Text -- 1 Peter 2:23 (NET)

2:23 When he was maligned, he did not answer back; when he suffered, he threatened no retaliation, but committed himself to God who judges justly.

Commentary -- Word/Phrase Notes (per phrase)

Robertson: 1Pe 2:23

When he was reviled ( loidoroumenos ).

Present passive participle of loidoreō , old verb (from loidoros , reviler, 1Co 5:11) as in Joh 9:28.

Robertson: 1Pe 2:23

Reviled not again ( ouk anteloidorei ).

Imperfect active (for repeated incidents) of antiloidoreō , late and rare compound (Plutarch, Lucian, one papyrus example with compound following the simplex verb as here, Moulton and Milligan’ s Vocabulary ), here only in N.T. Idiomatic use of anti (in turn, return, back).

Robertson: 1Pe 2:23

Threatened not ( ouk ēpeilei ).

Imperfect again (repeated acts) of apeileō , old compound (from apeilē , threat, Act 9:1), in N.T. only here and Act 4:17.

Robertson: 1Pe 2:23

But committed himself ( paredidou de ).

Imperfect active again (kept on committing himself) of paradidōmi , to hand over, usually of one to a judge, but here not of another (as the Sanhedrin), but himself (supply heauton ), for Jesus uses this very idea in Luk 23:46 as he dies. Jesus thus handed himself and his cause over to the Father who judges righteously (tōi krinonti dikaiōs , dative of present active articular participle of krinō ).

Vincent: 1Pe 2:23

Reviled - again ( ἀντελοιδόρει )

Only here in the New Testament.

Vincent: 1Pe 2:23

Committed himself ( παρεδίδου )

But this gives a reflexive force to the verb which has no parallel. Commentators are divided, some supplying his cause, as Rev., in margin; others, his judgment; others, his revilers. Better, the subject of the contest - his insults and injuries. Salmond renders, but left it to him, etc.

Vincent: 1Pe 2:23

Judgeth righteously

Compare without respect of person, 1Pe 1:17.

Wesley: 1Pe 2:22-23

In all these instances the example of Christ is peculiarly adapted to the state of servants, who easily slide either into sin or guile, reviling their fellowservants, or threatening them, the natural result of anger without power.

Wesley: 1Pe 2:22-23

The only solid ground of patience in affliction. Isa 53:4, Isa 53:6-7, Isa 53:9.

JFB: 1Pe 2:23

Servants are apt to "answer again" (Tit 2:9). Threats of divine judgment against oppressors are often used by those who have no other arms, as for instance, slaves. Christ, who as Lord could have threatened with truth, never did so.

JFB: 1Pe 2:23

Or His cause, as man in His suffering. Compare the type, Jer 11:20. In this Peter seems to have before his mind Isa 53:8. Compare Rom 12:19, on our corresponding duty. Leave your case in His hands, not desiring to make Him executioner of your revenge, but rather praying for enemies. God's righteous judgment gives tranquillity and consolation to the oppressed.

Clarke: 1Pe 2:23

But committed himself - Though he could have inflicted any kind of punishment on his persecutors, yet to give us, in this respect also, an example that we should follow his steps, he committed his cause to him who is the righteous Judge. To avoid evil tempers, and the uneasiness and danger of avenging ourselves, it is a great advantage in all such cases to be able to refer our cause to God, and to be assured that the Judge of all the earth will do right

The Vulgate, one copy of the Itala, St. Cyprian, and Fulgentius, read, Tradebat autem judicanti se injuste ; "He delivered himself to him who judged unrighteously;"meaning Pontius Pilate. Some critics approve of this reading, but it has not sufficient evidence to recommend it as genuine.

Calvin: 1Pe 2:23

23.When he was reviled, or, reproached. Here Peter points out what we are to imitate in Christ, even calmly to bear wrongs, and not to avenge wrongs. For such is our disposition, that when we receive injuries, our minds immediately boil over with revengeful feelings; but Christ abstained from every kind of retaliation. Our minds, therefore, ought to be bridled, lest we should seek to render evil for evil.

