2 Peter 2:4-16
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Loyola University Chicago Loyola eCommons Dissertations Theses and Dissertations 2014 2 Peter 2:4-16: The Redaction of the Biblical and Intertestamental References Dependent on Jude 5-11 and Their Overall Significance for the Document Jenny Devivo Loyola University Chicago Recommended Citation Devivo, Jenny, "2 Peter 2:4-16: The Redaction of the Biblical and Intertestamental References Dependent on Jude 5-11 and Their Overall Significance for the Document" (2014). Dissertations. Paper 1079. http://ecommons.luc.edu/luc_diss/1079 This Dissertation is brought to you for free and open access by the Theses and Dissertations at Loyola eCommons. It has been accepted for inclusion in Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Loyola eCommons. For more information, please contact [email protected]. This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 License. Copyright © 2014 Jenny Devivo LOYOLA UNIVERSITY CHICAGO 2 PETER 2:4-16: THE REDACTION OF THE BIBLICAL AND INTERTESTAMENTAL REFERENCES DEPENDENT ON JUDE 5-11 AND THEIR OVERALL SIGNIFICANCE FOR THE DOCUMENT A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF THE GRADUATE SCHOOL IN CANDIDACY FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY PROGRAM IN THEOLOGY BY JENNY DE VIVO CHICAGO, ILLINOIS AUGUST 2014 Copyright by Jenny DeVivo, 2014 All rights reserved. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to thank my dissertation director, Dr. Wendy J. Cotter, C.S.J., for her assistance and guidance throughout my whole Ph.D. program. She has always demanded my best and has made me a much stronger scholar. I would also like to thank my readers, Dr. Thomas H. Tobin, S.J. and Dr. Robert A. DiVito whose expertise and careful analysis have strengthened and enriched my dissertation. I would also like to thank Mrs. Catherine Wolf and Mrs. Marianne Wolfe of the Theology Department who guided me through forms, checklists, and countless other important details that eluded me. We all need companions on the journey. I am particularly grateful to have shared the process with my dear friend and brilliant colleague, Dr. Teresa J. Calpino. Thank you for your support and, most especially, your friendship. My interest in biblical scholarship began with Dr. Troy W. Martin at St. Xavier University in Chicago. Thank you for sparking my curiosity, guiding me through the beginnings of learning biblical scholarship, and for being my champion and friend ever since. I would have not been able to go to graduate school at all if it were not for my dearest friend, Ms. Margaret C. Schaaf, who opened her home to me. Thank you for all of your encouragement, support, and love. None of this would have been possible without you. iii Finally, I would like to thank my family and friends for all the ways they have encouraged and loved me through this process. In particular, I would like to thank my long-time friends, Dr. Jennifer M. Nelson, M.D. and Ms. Jennifer A. Meehan who carried me through much of this process with their friendship, laughter, challenge, and encouragement. Alle Werke Gottes gehen langsam und leidvoll vor sich, dann aber stehen sie desto fester und blühen desto herrlicher. Thank you to all who have made my roots sturdier. The flower is all the lovelier because of you. iv For my sister, Samantha Benevelli, of blessed memory TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGMENTS iii ABSTRACT vii CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION 1 Introduction 1 Jude and 2 Peter Used a Common Source 2 Jude and 2 Peter Were Written by the Same Author 11 2 Peter as a Source for Jude 14 Jude as a Source for 2 Peter 26 CHAPTER 2: 2 PETER 2:4 VS. JUDE 6 35 Introduction 35 Textual Criticism 36 The Angels 37 Function of this Narrative in 2 Peter 53 CHAPTER 3: 2 PETER 2:5 57 Introduction 57 Textual Criticism 57 The Use of the Flood Tradition in 2 Peter 58 Function of this Narrative in 2 Peter 80 CHAPTER 4: 2 PETER 2:6–8 VS. JUDE 7 83 Introduction 83 Textual Criticism 84 Sodom and Gomorrah 86 Lot 90 Textual Commentary 95 Conclusion 105 CHAPTER 5: 2 PETER 2:15–17 VS. JUDE 11 107 Introduction 107 Textual Criticism 107 Textual Commentary 111 Conclusion 133 CHAPTER 6: CONCLUSIONS 135 BIBLIOGRAPHY 157 VITA 165 vi ABSTRACT For some time now, scholars have noted the close literary connection between Jude and 2 Peter, with thirteen of Jude’s twenty-five verses paralleled in 2 Peter. One could say that the argument over the direction of dependency makes it the ‘synoptic problem’ of the Catholic Epistles. Although the literary evidence is overwhelmingly supportive of 2 Peter’s dependency on Jude, the prominence of the figure of Peter in Christian history seems to have influenced certain