||This dissertation is an attempt to face the current cacophony in biblical scholarship by suggesting a multidimensional approach to biblical texts, as a reality-orientated, problem- solving and progressive-effective hypothesis. In chapter I the hermeneutical and exegetical dilemma is illustrated in the light of the history of research on 1 Peter. In section A an analysis of this cacophony identified a lack of theory and methodology as the dissonant elements in biblical interpretation. In section B a communication theory is proposed, to deal with the hermeneutical-exegetical dilemma. With the aid of insights from semiotics, linguistics, literary theory and reception theory, a multidimensional communication model lS outlined, to do justice to the static, dynamic and dialectic parameters of textual communication. In order to simplify this multidimensional (i e the intratextual dimension as the prelude, the historical dimension as the interlude and the metatextual dimension as the finale of text analysis) and plurimodal (i e syntactic, semantic and pragmatic modes of a text) model, the notions of static thrust, dynamic perspective and dialectic strategy are proposed as the basic parameters and constituents in textual communication. A theoretical outline of the implications of this model is also given in section B. In section C the presuppositions underlying this model are crosschecked in the light of the epistemologico- paradigmatic parameters of the philosophy of science. Chapters II, III and IV are an implementation of this communication model. In these chapters a methodology for the intratextual (chapter II A), historical (chapter III A) and metatextual (chapter IV A) analyses is proposed, whereafter in each of them, it is implemented, in order to determine the thrust, perspective and strategy of 1 Peter (i e in sections B and C of chapters II, III and IV respectively). The implementation of this multidimensional approach to 1 Peter has confirmed the hypothesis that a one -dimensional approach to ancient canonized texts is futile. The over - and underexposure of the text by either an absolutized text-immanent or historic al analysis is comparable to someone trying to solve Rubic's cube by turning only one level of squares. Therefore it is concluded that a multidimensional approach to textual communication which takes account of the basic relief-mapping function of the static thrust, the cosmologic-orientational function of the dynamic perspective and the persuasive function of the dialectic strategy, is required. Ultimately the analysis of the thrust, perspective and strategy of 1 Peter has illustrated new possibilities of experiencing the successful communication of an ancient canonized text as a cosmologic battle between perspectives.