But committed himself, or, his cause. The word cause is not expressed, but it is obviously understood. And Peter adds this for the consolation of the godly, that is, that if they patiently endured the reproaches and violence of the wicked, they would have God as their defender. For it would be a very hard thing for us, to be subjected to the will of the ungodly, and not to have God caring for our wrongs. Peter, therefore, adorns God with this high attribute, that he judgeth righteously, as though he had said, “It behoves us calmly to bear evils; God in the meantime will not neglect what belongs to him, but will shew himself to be a righteous judge.” However wanton then the ungodly may be for a time, yet they shall not be unpunished for the wrongs done now to the children of God. Nor is there any cause for the godly to fear, as though they were without any protection; for since it belongs to God to defend them and to undertake their cause, they are to possess their souls in patience.

Moreover, as this doctrine brings no small consolation, so it avails to allay and subdue the inclinations of the flesh. For no one can recumb on the fidelity and protection of God, but he who in a meek spirit waits for his judgment; for he who leaps to take vengeance, intrudes into what belongs to God, and suffers not God to perform his own office. In reference to this Paul says, “Give place to wrath,” (Rom 12:19;) and thus he intimates that the way is closed up against God that he might not himself judge, when we anticipate him. He then confirms what he had said by the testimony of Moses, “Vengeance is mine.” (Deu 32:35.) Peter in short meant this, that we after the example of Christ shall be more prepared to endure injuries, if we give to God his own honor, that is, if we, believing him to be a righteous judge, refer our right and our cause to him.

It may however be asked, How did Christ commit his cause to the Father; for if he required vengeance from him, this he himself says is not lawful for us; for he bids us to do good to those who injure us, to pray for those who speak evil of us. (Mat 5:44.) To this my reply is, that it appears evident from the gospel-history, that Christ did thus refer his judgment to God, and yet did not demand vengeance to be taken on his enemies, but that, on the contrary, he prayed for them, “Father,” he said, “forgive them.” (Luk 23:34.) And doubtless the feelings of our flesh are far from being in unison with the judgment of God. That any one then may commit his cause to him who judgeth righteously, it is necessary that he should first lay a check on himself, so that he may not ask anything inconsistent with the righteous judgment of God. For they who indulge themselves in looking for vengeance, concede not to God his office of a judge, but in a manner wish him to be an executioner. He then who is so calm in his spirit as to wish his adversaries to become his friends, and endeavors to bring them to the right way, rightly commits to God his own cause, and his prayer is, “Thou, O Lord, knowest my heart, how I wish them to be saved who seek to destroy me: were they converted, I should congratulate them; but if they continue obstinate in their wickedness, for I know that thou watchest over my safety, I commit my cause to thee.” This meekness was manifested by Christ; it is then the rule to be observed by us.

TSK: 1Pe 2:23

when he was : Psa 38:12-14; Isa 53:7; Mat 27:39-44; Mar 14:60,Mar 14:61, Mar 15:29-32; Luk 22:64, Luk 22:65, Luk 23:9, Luk 23:34-39; Joh 8:48, Joh 8:49, Joh 19:9-11; Act 8:32-35; Heb 12:3

threatened : Act 4:29, Act 9:1; Eph 6:9

but : 1Pe 4:19; Psa 10:14, Psa 31:5, Psa 37:5; Luk 23:46; Act 7:59; 2Ti 1:12

himself : or, his cause

judgeth : Gen 18:25; Psa 7:11, Psa 96:13; Act 17:31; Rom 2:5; 2Th 1:5; 2Ti 4:8; Rev 19:11

Commentary -- Word/Phrase Notes (per Verse)

Barnes: 1Pe 2:23

Who, when he was reviled, reviled not again - He did not use harsh and opprobrious words in return for those which he received:

(1) He was reviled. He was accused of being a seditious man; spoken of as a deceiver; charged with being in league with Beelzebub, the "prince of the devils"and condemned as a blasphemer against God. This was done:

\tx720 \tx1080 (a)\caps1     b\caps0 y the great and the influential of the land;

(b)\caps1     i\caps0 n the most public manner;

©\caps1     w\caps0 ith a design to alienate his friends from him;

(d)\caps1     w\caps0 ith most cutting and severe sarcasm and irony; and,

(e)\caps1     i\caps0 n reference to everything that would most affect a man of delicate and tender sensibility.

