Seland_Crucial Issues--1 Peter.pdf

Torrey Seland Crucial Issues in the quest for the First Readers of 1 Peter Reassessing an old question Hitherto – in all I have taught and written – I have worked on the premise that the readers of 1Peter were of non-Jewish, Gentile background.¹ However, before one teaches or/and writes, there should be some informed thinking, and then again just as important, some re-thinking processes. In this article I want to – once more – discuss the old question of the identity of the readers of 1 Peter: can we establish whether they were of Jewish or Gentile background? In an article published in 2005, I wrote:² The Jews are nowhere incontestably mentioned – or even alluded to – in the text; not even once. On the one hand; there are, admittedly, several characterizations of identity taken over from the Hebrew Bible: in the introduction, e. g., the readers are characterized as the chosen ones, living in the Diaspora. Both these expression are quite Jewish, well known in their writings. Furthermore, in 2,5 – 9, they are described with terms taken from the Torah and the Prophets; terms which there specify the prerogatives of the Jews in their relation to JHWH (Jes. 28,16; Exod. 19,5 f). The author’s silence about the Jews, and his general and unproblematized use of such legitimating terms from their Hebrew Bible, might suggest that he is writing to Jews or that he considers the Christians to be the real Jews. Most commentators today consider the readers to be of Gentile background, possibly with some Jews involved. I am rather of the opinion that the readers are envisaged as of primarily Gentile background; if there were some Jews, we do not know. However, I must admit that I have become somewhat more hesitating in coming down on the Gentile side in this question. Hence, in this article I want to reconsider the issue. My discussion will not at least be carried out in a dialogue with Ben Witherington III, the scholar who in more recent times most emphatic has argued for the Jewish nature of the first readers of 1 Peter.  Concerning my writings, see the five articles published in Torrey Seland, Strangers in the Light: Philonic Perspectives on Christian Identity in 1 Peter, BIS 76 (Leiden: Brill, 2005), and the more recent article Torrey Seland, “Resident Aliens in Mission: Missional Practices in the Emerging Church of 1 Peter,” Bulletin for Biblical Research 19 (2009): 565 – 89.  See Chapter Five in my Strangers, 169 – 70. Brought to you by | Misjonshogskolen Authenticated | torreys@gmail.com author's copy Download Date | 11/6/13 4:12 AM 44 Torrey Seland 1 Real or intended readers? Some scholars seem to take it for granted that if we can decipher what the author meant by the specific terminology in describing the readers, then we are close to how or what her or his readers really were. This presupposition has at least two or three disputable components: First, that we might really know what the author originally meant, that is, what he or she intended to say; second, that we can know for sure how he or she understood her/his own terminology; and third, that even if this were the case, that we can unmask what the terms used referred to, what were their sphere of reference. All these issues are interconnected but debatable. Some scholars writing on 1 Peter remind their readers that this is not a one to one game: Ramsey Michaels reminds his readers that Any discussion of the audience of 1 Peter should begin with a caution: the fact that the epistle is directed to a circle of churches located over a wide geographical area and apparently far away from the author and his own congregation means that he may not have known specifically the ethnic and social composition of his audience. The question of audience must therefore be addressed from the author’s limited point of view. What assumptions – right or wrong – did he make about the individuals and congregations to whom he was writing? It must be acknowledged at the outset that 1Peter sends mixed signals in answer to this question.³ Here Ramsey Michaels points primarily to the plausible lack of knowledge on the side of the author of 1 Peter concerning the nature and conditions of his intended readers. John H. Elliott, however, also warns us by writing the wise words that our information in this letter “is at best inferential and reflective of what the author presumes to know concerning his hearers/readers and their situation. Here we can speak at most of the ‘implied’ readers – that is, the readers as presupposed and construed by the author …”⁴ Concerning their ethnic identity, Elliott states that “an ethnically mixed audience is presumed, comprising persons of both Israelite and pagan origin.”⁵ Nevertheless, when he comes to the conclusion at the end of the list of the relevant features the author of 1 Peter provides, Elliott states that the terms described “point to an author and an audience steeped in  J. Ramsey Michaels, 1 Peter, WBC 49 (Waco, Texas, 1988), xlv. Michaels own view is that “The best explanation of the data is that 1 Peter was written primarily to Gentile Christians in Asia Minor, but that the author, for his own reasons, has chosen to address them as if they were Jews” (xlvi).  