The Historical-Cultural Background of 1 Peter
This is a research paper submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the course DR30060, Integrating Christian Faith and Practice at Midwestern Baptist Theological Seminary (Kansas City, MO) on May 20, 2023.
Introduction
If a person wants to faithfully study and interpret a passage of Scripture, they need to understand the historical and cultural context of the text before attempting to apply the text in the modern context. Often, Christians today neglect to make the effort of studying the historical and cultural context of the text and then misinterpret and misapply the Bible detrimentally. The reality is that the historical and cultural data of a passage of Scripture can aid in interpreting the passage in a way that is faithful to the original author’s intended message to the original audience. In the case of 1 Peter and, in particular 1 Peter 3:21, the details concerning authorship, audience, time of writing, and other historical and cultural concerns can help to better explain the text in a way that adds depth to knowledge and clarity in application.
Authorship
Taken at face value, 1 Peter explicitly states that the author is Peter. The author writes in 1 Peter 1:1 as his introduction, “Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ.”[1] This introductory statement follows the typical pattern for letter writing in the first century[2] with Peter plainly stating his name and his credentials. Internally, the evidence of Peter’s authorship includes the plain statement of his identification;[3] and other indirect evidence such as the author’s claim to have seen Jesus (1 Pet 1:8), to have been a witness of Jesus’ sufferings (1 Pet 5:1), and the author’s connection with Silas and Mark.[4] In addition, there are external evidences concerning Petrine authorship. Thomas Schreiner explains usage of 1 Peter with the assertion that Peter is indeed the author as evidence to 1 Peter being authentic. He mentions Tertullian, Clement, and Irenaeus as early church fathers who identified Peter as the author of 1 Peter.[5] The Petrine authorship of 1 Peter was generally accepted by the church until recent history, in which modern scholars have questioned whether Peter could actually write with the same eloquence and sophistication that the author of 1 Peter utilizes.[6] Knowing that Peter has been accepted as the author of 1 Peter until recent history and that there are internal evidences that point towards Petrine authorship ought to cause the modern Christian to carefully weigh any supposed evidences to the contrary when determining the authorship of 1 Peter.
Whether 1 Peter is written by Peter is of profound importance. One of the markers of canonicity concern apostolic authorship.[7] If the text of 1 Peter is not written by the apostle Peter, which is what the document claims, then the text does not belong within the canon of Scripture. In addition, if the text proclaims that the author is Peter, which it does, but the document was not actually written by Peter, then the implication is that Scripture is not inerrant. Once inerrancy is lost then true application of the text is subjective.[8] Essentially, the meaning of 1 Peter would be subject to the reader of 1 Peter instead of the meaning being based in the authorial intent. Additionally, knowing that Peter is the author of 1 Peter ought to help the reader better contextualize the text. Understanding the author helps the modern reader better understand the text itself. For instance, knowing that the author was a witness to Jesus’ sufferings helps the reader understand how the author recognized the Old Testament prophecies that were fulfilled in Jesus’ sufferings (1 Pet 1:10-12). It also helps the reader understand how the author could be assured that Jesus, “did not threaten, but continued entrusting himself to him who judges justly.” (1 Pet 2:21-25). He is assured in this because he witnessed this. In the case of 1 Peter 3:18-22, knowing that Peter is the author of the text informs the reader because it helps the reader understand the text from Peter’s perspective. Peter is a Jewish believer that lived during a heightened purity culture in the first century and thus, his and his culture’s idea of ritual purity has to be contrasted with what Christian baptism really is.[9]
Audience
Much like the issue of authorship, the audience of 1 Peter is clearly stated at the beginning of the letter. 1 Peter 1:1 states that the letter is written, “to those who are elect exiles of the Dispersion in Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia.” Peter’s direct audience are believers who have been dispersed throughout what was known as northern Asia Minor.[10] There is disagreement about whether these are primarily Jewish believers or Gentile believers. Some claim that the original audience of 1 Peter were primarily Jewish converts, but many interpreters argue that Peter is writing to a primarily Gentile audience.[11] Part of the reasoning for a Jewish audience includes Paul’s statement about Peter in Galatians 2:7, “I [meaning Paul] had been entrusted with the gospel to the uncircumcised, just as Peter had been entrusted with the gospel to the circumcised.” In addition, the term diaspora has been utilized to refer to Jewish people who lived outside of Israel.[12] However, some have argued that Peter’s description of his audience previously living in ignorance suggests that they were Gentiles.[13]