\caps1 (2) h\caps0 e did not revile those who had reproached him. He asked that justice might be done. He demanded that if he had spoken evil, they should bear witness of the evil; but beyond that he did not go. He used no harsh language. He showed no anger. He called for no revenge. He prayed that they might robe forgiven. He calmly stood and bore it all, for he came to endure all kinds of suffering in order that he might set us an example, and make an atonement for our sins.

When he suffered, he threatened not - That is, when he suffered injustice from others, in his trial and in his death, he did not threaten punishment. He did not call down the wrath of heaven. He did not even predict that they would be punished; he expressed no wish that they should be.

But committed himself to him that judgeth righteously - Margin, his cause. The sense is much the same. The meaning is, that he committed his cause, his name, his interests, the whole case, to God. The meaning of the phrase "that judgeth righteously"here is, that God would do him exact justice. Though wronged by people, he felt assured that he would do right. He would rescue his name from these reproaches; he would give him the honor in the world which he deserved; and he would bring upon those who had wronged him all that was necessary in order to show his disapprobation of what they had done, and all that would be necessary to give the highest support to the cause of virtue. Compare Luk 23:46. This is the example which is set before us when we are wronged. The whole example embraces these points:

(1) We should see to it that we ourselves are guiltless in the matter for which we are reproached or accused. Before we fancy that we are suffering as Christ did, we should be sure that our lives are such as not to deserve reproach. We cannot indeed hope to be as pure in all things as he was; but we may so live that if we are reproached and reviled we may be certain that it is not for any wrong that we have done to others, or that we do not deserve it from our fellow-men.

(2) When we are reproached and reviled, we should feel that we were called to this by our profession; that it was one of the things which we were taught to expect when we became Christians; that it is what the prophets and apostles endured, and what the Master himself suffered in an eminent degree; and that if we meet with the scorn of the great, the frivilous, the rich, the powerful, it is no more than the Saviour did, and no more than we have been taught to expect will be our portion. It may be well, too, to remember our unworthiness; and to reflect, that though we have done no wrong to the individual who reviles us yet that we are sinners, and that such reproaches may not be a useless admonisher of our being guilty before God. So David felt when reproached by Shimei: "So let him curse, because the Lord hath said unto him, Curse David. Who shall then say, Wherefore hast thou done so?"2Sa 16:10.

\caps1 (3) w\caps0 hen this occurs, we should calmly and confidently commit our cause to God. Our name, our character, our influence, our reputation, while living and after we are dead, we should leave entirely with him. We should not seek nor desire revenge. We should not call down the wrath of God on our persecutors and slanderers. We should calmly feel that God will give us the measure of reputation which we ought to have in the world, and that he will suffer no ultimate injustice to be done us. "Commit thy way unto the Lord; trust also in him, and he shall bring it to pass; and he shall bring forth thy righteousness as the light, and thy judgment as the noon-day,"Psa 37:5-6. The Latin Vulgate has here, "But he committed himself to him who judged him unjustly,"judicanti se injuste; that is, to Pontius Pilate, meaning that he left himself in his hands, though he knew that the sentence was unjust. But there is no authority for this in the Greek, and this is one of the instances in which that version departs from the original.

Poole: 1Pe 2:23

By Christ’ s being reviled we are to understand all those injurious words, reproaches, slanders, blasphemies, which his persecutors cast out against him.

Reviled not again therefore when he told the Jews they were of their father the devil, Joh 8:44 , that was not a reviling them, but a just accusation of them, or reproof of their devilish behaviour.

When he suffered when he was affected not only with verbal but real injuries, buffeted, spit upon, crowned with thorns, crucified.

He threatened not he was so far from avenging himself, or recompensing evil for evil, that he did not so much as threaten what he would afterward do to them.

But committed himself or his cause; neither is in the Greek, but either may be well supplied, and to the same purpose: the sense is, Christ did not retaliate, nor act any thing out of private revenge, but so referred himself, and the judgment of his cause, to his Father’ s good pleasure, as rather to desire pardon for his persecutors, than vengeance on them, Luk 23:34 .