John H. Elliott, 1 Peter. A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary, AncB 37B (New York: Doubleday, 2000), 94.  Elliott, 1 Peter (AncB), 95. Brought to you by | Misjonshogskolen Authenticated | torreys@gmail.com author's copy Download Date | 11/6/13 4:12 AM Crucial Issues in the quest for the First Readers of 1 Peter 45 the Scripture, tradition, and history of Israel.”⁶ Here audience and author are mixed together, the author reflecting the real nature of the readers in his descriptions. As a whole, however, it must be admitted that Elliott most often, but not always, manages to stick to his view that what we find in the letter, is what is “presumed”, “perceived” or “reckoned with” by the author. Elliott himself is of the opinion that the composition of the audience is consistent with the heterogeneity of the populations of Asia Minor in general. Other scholars are not that conscious of, or at least not that observant of the problems inherent in the question of the author’s knowledge of the readers and the question of the relevance of the terminology used when it comes to the quest for the real nature of the readers. Schreiner, for instance, says that “We know from the letter that the readers were facing persecutions …”,⁷ that “The Gentile origin of the readers seems clear from 4:3 – 4” though he himself surmises that “presumably some Jews were members of the churches.”⁸ Several of the authors of the more recent commentaries on 1 Peter seem to adhere to this same attitude and views.⁹ We can thus find three positions advocated and used by recent scholars: first, the position that we have to presume a possible, maybe plausible, lack of knowledge on the author’s side concerning the social identity and situation of the readers; second, the position that states that what we have in 1 Peter is primarily his own (more or less deficient) understanding and consecutive verbalization of his perception of the readers’ conditions; and third, the presupposition that the author’s descriptions are to be taken as representative of the readers’ conditions, that is, the terms used have referential value. Thus studies dealing with these questions are often dealing with the issues as if there were a one to one relationship between the author’s descriptions and the reality of the first readers. I am not convinced that we can say that much about the readers’ conditions. What we have is the text of 1 Peter; that is, what we have is the author’s conceptualization about the readers, not necessarily their real social nature. The texts show us primarily how the author presumed  Elliott, 1 Peter (AncB), 96.  Thomas R. Schreiner, 1, 2 Peter, Jude, NAC (Nashville, Tennessee: Broadman & Holman, 2003), 38.  Schreiner, 1 Peter (NAC), 39.  Cf., for instance, Paul J. Achtemeier, 1 Peter, Hermeneia (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1996), 50 – 51; Karen H. Jobes, 1 Peter, BECNT (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2005), 23 – 28; Earl J. Richard, Reading 1 Peter, Jude, and 2 Peter, Reading the New Testament (Macon, Georgia: Smyth & Helwys, 2000), 11– 13; Joel B. Green, 1 Peter, THNTC (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2007), 5 – 6, and Reinhard Feldmeier, The First Letter of Peter. A Commentary on the Greek Text (Waco, Texas: Baylor University Press, 2008), 2– 13. Brought to you by | Misjonshogskolen Authenticated | torreys@gmail.com author's copy Download Date | 11/6/13 4:12 AM 46 Torrey Seland about his readers.¹⁰ I am often somewhat surprised by how easily scholars go about these issues. They most often argue from an author’s terminology – and thus his or her conceptualization about the readers – to the real social identity of the readers. What we have to start with, is the terminology of the author and the possible content of this vocabulary; then secondly we might ask about how does this fit in with what we can gather from other various sources about the real nature of the people in the regions addressed in his or her letter.¹¹ Hence I am trying to distinguish between the terms’ denotations and their possible connotations. In this article, accordingly, I will primarily deal with what we might say about how the author presumed about his readers. I am aware of the fact that these distinctions are not watertight, nor perhaps not always easy to uphold because of our scarcity of sources. But they represent an ideal we should not too easily depart from. 2 Main social features of the Readers in 1 Peter There is not much to go by in a search for the social profile of the readers as perceived by the author of 1 Peter, but we are not left totally without some cues. The author describes them unequivocally as persecuted; that is, they are described as someone who have to endure various forms of harassment in their local communities (1:6; 2:20; 3:9.14.17; 4:12.14– 16; 5:8 – 9). Likewise, the sufferings of the readers are a frequent topic in the letter. Scholars have for a long time been looking for what historical persecutions these passages may refer to. At present it seems however, that they have reached a kind of agreement; the sufferings were probably more due to local harassments than to official persecutions by the Roman authorities. Furthermore, the Christian readers are perceived as consisting of both men and women, slaves and children (3:1– 2); some of the women have non-Christian husbands, and some of the slaves suffer from harsh owners (2:18 – 20). Not all Christians are poor; the warnings against adornment, such as braided hair  We might point to a similar distinction in the study of J. D. G. Dunn on the historical Jesus, emphasizing that what we have is how Jesus was remembered: James D. G. Dunn, Jesus Remembered, Christianity in the Making, vol. 1 (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2003).  