If Peter is primarily writing to Jewish believers, then statements concerning the prophets (1 Pet 1:10), quotes from the Old Testament (1 Pet 1:24-25, 2:6-8, 3:10-12, 4:18), and comparisons and contrasts with the Old Testament are amplified because the direct audience knows the Old Testament well enough to understand the references.[14] If Peter is primarily writing to Gentile believers, then statements contrasting believers with unbelievers make more sense, the contrast between Jewish and Gentile people clarify (1 Pet 2:12), and his encouragement for right Christian relationships within the home is more emphatic (1 Peter 3:7).[15] It is the assertion in this essay that Peter is writing primarily to Jewish believers. Thus, concerning 1 Peter 3:18-22, knowledge of the audience helps the modern reader understand the text in the way that the Jewish audience would have understood the text. The comparison of baptism with Noah’s Ark should be explained through the Jewish worldview— “the water that deluged the world in Noah’s day and through which Noah was saved functions as a model or pattern for Christian believers . . . Anyone who is submerged under water dies. Submersion under the water represents death . . . Just as the chaotic waters of the flood were the agent of destruction, so too the waters of baptism are waters of destruction.”[16]
Time of Writing
Concerning the timing for 1 Peter, if Petrine authorship is assumed, then the letter would have to have been written before the end of the first century. Clement makes the statement that Peter died a martyr’s death (1 Clement 5-6) with 1 Clement being written in 96 A.D. and Wayne Grudem makes the argument that the wording of 1 Peter 2:13-17 could not have been written without further qualification if the persecution of Nero’s reign had already started. This dates the writing of 1 Peter at least before 64 A.D., after which persecution would have been excessively severe. Schreiner suggest the dating of 1 Peter around 62-63 A.D., which he suggests based on the lack of Neronian persecution in the letter itself.[17]
While the precise date of authorship is inconsequential, knowing the approximate date provides some details that help in interpreting 1 Peter. For instance, the encouragement to remain steadfast even in suffering (1 Pet 4:12-19) and the exhortation to submit to authority (1 Pet 2:13-25) are timely. In the case of 1 Peter 3:18-22, the knowledge of timing explains why Peter even needs to make the statement that baptism is not a cleansing of dirt from the body. Knowing that Peter lived during an era in which ritual cleansing was emphasized excessively explains why he would even feel that it was necessary to make a statement such as this.[18]
Conclusion
Though understanding the historical and cultural information surrounding a passage takes time and effort, it is clear that doing so helps in interpreting the passage of Scripture faithfully. Although Christians today neglect to make the effort of studying this context, it is vital information that helps to interpret 1 Peter faithfully. In the cast of 1 Peter, the details concerning authorship, audience, time of writing, and other historical and cultural concerns helps to explain the text that adds depth to knowledge and clarity in application.
[1] Unless otherwise specified, all Bible references in this paper are to The Holy Bible: English Standard Version (ESV) (Wheaton IL: Crossway Bibles, 2016).
[2] Wayne Grudem, 1 Peter: An Introduction and Commentary, Tyndale New Testament Commentary (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1988), 17.
[3] Ibid, 21.
[4] Thomas Schreiner, 1, 2 Peter, Jude, New American Commentary (Nashville, TN: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 2003), 22.
[5] Ibid.
[6] Roger M. Raymer, 1 Peter, The Bible Knowledge Commentary: New Testament (Colorado Springs, CO: David C. Cook, 1983), 837.
[7] Wayne Grudem, Systematic Theology: An Introduction to Biblical Doctrine (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1994), 63.
[8] Joel R. Beeke and Paul M. Smalley, Reformed Systematic Theology (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2019), 1:378-389.
[9] Scott Stripling, “Ritual Purity in the Late Second Temple Period,” (plenary address, ETS Eastern Region Meeting, Washington D.C., April 21-22, 2023).
[10] Raymond E. Brown, An Introduction to the New Testament, The Anchor Yale Bible Reference Library (New York, NY: Doubleday, 1997), 708.
[11] D.A. Carson and Douglas J. Moo, An Introduction to the New Testament, 2nd ed. (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 2005), 646-647.
[12] William B. Barcley, “1 Peter,” A Biblical-Theological Introduction to the New Testament: The Gospel Realized (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2016), 456.
[13] Sam Storms, “1 Peter,” The Gospel Coalition Bible Commentary, n.d., https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/commentary/1-peter/#section-30.
[14] In addition, Peter’s exhortation to “Keep your conduct among the Gentiles honorable” (1 Pet 2:12) makes more sense if he is speaking to Jewish people.
[15] The Gentile culture in the first century had a very low view of women in general. Peter’s exhortation for families would be completely counter cultural.
[16] Thomas Schreiner, 1, 2 Peter, Jude, New American Commentary (Nashville, TN: Broadman & Holman Publishers, 2003), 193-94.
[17] Ibid., 36-37.
[18] Scott Stripling, “Ritual Purity in the Late Second Temple Period,” (plenary address, ETS Eastern Region Meeting, Washington D.C., April 21-22, 2023).
