San pedro ca dating
There is both an absence of such Pauline doctrines as justification, law, the new Adam, and the flesh, and the presence of highly characteristic methods in Peter's own presentation, such as his copious use of Old Testament citations and moral codes, his church-consciousness, historic consciousness and Christ-consciousness.
Peter's teaching cannot be systematized into a theological school of thought, but there is enough distinctiveness about it to differentiate it from Paul's approach.
The absence of influence from the language of the Hebrew Bible or the Targumim on the one hand, and the clear influence of the LXX on the other, show that the author was at home in Greek rather than Semitic culture, and such is likely not to have been the case with Simon Peter." (, pp. This is true not only in the general sense that the Jewish-Christian readers, the 'people of God' (), are no longer concerned about the problem of the fulfillment of the Law, but also in the special sense that, as in Paul, the death of Jesus has atoned for the sins of Christians and has accomplished justification ( f; ).Furthermore, if this were the case, then Peter would not be the real author of I Pet in any sense." ( 20, and the subscripts at the end of letters by Paul (in the Byzantine text tradition) confirm that the Greek is used of the carrier of the letter. While it may be impossible to disprove such an idea, Eric Eve writes: "One cannot save Petrine authorship by arguing that Peter employed a secretary.Wayne Grudem adds: "Moreover, the fact that Peter calls Silvanus , argues strongly for Silvanus as the bearer (note Paul's similar commendation of the bearers of his lettersin 1 Cor. If one argues that this secretary was Silvanus, the travelling companion of Paul (e.g. Kmmel writes: "I Pet contains no evidence at all of familiarity with the earthly Jesus, his life, his teaching, and his death, but makes reference only in a general way to the 'sufferings' of Christ. Achtemeier writes: "The letter, therefore, beginning with a carefully crafted exordium whose purpose was to win the attention of the audience, followed by a series of topical discussions and concluding with a peroration, shows elements of judicial and epideictic structures, but seems to reflect most closely the deliberative rhetoric of its Hellenistic age.Whether or nto the author set out deliberatively to craft a letter that included such elements of formal Hellenistic rhetoric is difficult to say, although it would be equally difficult to deny him all acquaintance with formal rhetoric in light of the shape of the letter itself." (, p.