This procedure, for instance, is most often chosen when one consider the sayings in 1 Peter concerning the persecutions the readers are said to suffer; one takes the sayings of the letter, and then search for what historical conditions they may fit. For the most recent study of the persecutions in 1 Peter, see Travis B. Williams, Persecution in 1 Peter: Differentiating and Contextualizing Early Christian Suffering, NT.S 145 (Leiden: Brill, 2012). Brought to you by | Misjonshogskolen Authenticated | torreys@gmail.com author's copy Download Date | 11/6/13 4:12 AM Crucial Issues in the quest for the First Readers of 1 Peter 47 and the wearing of gold jewelry and fine clothes, presuppose readers of some status and wealth.¹² I have in another study argued¹³ that the author also describes them and write to his readers as first-generation Christians. As such they were living in a state of liminality.¹⁴ They also seem to have some knowledge about persons and stories from the Hebrew Scriptures (e. g., 3:6; 3:20), though it is not stated from where this knowledge derives. None of these descriptions and features, however, tell us anything about how the author perceived about the ethnic nature of his readers. There is, however a couple of much discussed terms that have been interpreted in a way that might also throw some light on the ethnic issue; that is the terms πάροικος and παρεπίδημος (1:1.17; 2:11). To some commentators, these terms are used metaphorically;¹⁵ to others they are social terms describing the social reality of the readers as “resident aliens”, “strangers”, “sojourners” etc.,¹⁶ but still without any ethnic connotations. Some others however, read them as terms signifying “proselytes”; that is, that the readers were non-Jewish.¹⁷ B. Witherington¹⁸ includes them in his  I do think, however, that Bruce W. Winter, “The Public Honouring of Christian Benefactors: Romans 13.3 – 4 and 1 Peter 2.14– 15.” JSNT 34 (1988): 87– 103 (reprinted in Bruce W. Winter, Seek the Welfare of the City: Christians as Benefactors and Citizens, First-Century Christians in the Graeco-Roman World [Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1994]), is overinterpreting the sources when he argues that they were supposed to be benefactors of the cities they lived in. For a more recent discussion of the possible socioeconomic location of the readers, see David G. Horrell, “Aliens and Strangers? The Socioeconomic Location of the Addressees of 1 Peter.” In Engaging Economics: New Testament Scenarios and Early Christian Reception, ed. Bruce W. Longenecker and Kelly D. Liebengood (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2009), 176 – 202.  See Seland, Strangers, 168 – 69; Seland, “Resident Aliens”.  Steven Richard Bechtler, Following in His Steps: Suffering, Community, and Christology in 1 Peter, SBL.DS 162 (Atlanta, GA: Scholars Press, 1998), 109 – 78.  See e. g., Francis W. Beare, The First Epistle of Peter: The Greek Text with Introduction and Notes (Oxford: Blackwell, 1970), 135; J. N. D. Kelly, A Commentary on the Epistles of Peter and of Jude, BNTC (London: A. & C. Black, 1969), 41, 72, 103; Peter H. Davids, The First Epistle of Peter, NICNT (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans Publishing, 1990), 46 – 47; Troy W. Martin, Metaphor and Composition in 1 Peter, SBL.DS 131 (Alpharetta, GA: Scholars Press, 1992), 142.  The main proponent of this view is, without doubt, John H. Elliott: John H. Elliott, A Home for the Homeless: A Sociological Exegesis of 1 Peter, Its Situation and Strategy (London: SCM, 1981); and see his great commentary: Elliott, 1 Peter (AncB). Several have followed in his footsteps, none perhaps as closely as Scot McKnight, 1 Peter, The NIV Application Commentary Series (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1996).  Cf. Willem C. van Unnik, “The Redemption in 1 Peter I 18 – 19 and the Problem of the First Epistle of Peter.” In idem, Sparsa Collecta, Part II, NT.S 30 (Leiden: Brill, 1980), 3 – 82. I have argued that they might stem from the semantic field of ‘proselytes’ without denoting them as proselytes: Torrey Seland, “πάροικος καὶ παρεπίδημος: Proselyte Characterizations in 1 Peter?” Bulletin for Biblical Research 11 (2001): 239 – 68, reprinted as Torrey Seland, “Paroikos kai pa- Brought to you by | Misjonshogskolen Authenticated | torreys@gmail.com author's copy Download Date | 11/6/13 4:12 AM 48 Torrey Seland arguments that the readers were, or was considered to be Jews. Hence we now turn to his views. 