To him that judgeth righteously: the apostle adds this of God’ s judging righteously, for the comfort of servants to whom he speaks, as Eph 6:8,9 Col 3:24 4:1 , and for the terror of masters, that the former might learn patience, and the latter moderation.

PBC: 1Pe 2:23

"... when he suffered, he threatened not."

A few years ago I read a physician’s description of the impact on the human body from scourging and crucifixion. We cannot imagine the pain our Lord endured during those few hours. How did he respond to such intense suffering? Our human nature would readily lash out at anyone who imposed such intense pain on us. What did Jesus do? He didn’t consider a retaliatory threat. He quietly endured.

How could anyone, even Jesus in his humanity, endure such an ordeal without striking back? Most teaching in discipleship builds, at times subtly but distinctly, on human willpower and stubborn determination. "Grab your bootstraps; maintain a ‘stiff upper lip.’ You can do it." Well meaning Christians under this influence try to practice these traits and inevitably fail. They proceed to beat up on themselves, to muster up greater determination, only to fail again. And again! Why? What are they missing? If Jesus left us an example to suffer silently for our faith, why can’t we live up to His teachings? We must be soft, second-class citizens of heaven to wilt so consistently under pressure. "I can wear the cross around my neck, but I can’t manage to wear it on my heart and in my life. I must be the worst excuse of a Christian who ever lived."

All this self-inflated determination misses the point wholly. Keep reading. He " ... committed himself to him that judgeth righteously." Even Jesus didn’t rely on his humanity, sinless as it was, to empower his exemplary conduct. He endured it through thoughtful and intentional reliance on God. Rather than stepping into the heat of the trial and striking back, our Lord resigned his whole self to the Father. His role in the flesh was not to judge or to correct every inequity, whether imposed against others or even against himself. Up to the moment of atonement, Jesus lived a life intended to exemplify the model Christian life for each of us. The New Testament contains distinct rules, but the power that drives the effective Christian life in the midst of heated resistance does not come from rules or from self-determination. Rules and stubborn self-will actually increase our burden; they never enable obedience. Further, the believer who relies on rules and self-will to comply with Biblical ethics will heap guilt and self-condemnation upon himself for his constant failures. This legalistic, self-reliant process always defeats itself. Oh, at times you will meet a Christian who thinks that he must put on a good appearance of faithfulness through such self-driven means, but in the heat of life’s struggles the shallow façade will crumble, revealing the emptiness behind it. The believer who practices such futile tactics then must either build another façade or face the fact that he/she has followed the wrong strategy in their lives and begin to seek a better way to live.

Eventually you will meet someone in authority who creates problems for you. It may be a supervisor on the job where you work. It may be a person in a social organization where you work to serve the needs of the less fortunate. It may be in your child’s school. Rest assured, you will meet this overbearing person face to face. How will you respond? Jesus was Peter’s example to lift him above angry, self-serving responses. Shall he become our example? We could do worse. We couldn’t do better!

Recently an advertising campaign against large sports utility vehicles appeared on television, using the question "What would Jesus drive?" as their theme. The implication is that Jesus would drive a small, fuel-efficient vehicle, not a behemoth gas-guzzler. The ad obviously appeals to the Christian community to reject the larger vehicles. What would Jesus drive? Frankly, if anyone gave the thoughtful time to study the gospels, the answer wouldn’t help the advertisers who ran this ad. Except for a ceremonial ride into Jerusalem on a donkey, Jesus walked everywhere he went.

"What would Jesus do?" offers a valid challenge to our culture, and to believers in our time. The question focuses on the fact that we should view Jesus as our example in all things. How did Jesus deal with the incredibly unfair and painful torture inflicted upon him? Peter answers the question. He "committed himself to him that judgeth righteously." In this situation the Father did not judge Jesus. Rather He judged those who reviled and tortured him. Jesus committed his unfair treatment at the hands of cruel men to the Father for judgment. He took no interest in revenge or in striking back at them. When you face the unfairness that occasionally invades your life, trivial in comparison with what Jesus faced, do you look for a way to step back from retaliation and commit the matter to God for His judgment? What a powerful incentive!

