tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4514726127775216123.post6462089992778506550..comments2020-05-10T14:58:23.496-07:00Comments on Hellenisti ginoskeis: do you know Greek?: 1 Peter — opening thoughtsDJPhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/16471042180904855578noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4514726127775216123.post-14018154796968642252010-01-29T12:30:35.039-08:002010-01-29T12:30:35.039-08:00I raised this exact question with Dan Wallace and ...I raised this exact question with Dan Wallace and he said there was much scholarly ink spilled on parallels between 1 Peter and Ephesians - I'm not sure where it was spilled though!<br /><br />I had taught 2 Peter (in part) soon after spending a year teaching Ephesians and had seen parallels in 2 Peter 1. Apparently that is not so readily accepted. I'd love to take some tiem to delve into100 Mile Pantshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04934805873293163004noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4514726127775216123.post-29356246762843175102007-04-10T12:22:00.000-07:002007-04-10T12:22:00.000-07:00I just found your site via my son's blog. This is ...I just found your site via my son's blog. This is great! <BR/><BR/>Re: wondering how familiar Peter was with Paul's epistles - I just finished a Ladies' class on 1 Peter and that's a discussion we got into while working through 1Pet.4:6. Some were quick to explain it in light of Pauline writings, which THEY were familiar with, but Peter might not have necessarily been.<BR/><BR/>Then I started BethsMomToohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09661542831522987087noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4514726127775216123.post-67906214954121047242007-04-06T06:42:00.000-07:002007-04-06T06:42:00.000-07:00I'm glad to know your wife is a woman.Sorry, I jus...I'm glad to know your wife is a woman.<BR/><BR/>Sorry, I just had to comment on that, since I'm too ignorant to comment on anything else you write here (it's all Greek to me). I enjoy reading it, though, and there's a lot of useful stuff here even for an illiterate like me.Davidhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10658215452617342095noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4514726127775216123.post-83264092913924386022007-04-05T16:01:00.000-07:002007-04-05T16:01:00.000-07:00Oh, feel free to differ. I'm no pope, this isn't R...Oh, feel free to differ. I'm no pope, this isn't Rome — we're not even talking about Romans! I just find it an attractive explanation of the marked difference in style between the two books. Thanks for the additional thought, Matt.DJPhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16471042180904855578noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4514726127775216123.post-12422869320769868792007-04-05T13:20:00.000-07:002007-04-05T13:20:00.000-07:00Dan,Not to be contrarian, but it is also possible ...Dan,<BR/><BR/>Not to be contrarian, but it is also possible that the expression "dia Silvanou" could refer instead to Silvanus being the carrier of the letter rather than the amanuensis. Or it could mean he was actually both. For arguments, see Jobes, 1 Peter, in the Baker Exegetical Commentary @ 5:12.Matthew S. Harmonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17506399043911656897noreply@blogger.com