3 Jewish or Gentiles readers: a presentation and discussion of B. Witherington’s view B. Witherington argues primarily historically concerning the readers’ identity when he sets forth his view. He is not so much interested in how the author perceived his readers, as how they really were. While these perspectives cannot be totally separated, and Witherington does not always keep them apart either, his view is typical for a much used procedure: were the first Christian readers Jews or Gentiles? In investigating this question he often jumps very quickly from how the author envisioned them to how or what they were. Witherington proceeds from two important premises: first, that there was a sizeable number of Jews in the areas addressed in the opening of the letter; and second, that many, if not most, of the Jews were largely Hellenized.¹⁹ In arguing for the first premise, he relies on the research of P. Trebilco.²⁰ Furthermore, arguing for the great extent of Hellenization among these Jews he says: “The evidence we have, both literary and archaeological, suggests as well that Jews, perhaps particularly in Asia Minor, were well integrated into the social ethos of the region, having become quite Hellenized.”²¹ As examples of evidence he points to the synagogue in Sardis that was built next to the gymnasium at the center of the city, and that in light of such archaeological evidence one should not at all consider the Jews in these regions as living in some Jewish cultural ghettoes.²² Accordingly, having established this last mentioned view as an important premise, one can easily see how it colors Witherington’s understanding of all the particular verses most relevant for the quest for (the author’s perception of) the first readers. We do not have space to deal with his exegesis of all the characterizations inherent in 1 Peter, but below is presented his view of the major passages repidemos: Proselyte Characterizations in 1 Peter?” In idem, Strangers in the Light: Philonic Perspectives on Christian Identity in 1 Peter, BIS 76 (Leiden: Brill, 2005), 39 – 78.  Ben Witherington III, A Socio-Rhetorical Commentary on 1 – 2 Peter, Letters and Homilies for Hellenized Christians, vol. 2 (Downers Grove, Illinois: IVP Academic, 2007).  Cf. here the title of his commentary: ‘Letters and Homilies for Hellenized Christians’, comprising 1– 2 Peter.  Paul Trebilco, Jewish Communities in Asia Minor, MSSNTS 69 (Cambridge: CUP, 1991).  Witherington, Commentary, 25.  Witherington, Commentary, 26. Brought to you by | Misjonshogskolen Authenticated | torreys@gmail.com author's copy Download Date | 11/6/13 4:12 AM Crucial Issues in the quest for the First Readers of 1 Peter 49 that most other scholars read as indicating the Gentile background of the readers. 4 The addressees as παρεπιδήμοις διασπορᾶς (1:1) and τῆς παροικίας ὑμῶν (1:17) Witherington reads the description in 1:1 as denoting Jewish Christians. It is the “language of the Jewish Diaspora” that is used here,²³ and the term Diaspora is signaling that the audience is Jewish. The use of παροικία also support the Jewish identity of the readers as it is used several times in the Septuagint as a term for Jews in exile and sometimes close to or synonymous to “diaspora”. The nonGentile nature of the readers, he suggests, is also strengthened by the fact that 2:12 indicates that the readers were supposed to live “among the Gentiles.”²⁴ Hence Witherington is influenced and convinced by the research of John H. Elliott²⁵ that these terms are not to be read as metaphorical terms, but he departs from the Elliott’s understanding that they denote former Gentiles. Concerning 1:17, Witherington states that “Whatever else one may say about Gentiles living in these regions, they certainly would not have seen themselves as living in some sort of exile presently or in the past, even if they had become Christians, nor would they see themselves as resident aliens.”²⁶ Furthermore, by characterizing his own social location as “Babylon”, a catch word for Rome, the author of 1 Peter shares the readers’ condition as resident alien and in a kind of exile. That the author was Jewish, is hardly to be doubted; even though he might not be Peter the Apostle, he certainly was Jewish. Witherington, however, considers him to have been Peter, and to have written this letter from Rome, most probably in the sixties ce. Hence these linguistic features best suit the theory that the readers were Jewish, and since it is clearly written to Christians, this means it was written to Jewish Christians.²⁷      Witherington, Witherington, Elliott, Home. Witherington, Witherington, Commentary, 24. Commentary, 66. Commentary, 28. Commentary, 25. Brought to you by | Misjonshogskolen Authenticated | torreys@gmail.com author's copy Download Date | 11/6/13 4:12 AM 50 Torrey Seland 5 οἵ ποτε οὐ λαὸς νῦν δὲ λαὸς θεοῦ (2:10); ἦτε γὰρ ὡς πρόβατα πλανώμενοι (2:25) The characterizations in 1 Peter 2:10 and 2:25 are often seen as evidence that the audience must have been Gentiles. Most commentators would probably agree that 2:10 is an intertextual echo of Hosea 1:9 – 10, but they draw different conclusions from this aspect than Witherington does. The latter point to the fact that when Hosea used these words, he was clearly speaking of and about Jews, and offering a prophetic critique of them.