452

Haydock: 1Pe 2:23

Christ, who was incapable of sinning, did not revile [7] them that reviled him; he suffered all with patience; he willingly gave himself up to Pontius Pilate, that judged him, and condemned him unjustly [8] to the death of the cross: and remember that all he suffered was to satisfy for your sins, that he bore our sins in his own body on the tree of the cross. Remember always this great benefit of your redemption, and of your being called to believe in him, and to be eternally happy by following his doctrine; that all of you were as sheep going astray, lost in your ignorance and in your sins, but that by his grace and by his merits you are now called and converted to Jesus Christ, the great pastor and bishop of your souls. You are happy if you live under his care, inspection, and protection. (Witham)

===============================

[BIBLIOGRAPHY]

Cum malediceretur, non maledicebat, Greek: loidoroumenos, convitiis appetitus; improperly translated, cursed, by Mr. N.

===============================

[BIBLIOGRAPHY]

Judicanti se injuste. In the present Greek we read Greek: dikaios, juste, as also some Latin Fathers read. St. Augustine, (tract. 21. in Joan.) Commendabat autem judicanti juste; and so the sense is, that he commanded and committed his cause to God, the just judge of all.

====================

Gill: 1Pe 2:23

Who when he was reviled, reviled not again,.... When he was reproached as a glutton, a winebibber, a friend of publicans and sinners, all the reply he made was, that Wisdom is justified of her children; and when he was charged with casting out devils by Beelzebub, the prince of devils, he defended himself, not with bad language, but with strong reasonings; and when he was said to be a Samaritan, and had a devil, his only answer was, that he had not, that he honoured his Father, and they dishonoured him; and when he was reviled on the cross, by those that passed by, by the chief priests, and Scribes, and the thieves that were crucified with him, he made no return, he opened not his mouth, and much less in a recriminating way,

When he suffered he threatened not; when he endured buffetings, and scourgings in his body, when the officers in the palace of the high priests spit in his face, buffeted him, and smote him with the palms of their hands, and bid him prophesy who smote him, all which were very provoking; yet he said not one word to them, much less threatened them with what he would do to them for such usage another day, when he would let them know, with vengeance, who it was that smote him; no, he took all patiently from them, and from Pilate, and the Roman soldiers, when scourged by them; he gave his back to the smiters, and his cheeks to them that plucked off the hair; and when he suffered crucifixion, and was put to such distressing pains and agonies, he did not threaten his crucifiers with a future judgment, when he would take vengeance, and execute his wrath upon them, but prays to his Father for the forgiveness of their sins: and, as it follows,

but committed himself to him that judgeth righteously; he commended his Spirit, or soul, to God his Father, and committed his cause to him, to vindicate it in what way he should think fit, who he knew was the Judge of all the earth, that would do right; and so the Syriac version supplies it with דיניה, "his judgment": which he left with God, the righteous Judge, to whom vengeance belongs; and which is an example, and an instruction to the saints to do so likewise; not to render railing for railing, or to seek revenge, but to leave their cause with their God, who will, in his own time, avenge the wrongs and injuries done them. The Vulgate Latin version reads, contrary to all the Greek copies, and other versions, "but delivered himself to him that judgeth unjustly"; the sense of which is, that Christ delivered himself into the hands of Pilate, who unjustly condemned him to death; but is neither the reading, nor sense of the text.

Commentary -- Verse Notes / Footnotes

NET Notes: 1Pe 2:23

¹ tn Grk “who being maligned,” continuing the reference to Christ. Because of the length and complexity of the Greek sentence, a new sentence was started here in the translation.

² tn Grk “he did not threaten, but.”

³ sn An allusion to Isa 53:7.

⁴ tn Grk “to the one”; the referent (God) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

Geneva Bible: 1Pe 2:23

Who, when he was reviled, reviled not again; when he suffered, he threatened not; but ^{( 24 )} committed [himself] to him ^{( 25 )} that judgeth righteously:

^{( 24 )} He shows them a remedy against injuries, that is, that they commend their cause to God, by the example of Christ.

^{( 25 )} He seems now to turn his speech to masters, who have also themselves a master and judge in heaven, who will justly avenge the injuries that are done to servants, without any respecting of people.

