The First Epistle General of Peter

Tyndale New Testament Commentaries

by Alan M. Stibbs

The author was Vice-Principal of Oak Hill Theological College, London, England. This commentary is a lucid exposition of the inspired message of I Peter. It avoids the extremes of opinion in the interest of sound exegesis. The author reveals keen insight and sound scholarship while his style is clear and easily readable.

Genres: New Testament, Theology, Christian, Reference, Biblical Studies

Paperback

First published January 1, 1983

About the author

Before his death, Stibbs served as vice principal of Oak Hill Theological College in London. He edited several titles from InterVarsity Press, including The New Bible Commentary and Search the Scriptures.

Reviews

[Gene · Rating 3 out of 5]

In a book this size, not much more is possible than an overview of the book and some speculations about the epistle's form, author, and audience. Stibbs goes to quite an effort to substantiate the traditional view of Petrine authorship and time frame. He suspects that Silas (Silvanus) did most of the actual writing at Peter's instruction and added a more polished Greek style than Peter could have produced. In terms of format, he put forward that the book bears similarity to pre-baptismal training material, and he even quotes one expert who feels the epistle is a baptism liturgical text.

The commentary strikes well at the level of informed lay student. It did allow me to have a good review of I Peter.

[Peter Krol · Rating 3 out of 5]

An excellent short commentary on 1 Peter (in the Tyndale series). I thought the best part was the last 20 pages or so, where the author summarized the entire teaching of the epistle under the following headings:

The Nature of God
The Person and Work of Jesus Christ
The Work of the Holy Spirit
The People of God
The Place of Suffering
The Inevitability of God's Judgment
The Final Open Manifestation of Christ's Glory

Those pages were worth reading the commentary for. On the whole, Stibbs did a better job than Schreiner at showing the prevalence of grace through Peter's teaching. But Schreiner was better at understanding Peter's flow of thought.

This is worth checking out for someone who wants a pretty short and inexpensive commentary that's not too technical.