²⁸ Hence Peter as well could use these descriptions as characterizations of Jewish readers. When Peter here exhibits such negative view of his readers’ Jewish background as Hellenized Jews, he is reflecting a view not uncommon among the conservative and more Torah-true Jews, living in the Holy Land. Witherington is here comparing Peter to Paul when he states that Jews having rejected Christ, “at least temporarily cease to be part of the people of God (cf. Rom 11).”²⁹ Witherington applies the same view also to 2:25: “For you were going astray like sheep.” This characterization too, he suggests, the author adopted from the language of the prophetic critique of Israel.³⁰ 6 Their former life: 4:3 – 4 1 Pet 4:3 – 4 is a passage in which the author describes the former life of his readers in religious and ethical terms: You have already spent enough time in doing what the Gentiles like to do, living in licentiousness, passions, drunkenness, revels, carousing, and lawless idolatry.4 They are surprised that you no longer join them in the same excesses of dissipation (NRSV). This could not, many commentators say, be a description of former Jews, but would fit much more a Jewish description of Gentiles. Could a Jew like Peter describe Jewish-Christian readers as former idolaters? Witherington, on the other hand, suggests that “this is a fairly typical Jewish polemical rhetoric, often used by various Jewish Christians … to stigmatize what went on at pagan temple feasts.”³¹ And he compares these verses to some of     Witherington, Witherington, Witherington, Witherington, Commentary, 28, 121. Commentary, 121. Commentary, 31. Commentary, 29. Brought to you by | Misjonshogskolen Authenticated | torreys@gmail.com author's copy Download Date | 11/6/13 4:12 AM Crucial Issues in the quest for the First Readers of 1 Peter 51 Paul’s characterizations in 1 Cor 8 – 10, and the dangers the Christians had to face in Corinth. Witherington is sure that many Jews, in particular those in the upper segments of society, would have participated in such feasts, especially if they were Hellenized Jews. If looking for other written evidence where Jews are criticizing Jews for idolatry and immorality, Witherington points to TestJud 14:2– 3 and 23:1, and the social contexts might have been pagan feasts and parties in temples and local associations.³² Hence one should not use this passage to deny the possibility that the readers had a Jewish ethnic background. Peter is rather to be read here as warning his readers not to return to their past Gentilelike behavior.³³ Accordingly, the sum of all the not too many descriptions of the readers is that the author several times describes them as if they were Jewish Christians. To Witherington, this also means that they really were of Jewish background. Witherington is very well aware of the fact that his view is a minority position; most scholars presume the readers to be of non-Jewish Gentile background, probably with some former Jews included. In Witherington’s final conclusion there might also be an opening for this view: “In sum, it appears to me that it is possible, indeed likely correct, to read 1 Peter as a document written to an audience the majority of whom are Jewish Christians, with some God-fearers perhaps included.”³⁴ This distinction is important, because some scholars admit that there are several terms and characterizations in the text that might very well carry a characterization of the readers as former Jews, but that they are coupled by others that are best understood as denoting some as former Gentiles. Witherington himself adds that “The author writes with a conversionist and sectarian mentality, assuming that those who are outside the Christian circle are to one degree or another religiously in the dark, whether they are formerly Jews or formerly Gentiles.”³⁵ Hence to Witherington, the author of this letter has something of a ‘completionist’ or ‘supersessionist’ reading of the earlier history of Israel. He uses the language of the Hebrew Scriptures, applying it to the Christians. That this is a hermeneutical leap, Witherington is very well aware of. The important issue to us is the suggestion that such a leap is not at all dependent on whether the readers were of primarily Jewish or Gentile background.     