T.B. Williams, «Reading Social Conflict through Greek Grammar: Reconciling the Difficulties of the Fourth-Class Condition in 1 Pet 3,14.», Vol. 26 (2013) 109-126
For the most part, it is assumed that in the Koine period the fourth-class condition indicated a future contingency with a possible or, in many cases, only a remote chance of fulfillment (e.g., “if this could happen”). If this meaning is applied to the condition in 1 Pet 3,14, it seems to imply not the reality of suffering, but merely the remote possibility, which is at odds with the popular understanding of the epistle’s social situation. This study is an attempt to examine the meaning of the fourth-class condition in 1 Pet 3,14 and its function(s) within the larger Petrine argument, a task which not only sheds light on the interpretation of 1 Pet 3,13-17, but also provides the unity of the epistle with some much-needed substantiation.
Reading Social Conflict through
Greek Grammar: Reconciling the Difficulties
of the Fourth-Class Condition in 1 Pet 3,14
TRAVIS B. WILLIAMS
For the most part, it is assumed that in the Koine period the fourth-class
condition indicated a future contingency with a possible or, in many cases,
only a remote chance of fulfillment (e.g., “if this could happen”). If this
meaning is applied to the condition in 1 Pet 3,14, it seems to imply not the
reality of suffering, but merely the remote possibility, which is at odds with
the popular understanding of the epistle’s social situation. This study is an
attempt to examine the meaning of the fourth-class condition in 1 Pet 3,14
and its function(s) within the larger Petrine argument, a task which not only
sheds light on the interpretation of 1 Pet 3,13-17, but also provides the unity
of the epistle with some much-needed substantiation.
Keywords: 1 Peter; Greek grammar; conditional sentence; suffering;
syntax.
1. Introduction
For those familiar with the study of 1 Peter, it goes without saying that
the question of the epistle’s compositional unity has been a lightning rod
of debate throughout the last century. The partition theories that once
held sway during the early and middle part of the 20th century have given
way, and a new consensus has emerged. Modern scholarship has reached
a general agreement that the letter is in fact a unified composition1. But
while this consensus can boast of considerable solidity, one of the central
issues within the debate still remains unresolved.
1
On this consensus, see J.H. Elliott, “The Rehabilitation of an Exegetical Step-Child: 1
Peter in Recent Research”, JBL 95 (1976) 251-52; É. Cothenet, “La Premiére de Pierre: Bilan
de 35 ans de recherches”, in H. Temporini and W. Haase (eds.), Aufstieg und Niedergang
der römischen Welt (Part II, Principat 25.5; Berlin/New York 1988) 3689-90; R.L. Webb,
“The Petrine Epistles: Recent Developments and Trends”, in S. McKnight and G.R. Osborne
(eds.), The Face of New Testament Studies: A Survey of Recent Research (Grand Rapids
2004) 374-76; M. Dubis, “Research on 1 Peter: A Survey of Scholarly Literature Since 1985”,
CBR 4 (2006) 206.
Filología Neotestamentaria - Vol. XXVI - 2013, pp. 109-126
Facultad de Filosofía y Letras - Universidad de Córdoba (España)