But if the first of Peter is in the main genuine, it did not escape corruption at the hands of the poisoners of truth in the second century. "Who verily was fore-ordained before _the foundation_ of the world, but was manifest in these last times for you." (i Peter i. 20.) "Forasmuch then as Christ hath suffered for us in the _flesh_, arm yourselves likewise with the same mind: for he that hath suffered in the _flesh_ hath ceased from sin." (1 Peter iv. I.) When these verses were written, Christianity had passed into its third period, for here is announced _a Christ_ who was co-eternal with the Father, and was _incarnate_. Most of the first chapter, if not all, is undoubtedly spurious. The boastful spirit with which it commences; the doctrinal announcements, and the tone in which they are delivered are entirely different from that shown in the following chapters. It is written as something to be used against an adversary, and, like all forgeries inserted into genuine writings for such purposes, much is crowded into a small space. In this chapter is declared the preexistence of Christ, or the Alexandrian Logos; the resurrection; foreknowledge and election, and sanctification--all disputed points in theology, which required the authority of an Apostle to settle: but neither of which had anything to do with Christ or the religion he taught. It will be noticed, that the crucifixion is mentioned twice: once in connection with the twentieth verse, which asserts the eternity of the Logos, and the other in close connection with the second verse, which holds to the doctrine of election. As the preexistence of Christ was no part of Christianity when Peter wrote, which was, according to Lardner and others, in A.D. 64, but belongs to a later period; and as the subject mentioned in the twentieth and twenty-first verses is the same, and cannot be separated, it follows that both are spurious. So we would say of the mention of the resurrection in the third verse. It is connected with a doctrinal point which had no existence in Peter's time, and, if it had, was in dispute, and was inserted into this chapter to give it Apostolic authority. The mention of the resurrection in the twenty-first verse of the third chapter, holds also a suspicious connection with the doctrine of baptism.