Witherington, Witherington, Witherington, Witherington, Commentary, 195 – 96. Commentary, 30. Commentary, 36. Commentary, 30. Brought to you by | Misjonshogskolen Authenticated | torreys@gmail.com author's copy Download Date | 11/6/13 4:12 AM 52 Torrey Seland 7 Some further comments The most common view in vogue today concerning the readers background might be summed up thus, drawing on Paul J. Achtemeier’s exposition:³⁶ There is a certain ambiguity in the data of this letter concerning the (author’s view of his/her) readers. On the one hand, the many quotations and allusions to the Old Testament (1:16.24; 2:3.6.7.8.9 – 10.22.24; 3:10 – 12.14; 4:18; 5:5), the use of characters like Sarah, Abraham and Noah (3:6.20), and references to episodes in the history of the Jews (1:1 dispersion; exile and aliens 2:11) indicate the author’s perception that the readers might be very familiar with the Old Testament. Hence scholars from earliest times and up to the nineteenth century, with only a few exceptions, favored the view that the readers were of Jewish origin. Furthermore, the absence of any explicit mention of the Jews as such as well as the absence of any mention of conflicts between Jews and Christians were read as pointing in the very same direction. Yet there are, as seen above, also several passages that the vast majority of recent scholars read as still indicating the Gentile background of the readers (1:14.18; 2:10.25; 4:3 – 4). These scholars would most often explain the readers supposed familiarity with the Old Testament as a result of their instruction both before and after their conversion. But commentators are also struck by the identification of the readers with aspects of the history of Israel: This is then most often interpreted as a metaphorical use of this material in a Gentile-Christian context.³⁷ It is clear from a reading of Witherington’s arguments that his view of the degree of and distribution of Hellenization among the Diaspora Jews of these regions are pivotal. That many Jews in fact were Hellenized is hardly to be denied, but the degrees of Hellenization might vary from region to region, and even from  Achtemeier, 1 Peter (Hermeneia), 50 – 51.  As scholars subscribing to a view very compatible to these suggestions of Achtemeier, one might mention the following: Elliott, 1 Peter (AncB), 95 – 97, cf. 96: “On the whole, the letters content, combination of Israelite and Hellenistic traditions, and mode of argumentation indicate that the author reckoned with a mixed audience – some of Israelite roots and some of pagan origin.” Schreiner, 1 Peter (NAC), 38 – 39: “… the readers were mainly Gentiles. The evidence in support of this conclusion is quite compelling” (38). Jobes, 1 Peter (BECNT), 23 – 41, argues that the readers were Jewish Christians expelled from Rome or sent as colonizers (thus explaining why Peter knew them), and Gentile converts. Green, 1 Peter (THNTC), 5 – 6; Feldmeier, 1 Peter, 42– 43; Duane F. Watson and Terrance Callan, First and Second Peter, Paideia Commentaries on the New Testament (Grand Rapids, Mi.: Baker Academic, 2012), 7– 8. David G. Horell, 1 Peter, NTG (London/New York: T & T Clark, 2008), 48 may be referred to as one of those who admits that it is hard to avoid guesses: “Probably the best guess is that the churches who received the letter were largely, but by no means exclusively, Gentile in composition.” Brought to you by | Misjonshogskolen Authenticated | torreys@gmail.com author's copy Download Date | 11/6/13 4:12 AM Crucial Issues in the quest for the First Readers of 1 Peter 53 person to person. Witherington’s reference to 1 Cor 8 – 10 furthermore, I would consider as apt: Here Paul is dealing with several local problems due to various attitudes among the readers. Some of these readers might have been Jewish; that depends on how one perceives the ethnic identity of the “strong” and the “weak” in these Christian Corinthian communities. I for my part, am a little surprised that Witherington does not draw more on the works of Philo of Alexandria in arguing for the possible Hellenization of the Diaspora Jews. Philo himself was a Torah-observant Jew, but his writings provide ample evidence for the fact that there were a great variety of views, attitudes and behavior among the Diaspora Jews he knew. Hence Philo is relevant for understanding the social problems of the Christians in Corinth,³⁸ and a more extensive use of his works might as well have strengthened Witherington’s view of the Jews in the areas addressed by 1 Peter. However, I do not believe that Witherington’s arguments can bear the burden of evidence he loads upon them. Many of the Jews in Asia Minor might have been Hellenized, but to presume that they all were that very much Hellenized as Witherington seems to believe, is to me to stretch the string too much. Here again one might draw upon Philo. There is no doubt that there were several Jews in Alexandria of which he was very critical when considering their views and their behavior. One of the social phenomena he was critical of was participation in the Greco-Roman clubs and associations.³⁹ Hence Philo is also a witness of the plurality of attitudes in vogue. One should probably also take such a plurality in view when discussing the readers of 1 Peter. If one thus might consider Witherington’s weight on the argument about the real or perceived Hellenization of the readers to be too overloaded, one nevertheless should appreciate his pinpointing of the possible Jewish background of many of the statements so often read as proof of the readers’ Gentile background.  A PhD dissertation submitted at The School of Mission and Theology, Stavanger Fall 2012 tries to apply insights from Philo’s works in dealing with the various attitudes to sacrificial meat discussed in 1 Cor 8 – 10: Ruben Ngozo, The One God and the Many Gods: Monotheism and Idolatry in 1 Cor 8:1 – 11:1 in Light of Philo’s Writings, Dissertation series (Misjonshøgskolen) vol. 13 (PhD Diss. Stavanger: School of Mission and Theology, 2012).  