scholars to propose the contrary. The arguments for the dependence of 2 Peter upon Jude will be addressed immediately in this dissertation since the focus of this study is on the way the author of 2 Peter redacted certain key texts in Jude, and more importantly, why he did so. Jude draws on the Old Testament and Pseudepigrapha to present six notorious sinners/ groups of sinners placing them in two clusters of three. In the first cluster (Jude 5-7// 2 Pet 2:4-8) Jude names the Exodus generation, the sinful angels, and the cities of Sodom and Gomorrah; 2 Peter substitutes the Flood for the Exodus generation and returns to the correct chronological order of the sinful angels, the Flood, and Sodom and Gomorrah. Jude’s second cluster (Jude 11) names three characters, Cain, Balaam, and Korah. 2 Peter 2:15-16 eliminates Cain and Korah, and expands upon the sinfulness of Balaam in 2:15- 16. While the majority of scholars conclude the 2 Peter is dependent on Jude, they have also made important contributions in the itemization of the ways in which the author vii of 2 Peter has redacted Jude as well. What they have failed to address is the patterns that show the reasons for these alterations and how 2 Peter uses these texts for a different message to the community. This dissertation now attends to that issue, by focusing on these four narrative references which are foundational to the rest of 2 Peter; they are the key to understanding the function and genre of 2 Peter. While Jude uses these texts to threaten eternal punishment for those who follow the heresy within his community, 2 Peter uses them to assure the community that sin will not go unpunished and that God will soon destroy the entire earth with fire, consuming the unrighteous and sparing the righteous. Further research that will belong to the full study in the dissertation will help to fill out these differences, illustrate their depth, and will show their impact for the rest of the document. viii CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION Introduction For some time now, scholars have noted the close literary connection between Jude and 2 Peter, with thirteen of Jude’s twenty-five verses paralleled in 2 Peter.1 One could say that the argument over the direction of dependency makes it the “synoptic problem” of the Catholic Epistles. Although the literary evidence is overwhelmingly supportive of 2 Peter’s dependency on Jude, the prominence of the figure of Peter in Christian history seems to have influenced certain scholars to propose the contrary.2 The issue of dependency concerning Jude and 2 Peter is the fundamental issue of the dissertation, and must be addressed first, for the dissertation will examine the manner in which the use of significant scripture passages in 2 Peter are drawn from Jude, but then redacted to serve a new message. Although most scholars concur that the evidence points 1 Jude 4–13, 16// 2 Pet 2:1–18 and Jude 17–18//2 Pet 3:2–3. 2 Richard Bauckham, Jude, 2 Peter, Word Biblical Commentary, 50 (Waco, TX: Word Books, 1983), 141– 2; J. Chaine, Les épîtres catholique: la seconde épître de Saint Pierre, les épîtres de Sain Jean, l'épître de Saint Jude (Paris: Gabalda, 1939), 18–24; Tord Fornberg, An Early Church in a Pluralistic Society: A Study of 2 Peter, Coniectanea biblical. New Testament Series; 9 (Lund: LiberLäromedel/ Gleerup, 1977), 31–59; Gene L. Green, Jude & 2 Peter, Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic, 2008), 327–30; Steven J. Kraftchick, Jude, 2 Peter, Abingdon New Testament Commentaries (Nashville: Abingdon, 2002), 79–81; J. N. D. Kelly, A Commentary on the Epistles of Peter and Jude, Black's New Testament Commentaries (London: Black, 1969), 226–7; Pheme Perkins, First and Second Peter, James, and Jude, Interpretation: A Bible Commentary for Teaching and Preaching (Louisville: John Knox Press, 1995), 178. 1 2 to 2 Peter as literarily dependent upon Jude, that evidence must be re-examined to reveal its degree of probability and not simply referenced and presumed. There are four possible scholarly positions concerning the question of the literary relationship between Jude and 2 Peter. We shall examine each of them, beginning with the less probable and moving toward the more probable theories. They are (1) Jude and 2 Peter used a common source, (2) Jude and 2 Peter were written by the same author, (3) Jude is dependent upon 2 Peter, (4) 2 Peter is dependent upon Jude. Jude and 2 Peter Used a Common Source Bo Reicke holds that a common source, whether oral or written, was the “best assumption.”3 He poses that Jude and 2 Peter were based on a “… sermon pattern formulated to resist the seducers of the church.”4 The grounds for this theory are not explained or explored, but briefly stated.