PETER, FIRST EPISTLE OF. The Epistle is addressed to the elect who are sojourners of the dispersion (diaspora) in Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia and Bithynia. The term "dis persion" suggests scattered Jews, but references in the epistle to their previous benighted state (i. 14, ii. 9-10, iv. 3) seem rather to imply that the recipients were Gentiles, and if so, the word "dispersion" is used metaphorically for Christians scattered among the heathen. The primary purpose of the writer seems to have been to strengthen the courage of these Asian Christians who were faced with persecution, and to enjoin on them such conduct as would remove all excuse for the common confusion between Christianity and crime.
The questions of date and authorship are closely connected, for many critics have maintained that the contents of the epistle imply a date subsequent to the death of St. Peter. (a) References to persecution occur in i. 6, ii. 12,1V. 12-19, V. 9; the recipients are undergoing a "fiery trial"; they have to bear reproaches, and to endure an evil reputation; they may "suffer" as do thieves and murderers, although it is not clear that death is the in evitable penalty; so severe is the trial that it must mark the be ginning of the end; persecution is general, and not confined to the provinces addressed. These are very similar conditions to those implied in Pliny's letter to Trajan, and therefore it is argued that I. Peter belongs to the same period and was written long after the Apostle's death.
It is true that if we accept the tradition of Peter's death under Nero it is very difficult to suppose that these conditions existed during his lifetime. There was certainly no general persecution before Nero, and our only real authority (Tacitus) gives no hint that the Neronian persecution extended beyond the city of Rome where it was due to local causes. Systematic religious persecution was so strange to the easy tolerance of Rome that most scholars think that a considerable time must be allowed for the policy to have developed. Ramsay thinks that the Flavian emperors be gan systematic persecution after the Jewish war; others believe that there was nothing serious in the provinces before the reign of Domitian (81-96), and Professor Merrill (Essays in Early Christian History) is sceptical even about that. But the evidence
of the Apocalypse seems decisive that Rome persecuted syste matically in the time of Domitian, at least in Asia. I. Peter ap pears to have been written at a time when the conditions reflected in Pliny's letter were just coming into being; the imperial au thorities were manifesting hostility due to a lack of understand ing, but there had been few if any martyrdoms, and the author betrays none of the ferocious resentment against Rome which characterizes the Apocalypse, indeed he still entertains a respect for the authorities not unlike that of St. Paul (I. Pet. iii. 13). There is no allusion to the Emperor-worship which caused trou ble in Domitian's time. On these grounds it seems possible to date the epistle roughly. The terminus ad quern is fixed by the full development of the Domitian policy. If Ramsay is right in connecting persecution with the Jewish war, 7o is the terminus a quo ; if not, 85-90 is the most probable date, but the epistle must be considerably earlier than the Domitian portions of the Apocalypse. (b) It is generally agreed that the epistle has close affinities with some other early Christian works, notably the Epistle to the Romans (q.v.), the Epistle to the Ephesians (q.v.), the Epistle of James (q.v.), and the Epistle of Polycarp. Un fortunately the dates of some of these works are uncertain, and it is not agreed on which side is the dependence. The majority of scholars allow that in the case of Romans the dependence is on the side of Peter, and the balance of opinion favours the priority of Ephesians, though not of James. If so, the author of I. Peter wrote at a time when Romans and Ephesians were well known at least in his neighbourhood. If the Pauline authorship of Ephesians is rejected the ',inference must be that I. Peter was written at a time when a pseudo-Pauline epistle had had time to gain currency, and that could hardly be earlier than the second century. But, as we have seen, there are difficulties in dating I.