# The diaspora of 1 Peter 1:1



## Herald (Mar 25, 2007)

*1 Peter 1:1* Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ, to those who reside as aliens, scattered throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia, 

Matthew Henry writes:



> By their external condition--Strangers dispersed throughout Pontus, Galatia, &c. They were chiefly Jews, descended (as Dr. Prideaux thinks) from those Jews who were translated from Babylon, by order of Antiochus king of Syria, about two hundred years before the coming of Christ, and placed in the cities of Asia Minor. It is very likely that our apostle had been among them, and converted them, being the apostle of the circumcision, and that he afterwards wrote this epistle to them from Babylon, where multitudes of the Jewish nation then resided. At present, their circumstances were poor and afflicted. (1.) The best of God's servants may, through the hardships of times and providences, be dispersed about, and forced to leave their native countries. Those of whom the world was not worthy have been forced to wander in mountains, in dens and caves of the earth. (2.) We ought to have a special regard to the dispersed persecuted servants of God. These were the objects of this apostle's particular care and compassion. We should proportion our regard to the excellency and to the necessity of the saints. (3.) The value of good people ought not to be estimated by their present external condition. Here was a set of excellent people, beloved of God, and yet strangers, dispersed and poor in the world; the eye of God was upon them in all their dispersions, and the apostle was tenderly careful to write to them for their direction and consolation.



John MacArthur contends that since the definite article is missing, the diaspora is not being used in a technical sense, therefore Peter is not referring to the diaspora of the Jews.

Thoughts?


----------



## MW (Mar 25, 2007)

Peter is probably extending the usual manner of omitting the article in the introduction of the epistle. Anarthrous nouns do not necessarily suggest indefiniteness unless there are contextual or syntactic reasons for it.


----------



## Herald (Mar 25, 2007)

armourbearer said:


> Peter is probably extending the usual manner of omitting the article in the introduction of the epistle. Anarthrous nouns do not necessarily suggest indefiniteness unless there are contextual or syntactic reasons for it.



Matthew - so would you be in agreement with Matthew Henry?


----------



## fredtgreco (Mar 25, 2007)

It appears to me that Peter is writing to a mixed church, 
that actually may be predominantly Gentiles. It seems unlikely that Peter would write this to Jews:

[bible]1 Peter 4:3-4[/bible]

or especially

[bible] 1 Peter 2:10[/bible]
[bible] 1 Peter 1:18[/bible]


----------



## MW (Mar 25, 2007)

Bill, I don't read MH as giving his opinion. Application 2 shows he can understand "diaspora" in a figurative sense. Peter employs many OT concepts in his letters, which leads commentators to think of a predominant Jewish audience. This still doesn't answer the question as to whether they were remnants of the historic diaspora (concrete) or in a similar condition (figurative). I don't believe the interpretation of the book is dependent upon the conclusion, but Peter's transference of OT concepts onto the NT church leads me to understand it figuratively.


----------



## MW (Mar 25, 2007)

1 Peter 1:18, "forefathers." See Ps. 106:6ff. Chap. 4:3, "will of the Gentiles" contains innuendo fitted to alarm any Jewish particularist; and see Ps. 106:34-36. 1 Peter 2:10, properly understood in the light of Hosea, reflects Peter's "restoration" theology -- a theology also contained in Ps. 106:47, 48. Blessings!


----------

