James Bell, University of Exeter, ‘Shepherd-leadership in 1 Peter and Jude’
The HUMAN LEADERSHIP IS SHEPHERDSHIP metaphor is used in 1 Pet 5:1–4 and Jude 12, yet this potential connection between the two letters is rarely examined. This paper will consider this metaphor in 1 Pet 5:1–4 (and 8) and Jude 11–13 through Conceptual Metaphor Theory, arguing that similar aspects of shepherding (mappings) are utilized in both usages of the metaphor to highlight the same leadership aspects, as leaders in the church are viewed as accountable to God, with their primary responsibilities being to teach and care for the people of God. I shall further suggest that these similarities are due to a shared allusion to Ezek 34:1–24 and 37:24, to imply that leaders in the church should lead like the eschatological Davidic shepherd-King, not the Kings of Israel. I finally propose that, despite these similarities, 1 Pet 5:1–4 (and 8) emphasizes accountable and caring leadership and Jude 11–13 accountable and teaching leadership due to their different socio-historical contexts.
Daniel F. B. Eng, University of Glasgow, ‘The Paranaetic Directive in the Paratextual Framing of 1 Peter’
Paratextual features in ancient manuscripts such as the Euthalian apparatus play a subtle yet intentional role in shaping how readers encountered and interpreted the New Testament texts. Widely transmitted alongside the Catholic Epistles, the apparatus comprises of a collection of paratextual genres, including prologues, hypotheses, chapter titles, quotation lists, and lectionary materials. These elements function collectively as a reading guide, orienting readers toward particular interpretive contexts and influencing how the biblical text was navigated and understood. This paper examines the paratextual framing of 1 Peter within manuscripts that preserve the Euthalian apparatus. I argue that paratexts operate collaboratively to foreground the paraenetic character of the epistle. Through the cataloguing of themes, structuring of textual divisions, and selective highlighting of scriptural citations, these paratexts guide readers toward a moral-exhortative interpretation of the letter. In doing so, they also mitigate interpretive tensions by containing them within a broader ethical framework. This study demonstrates that the apparatus actively shapes its reception, pointing readers toward a particular understanding of 1 Peter’s theology through an overarching moral message.
Junette B. Galagala-Nacion, University of Edinburgh, ‘Becoming a People: Royal Priesthood, Spiritual House, and Holy Nation in 1 Peter’
First Peter broadly addresses scattered Christian communities (“exiles of the dispersion”) in Roman provinces in Asia Minor (Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia and Bithynia). Notwithstanding the debates regarding the nature of 1 Peter’s audience (Jewish or gentile), the text uses Jewish symbols to describe the inclusion of gentiles as God’s people. Initiation into Christ is characterized by spiritual house (overtones of the temple with Jesus as the cornerstone), royal priesthood, and holy nation (1 Pet 2:4-10). Moreover, the author uses the concept of new birth into imperishable inheritance and seed (1:3-4, 18, 23). This notion echoes of Israelite inheritance and descent and stands in contrast to their former life and heritage as unbelieving gentiles (2:11-12, 4:3). I propose that 1 Peter re-inscribes the said Jewish motifs (nationhood, temple, priestly function, inheritance and lineage) into a Christian framework in order to construct the identity of gentile believers. By hinging these themes onto Jesus as the living stone, 1 Peter re-defines these metaphors to demonstrate that gentile believers are now God’s people.
Session 2: open session
Stephen Bay, Brigham Young University, ‘The Epistle of James in Light of Job’s Early Christian Reception’
This paper argues that James 5:11 “You have heard of the patience of Job…” provides a crucial yet overlooked clue for dating the Epistle of James. In the Masoretic Text, Job appears righteous and steadfast in the prose frame, but in the poetic dialogues he speaks with striking boldness, even confronting God over his suffering. Although the Septuagint may soften parts of this portrait, no extant Jewish or Christian text before the mid-second century CE describes Job as patient. The first such characterization emerges only in that period, after which patience quickly becomes the defining feature of Job’s Christian reception. The epistle’s reference to “the patience of Job” is therefore anomalous in a first century setting but fits comfortably within the interpretive milieu of the mid second century. This convergence with later developments suggests that the Epistle of James is best situated in that era, a dating that in turn strengthens the case for its pseudepigraphical authorship.
Phillip Smith, University of Cambridge, ‘Eyewitnesses of the Parousia: Matthean Influence on 2 Peter and the Apocalypse of Peter’
In discussions about a potential relationship between 2 Peter and the second-century Greek/Ethiopic Apocalypse of Peter, the influence of the Gospel of Matthew on these texts has not been adequately taken into account. At the least, the vision of the eschaton and judgment in Apoc. Pet. 1–4 is likely dependent on Matthew’s Olivet Discourse (Matt 24–25), and the transfiguration scenes in Apoc. Pet. 15–17 and 2 Pet 1:16–18 are likely dependent on Matthew’s transfiguration and related scenes. In this paper, I compare 2 Peter, the Apocalypse of Peter, and Matthew with regard to the timing of the Parousia in each text (2 Pet 1:12–14; 3:1–10; Apoc. Pet. 1:1–4:13; 14.1–4; and Matt 24–25). I argue that Matthean influence on 2 Peter and the Apocalypse of Peter illuminates the discussion regarding a potential relationship between these Petrine texts.
Donald Wong, University of Oxford, ‘Justification by Works or Not? A Study on 1 Clem 30 and 32’
According to 1 Clement, are humans justified by works or not? In 1 Clem. 30.3, the author remarks that Christ-followers are ἔργοις δικαιούμενοι μὴ λόγοις (‘being justified by works not words’). Yet 1 Clem. 32.4 claims that οὐ διʼ ἑαυτῶν δικαιούμεθα, οὐδὲ διὰ… ἔργων… (‘we are not justified through ourselves, nor through… works …’). In this paper, I explore the language of ‘justification’ in 1 Clement. I shall argue that in 1 Clem 30.3, ‘justification’ denotes the vindication, validation and proof of membership as God’s elect. It should be understood in a communal, peer-to-peer context. ‘Justification’ in 1 Clem 32.4, on the other hand, carries the soteriological sense. It operates on a vertical, divine-human dimension. Therefore, the author develops two non-contradictory strands of thoughts while using the same term ‘justification’. Towards the end of the paper, I shall also highlight the importance of hearing the creative voice of 1 Clement in its context, as opposed to reading it either as a faithful elaboration or failed adaptation of Paul’s soteriology.