Cf. Peder Borgen, “‘Yes,’ ‘No,’ ‘How Far?’: The Participation of Jews and Christians in Pagan Cults.” In Early Christianity and Hellenistic Judaism, ed. Peder Borgen (Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1996) 15 – 43, and Torrey Seland, “Philo and the Clubs and Associations of Alexandria.” In Voluntary Associations in the Graeco-Roman World, ed. John S. Kloppenborg and Stephen G. Wilson (London: Routledge, 1996), 110 – 27. Brought to you by | Misjonshogskolen Authenticated | torreys@gmail.com author's copy Download Date | 11/6/13 4:12 AM 54 Torrey Seland John H. Elliott⁴⁰ has argued that the terms πάροικος and παρεπίδημος (1:1.17; 2:11) are not to be read as metaphors, denoting the readers as pilgrims, having their real home in heaven. He instead opts for the view that they denote social “resident aliens” and “visiting strangers”, thus being important terms indicating the social status of the readers in their local communities. He has been followed by many scholars in what he denies, but not, however, in what he affirms. These terms, and other characterizations taken from the Hebrew Scriptures are still often taken as having a metaphorical value.⁴¹ As metaphors, such descriptions may indicate that the author either had no Jews in view when writing, or that he transferred the descriptions to the new communities, whether they were composed of Jews, Gentiles or both. We have here seen that Witherington thinks that the readers were primarily of Jewish origins, but as the author transfers these descriptions to Jewish-Christians, his theology may be described as ‘completionist’ or ‘supersessionist’. Ramsey Michaels comes to a similar conclusion concerning the theology, but he thinks that the readers were primarily of Gentile stock. To Ramsey Michaels, the letter “was written primarily to Gentile Christians in Asia Minor, but that the author, for his own reasons, has chosen to address them as if they were Jews.”⁴² Ramsey Michaels thinks that the author of 1 Peter simply ignores the actual Jewish communities that may have been around, but that he nevertheless links his own communities “by a shared selfunderstanding.”⁴³ Hence, in a way, whether the readers are considered as former Jews or former Gentiles, the theology may be characterized as ‘supersessionist’, and this was carried out by a transference of Jewish characterizations, persons and stories from the Hebrew Scriptures to the new communities, to those “who have been chosen and destined by God the Father and sanctified by the Spirit to be obedient to Jesus Christ and to be sprinkled with his blood” (1 Pet 1:2; NRSV). This view may not solve the quest for the first readers of 1 Peter, but it may illuminate the reason why the author phrased himself as he did. The main issue for him was not Jew or Gentile, but the new community established in Christ, transcending such ethnic characterizations and limitations.  Elliott, Home.  The following two studies are main contributions to the discussion of metaphors in 1 Peter: Troy W. Martin, Metaphor and Composition in 1 Peter: SBL.DS 131 (Atlanta, Scholars Press, 1992); Bonnie Howe, Because You bear this name: Conceptual Metaphor and the moral meaning of 1 Peter, BIS 81 (Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2005), see especially pp. 265 – 308.  Michaels, 1 Peter (WBC), xlvi.  Michaels, 1 Peter (WBC), l. Brought to you by | Misjonshogskolen Authenticated | torreys@gmail.com author's copy Download Date | 11/6/13 4:12 AM Crucial Issues in the quest for the First Readers of 1 Peter 55 8 Conclusions We have not solved the problem. We do not know if the first readers were of Jewish or Gentile background. Probably the readers comprised both. That’s probably also all we will get to know. The main problem in looking for the ethnic identity of the first readers is partly located in our impossibility of knowing what the author really knew about his readers; second, in understanding the actual denotations of the descriptions used by the author of 1 Peter. Furthermore, when metaphors obviously still are in play in this work, we must be careful not to interpret metaphors as if they were not metaphors, and non-metaphors as if they were metaphors. Finally, one lesson to be learned from Witherington’s arguments is that we should not be too rash to deny the significance of several characterizations as rooted in the Hebrew Scriptures. And second, the author may be more of a supersessionist that many so far have realized. I think I can still stand by the standpoint of mine given on the first page of this article, but I would like to end this article by endorsing a quotation from Joel B. Green:⁴⁴ 1 Peter employs as a central motif the identification of Israel and the church, with the result that normal usage of such terms as ‘Jewish’ and ‘Gentile’ cannot be assumed. The people of God envisioned in this letter is none other than ‘Israel’ – so this document’s ‘Jewishness’ intimates less a description of the ethnic origins of its implied audience and more a clarification of its readers’ status before God. Bibliography Achtemeier, Paul J, 1 