Commentary -- Verse Range Notes

TSK Synopsis: 1Pe 2:1-25

1 He exhorts them from the breach of charity;

4 shewing that Christ is the foundation whereupon they are built.

11 He beseeches them also to abstain from fleshly lusts;

13 to be obedient to magistrates;

18 and teaches servants how to obey their masters;

20 patiently suffering for well doing, after the example of Christ.

MHCC: 1Pe 2:18-25

Servants in those days generally were slaves, and had heathen masters, who often used them cruelly; yet the apostle directs them to be subject to the masters placed over them by Providence, with a fear to dishonour or offend God. And not only to those pleased with reasonable service, but to the severe, and those angry without cause. The sinful misconduct of one relation, does not justify sinful behaviour in the other; the servant is bound to do his duty, though the master may be sinfully froward and perverse. But masters should be meek and gentle to their servants and inferiors. What glory or distinction could it be, for professed Christians to be patient when corrected for their faults? But if when they behaved well they were ill treated by proud and passionate heathen masters, yet bore it without peevish complaints, or purposes of revenge, and persevered in their duty, this would be acceptable to God as a distinguishing effect of his grace, and would be rewarded by him. Christ's death was designed not only for an example of patience under sufferings, but he bore our sins; he bore the punishment of them, and thereby satisfied Divine justice. Hereby he takes them away from us. The fruits of Christ's sufferings are the death of sin, and a new holy life of righteousness; for both which we have an example, and powerful motives, and ability to perform also, from the death and resurrection of Christ. And our justification; Christ was bruised and crucified as a sacrifice for our sins, and by his stripes the diseases of our souls are cured. Here is man's sin; he goes astray; it is his own act. His misery; he goes astray from the pasture, from the Shepherd, and from the flock, and so exposes himself to dangers without number. Here is the recovery by conversion; they are now returned as the effect of Divine grace. This return is, from all their errors and wanderings, to Christ. Sinners, before their conversion, are always going astray; their life is a continued error.

Matthew Henry: 1Pe 2:13-25

The general rule of a Christian conversation is this, it must be honest, which it cannot be if there be not a conscientious discharge of all relative duties. The apostle here particularly treats of these distinctly.

I. The case of subjects. Christians were not only reputed innovators in religion, but disturbers of the state; it was highly necessary, therefore, that the apostle should settle the rules and measures of obedience to the civil magistrate, which he does here, where,

1. The duty required is submission, which comprises loyalty and reverence to their persons, obedience to their just laws and commands, and subjection to legal penalties.

2. The persons or objects to whom this submission is due are described, (1.) More generally: Every ordinance of man. Magistracy is certainly of divine right; but the particular form of government, the power of the magistrate, and the persons who are to execute this power, are of human institution, and are governed by the laws and constitutions of each particular country; and this is a general rule, binding in all nations, let the established form of be what it will. (2.) Particularly: To the king, as supreme, first in dignity and most eminent in degree; the king is a legal person, not a tyrant: or unto governors, deputies, proconsuls, rulers of provinces, who are sent by him, that is, commissioned by him to govern.

3. The reasons to enforce this duty are,

(1.) For the Lord's sake, who had ordained magistracy for the good of mankind, who has required obedience and submission (Rom 13:1-14), and whose honour is concerned in the dutiful behavior of subjects to their sovereigns.

(2.) From the end and use of the magistrate's office, which are, to punish evil-doers, and to praise and encourage all those that do well. They were appointed for the good of societies; and, where this end is not pursued, the fault is not in their institution but their practice. [1.] True religion is the best support of civil government; it requires submission for the Lord's sake, and for conscience' sake. [2.] All the punishments, and all the magistrates in the world, cannot hinder but there will be evil-doers in it. [3.] The best way the magistrate can take to discharge his own duty, and to amend the world, is to punish well and reward well.

(3.) Another reason why Christians should submit to the evil magistrate is because it is the will of God, and consequently their duty; and because it is the way to put to silence the malicious slanders of ignorant and foolish men, 1Pe 2:15. Learn, [1.] The will of God is, to a good man, the strongest reason for any duty. [2.] Obedience to magistrates is a considerable branch of a Christian's duty: So is the will of God. [3.] A Christian must endeavour, in all relations, to behave himself so as to put to silence the unreasonable reproaches of the most ignorant and foolish men. [4.] Those who speak against religion and religious people are ignorant and foolish.

