiring
to
give
all
his
beloved
a
share
in
repentance’ (flovh6pEvoq
paavoiaq
pe-cao-Xciv),
which has
at
least
a
superficial
resemblance
to
’desiring
that
all
have
room
for
repentance’
(pou;k6pEvoq ...
1TåV’taç
ciq
padvoiav
xwp1Ïoal).
The
comparison
is
made
by
Mayor 14
and
s
Warfield.
15
2. Both 1 Clem.
23.3
and 2
Clem.
11.2
cite
an
(unidentified)
’Scripture’
as
saying:
’Wretched
are
the
doubleminded,
who doubt
in
their
soul
and
say,
&dquo;These
things
we
heard
even
in
the
days
of
our
fathers,
and
behold
we
have
grown
old and
none
of
these
things
have
happened
to
us&dquo;’. 2
Pet. 3.4
might
be
the
source:
mockers
say
’Where
is the
promise
of
his
coming?
For
since the
fathers
went to
sleep
all
things
continue thus
from
the
beginning
of creation’. The
vocabulary
is
not
the
same,
except
for
the
common
reference
to
’the
fathers’,
but
the
idea
is
strikingly
similar.
The
interpreters
of Clement,
and of 2
Peter,
have labored with
this
citation.
Lightfoot’s
view has
influenced
many:
...
.
As this passage
does
not
occur
in
the Old
Testament,
it
must
have
been
taken from
some
lost
apocryphal writing.
Some writers
indeed
have
supposed
that
Clement
here,
as
he
certainly
does
else-
where ...,
is
fusing
several
passages
of
the Canonical
Scripture,
such
as
James
i.8,
2 Pet.
iii.4,
Mark iv.26
...;
but
the resemblances
though striking
are
not
sufficient.. Y>
Thus
Westcott
can
call
this
a
’striking
coincidence’ and still
opine
that
Clement
was
quoting
an
apocryphal
source.17
Armitage
Robinson
says it
’clearly
comes
from
an
apocryphal
passage’, 18
and
J.A.
Kleist
is
definite:
’The
source
of
the
quotation
is
unknown’.19
Others
are
not
so sure
the resemblance
is
coincidental.
Mayor
notes
that Clement’s allusion
’corresponds closely
with 2 P.
3.4’;
he
also
notes
that the
striking
phrase
rjuepav
t~
Tlfl£paç
occurs
both
in
2 Clem. 11.2
and
2 Pet.
2.8.2°
Even
Lightfoot
comments
on
this:
’This
additional coincidence
of
the
passage
quoted
with the
language
of
2
Peter
is
worthy
of
notice. It
seems
hardly possible
that the
two
can
be
wholly
independent, though
we
have
no
means
of
determining
their
relation’.21
More
recently,
Karl
Donfried has
made the association
even
stronger,
commenting
on
2
Clement 11:
...
_
Downloaded from
http://jnt.sagepub.com
by Dolly Chaaya on May 10, 2008
© 1988 SAGE Publications. All rights reserved. Not for commercial use or
unauthorized distribution.
60
The
elements which
precede
and
follow
this section
on
doubt about
the future
are
almost
identical
to
a
pattern
which
is
found
in 2
Peter and
1
Clement:
(1)
a
reference
to
false
teachers
(2
Clem.
10.5;
2 Pet.
2.1ff.
and
17ff.;
1
Clem.
21.5); (2)
a
discussion
of
the
eschatological
problem
(2
Clem.
11; 2
Pet.
3;
1
Clem.
23);
and
(3)
a
reference
to
the
nearness
of the
kingdom
(2
Clem.
12.1;
2
Pet.
3.10;
1
Clem.
23.5).22
Richard Bauckham also is
confident
that the ’close similarities
of
distinctive
ideas
and
terminology
between
2 Peter and 1
Clement
and
2
Clement’,
both
here and
elsewhere,
are
too
strong
to
avoid
concluding
that there
was
a
definite
connection between
them-
although
he
finds
that connection in
mutual
dependence
on an
apocrypahl
source.
His
listing
of
1
Clem.
23.3;
2 Clem.
11.2,
and
2
Pet
3.4
side
by
side is
especially
helpfu1.23
3.
I
group
together
three distinctive
phrases
that
are common
to
Clement and
2
Peter. First is
an
apparently
reverent
periphrasis
for
the
name
of
God,
’his/the
magnificent
glory’.
7
Clem.
9.2
says
Old
Testament saints rendered
perfect
service
to
’his
magnificent glory’
(z~
fJ£yaÀ01T pÉ1T£l
66§g
aurou);
in
2 Pet.
1.17,
at
the
transfiguration,
the voice
to
Jesus
came
from ’the
magnificent glory’
(uno
rr)<;
fJ£ya.MmpÉ1Touç
86~fl~).
Second,
1 Clem.
35.5
refers
to
the
Christian life
as
’the
way
of
truth’
(I 66Q
rfiq
à.ÀT]8£iaç);
so
does
2 Pet.
2.2,
and
in
the
very
same
Greek.
(Anarthrous
666q
à.ÀT]8£iaç
occurs
occasionally
in
the
LXX,
but with
a
rather different
meaning;
cf
Ps.
119.30;
Gen.
24.48.)
Third,
2
Clem. 11.2 calls
the
Scriptures
’the
prophetic
Word’
(6
1TpO<t>T]’tlKàç
k6yo~), exactly
as
in 2 Pet. 1.19.
It
is
interesting
that
three
of
2 Peter’s distinctive
phrases, unique
in
the
Bible,
are
used
in
’Clement’,
and
in
exactly
the
same
way.
The
commentators
have noticed
all
or some
of these.
Mayor
makes
all
three
citations,
finding
the third
one-‘the
prophetic
word’-also
in
Philo and
Justin. 14
So
does
Bauckham.25
Warfield
notes
the
first
two
and
observes: ’In each
case
a
very
rare
and
peculiar phrase
occurs,
peculiar
in the New Testament
to
2
Peter,
and
in the
subapostolic
age
to
Clement’.26
Lightfoot
cites the
first
and
third. 21
Bigg
cites
the third
confidently,28
but
of
the
first
he
says:
’possibly
borrowed from
2
Peter ...
but
he
may
have
taken it direct
from
Enoch;
see
Lightfoot’s
note’.29
Donfried,
dealing only
with 2
Clement,
makes
much
of
the third: ’It
is
perhaps
not
insignificant
that
2
Clement
introduces its first
supportive
quotation
concerning
Downloaded from
http://jnt.sagepub.com
by Dolly Chaaya on May 10, 2008
© 1988 SAGE Publications. All rights reserved. Not for commercial use or
unauthorized distribution.

Plik z chomika:

Inne pliki z tego folderu:

Inne foldery tego chomika:

Zgłoś jeśli naruszono regulamin