Peter, Hermeneia (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1996). Beare, Francis Wright, The First Epistle of Peter: The Greek Text with Introduction and Notes (Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1970). Bechtler, Steven Richard, Following in His Steps: Suffering, Community, and Christology in 1 Peter, SBL.DS 162 (Atlanta, GA: Scholars Press, 1998). Borgen, Peder, “‘Yes,’ ‘No,’ ‘How Far?’: The Participation of Jews and Christians in Pagan Cults.” In Early Christianity and Hellenistic Judaism, ed. Peder Borgen (Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1996) 15 – 43. Davids, Peter H., The First Epistle of Peter, NICNT (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans Publishing, 1990). Dunn, James D. G., Jesus Remembered, Christianity in the Making, vol. 1 (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2003). Elliott, John H., 1 Peter. A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary, AncB 37B (New York: Doubleday, 2000).  Green, 1 Peter (THNTC), 6. Brought to you by | Misjonshogskolen Authenticated | torreys@gmail.com author's copy Download Date | 11/6/13 4:12 AM 56 Torrey Seland —, A Home for the Homeless: A Sociological Exegesis of 1 Peter, Its Situation and Strategy (London: SCM Press, 1981). Feldmeier, Reinhard, The First Letter of Peter. A Commentary on the Greek Text (Waco, Texas: Baylor University Press, 2008). Green, Joel B., 1 Peter, THNTC (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2007). Horell, David G., 1 Peter, NTG (London New York: T & T Clark, 2008). —, “Aliens and Strangers? The Socioeconomic Location of the Addressees of 1 Peter.” In Engaging Economics: New Testament Scenarios and Early Christian Reception, ed. Bruce W. Longenecker and Kelly D. Liebengood (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2009), 176 – 202. Howe, Bonnie, Because You bear this name: Conceptual Metaphor and the moral meaning of 1 Peter, BIS 81 (Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2005). Jobes, Karen H., 1 Peter, BECNT (Grand Rapids, Mi: Baker Academic, 2005). Kelly, J. N. D., A Commentary on the Epistles of Peter and of Jude, BNTC (London: Adam & Charles Black, 1969). Martin, Troy W., Metaphor and Composition in 1 Peter. SBL.DS 131 (Alpharetta, GA: Scholars Press, 1992). McKnight, Scot, 1 Peter, The NIV Application Commentary Series (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1996). Michaels, J. Ramsey, 1 Peter, WBC 49 (Waco, Texas: Word, 1988). Ngozo, Ruben, The One God and the Many Gods: Monotheism and Idolatry in 1 Cor 8:1 – 11:1 in Light of Philo’s Writings, Dissertation series (Misjonshøgskolen) vol. 13 (PhD Diss. Stavanger: School of Mission and Theology, 2012). Richard, Earl J., Reading 1 Peter, Jude, and 2 Peter, Reading the New Testament (Macon, Georgia: Smyth & Helwys, 2000). Schreiner, Thomas R., 1, 2 Peter, Jude, NAC (Nashville, Tennessee: Broadman & Holman, 2003). Seland, Torrey, “πάροικος καὶ παρεπίδημος: Proselyte Characterizations in 1 Peter?” Bulletin for Biblical Research 11 (2001): 239 – 68 (reprinted as “Paroikos kai parepidemos: Proselyte Characterizations in 1 Peter?” In idem, Strangers in the Light: Philonic Perspectives on Christian Identity in 1 Peter, BIS 76 [Leiden: Brill, 2005], 39 – 78). —, “Philo and the Clubs and Associations of Alexandria.” In Voluntary Associations in the Graeco-Roman World, ed. John S. Kloppenborg and Stephen G. Wilson (London: Routledge, 1996) 110 – 27. —, “Resident Aliens in Mission: Missional Practices in the Emerging Church of 1 Peter.” Bulletin for Biblical Research 19 (2009): 565 – 89. —, Strangers in the Light: Philonic Perspectives on Christian Identity in 1 Peter, BIS 76 (Leiden: Brill Publishing) 2005. Trebilco, Paul, Jewish Communities in Asia Minor, MSSNTS 69 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1991). Van Unnik, Willem C., “The Redemption in 1 Peter I 18 – 19 and the Problem of the First Epistle of Peter.” In idem, Sparsa Collecta, Part II, NT.S 30 (Leiden: Brill, 1980) 3 – 82. Watson, Duane F., and Terrance Callan, First and Second Peter, Paideia Commentaries on the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2012). Williams, Travis B., Persecution in 1 Peter: Differentiating and Contextualizing Early Christian Suffering, NT.S 145 (Leiden: Brill, 2012). Winter, Bruce W., “The Public Honouring of Christian Benefactors: Romans 13.3 – 4 and 1 Peter 2.14 – 15.” JSNT 34 (1988): 87 – 103. Brought to you by | Misjonshogskolen Authenticated | torreys@gmail.com author's copy Download Date | 11/6/13 4:12 AM Crucial Issues in the quest for the First Readers of 1 Peter 57 —, Seek the Welfare of the City: Christians as Benefactors and Citizens, First-Century Christians in the Graeco-Roman World (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1994). Witherington III, Ben, A Socio-Rhetorical Commentary on 1 – 2 Peter, Letters and Homilies for Hellenized Christians, vol. 2 (Downers Grove, Illinois: IVP Academic, 2007). Brought to you by | Misjonshogskolen Authenticated | torreys@gmail.com author's copy Download Date | 11/6/13 4:12 AM Brought to you by | Misjonshogskolen Authenticated | torreys@gmail.com author's copy Download Date | 11/6/13 4:12 AM