(4.) He reminds them of the spiritual nature of Christian liberty. The Jews, from Deu 17:15, concluded that they were bound to obey no sovereign but one taken from their own brethren; and the converted Jews thought they were free from subjection by their relation to Christ. To prevent their mistakes, the apostle tells the Christians that they were free, but from what? Not from duty or obedience to God's law, which requires subjection to the civil magistrate. They were free spiritually from the bondage of sin and Satan, and the ceremonial law; but they must not make their Christian liberty a cloak or covering for any wickedness, or for the neglect of any duty towards God or towards their superiors, but must still remember they were the servants of God. Learn, [1.] All the servants of Christ are free men (Joh 8:36); they are free from Satans' dominion, the law's condemnation, the wrath of God, the uneasiness of duty, and the terrors of death. [2.] The servants of Jesus Christ ought to be very careful not to abuse their Christian liberty; they must not make it a cover or cloak for any wickedness against God or disobedience to superiors.

4. The apostle concludes his discourse concerning the duty of subjects with four admirable precepts: - (1.) Honour all men. A due respect is to be given to all men; the poor are not to be despised (Pro 17:5); the wicked must be honoured, not for their wickedness, but for any other qualities, such as wit, prudence, courage, eminency of employment, or the hoary head. Abraham, Jacob, Samuel, the prophets, and the apostles, never scrupled to give due honour to bad men. (2.) Love the brotherhood. All Christians are a fraternity, united to Christ the head, alike disposed and qualified, nearly related in the same interest, having communion one with another, and going to the same home; they should therefore love one another with an especial affection. (3.) Fear God with the highest reverence, duty, and submission; if this be wanting, none of the other three duties can be performed as they ought. (4.) Honour the king with that highest honour that is peculiarly due to him above other men.

II. The case of servants wanted an apostolical determination as well as that of subjects, for they imagined that their Christian liberty set them free from their unbelieving and cruel masters; to this the apostle answers, Servants, be subject, 1Pe 2:18. By servants he means those who were strictly such, whether hired, or bought with money, or taken in the wars, or born in the house, or those who served by contract for a limited time, as apprentices. Observe,

1. He orders them to be subject, to do their business faithfully and honestly, to conduct themselves, as inferiors ought, with reverence and affection, and to submit patiently to hardships and inconveniences. This subjection they owe to their masters, who have a right to their service; and that not only to the good and gentle, such as use them well and abate somewhat of their right, but even to the crooked and perverse, who are scarcely to be pleased at all. Learn, (1.) Servants ought to behave themselves to their masters with submission, and fear of displeasing them. (2.) The sinful misconduct of one relation does not justify the sinful behaviour of the other; the servant is bound to do his duty, though the master be sinfully froward and perverse. (3.) Good people are meek and gentle to their servants and inferiors. Our holy apostle shows his love and concern for the souls of poor servants, as well as for higher people. Herein he ought to be imitated by all inferior ministers, who should distinctly apply their counsels to the lower, the meaner, the younger, and the poorer sort of their hearers, as well as others.

2. Having charged them to be subject, he condescends to reason with them about it.

(1.) If they were patient under their hardships, while they suffered unjustly, and continued doing their duty to their unbelieving and untoward masters, this would e acceptable to God, and he would reward all that they suffered for conscience towards him; but to be patient when they were justly chastised would deserve no commendation at all; it is only doing well, and suffering patiently for that, which is acceptable with God, 1Pe 2:19, 1Pe 2:20. Learn, [1.] There is no condition so mean but a man may live conscientiously in it, and glorify God in it; the meanest servant may do so. [2.] The most conscientious persons are very often the greatest sufferers. For conscience towards God, they suffer wrongfully; they do well, and suffer for it; but sufferers of this sort are praiseworthy, they do honour to God and to religion, and they are accepted of him; and this is their highest support and satisfaction. [3.] Deserved sufferings must be endured with patience: If you are buffeted for your faults, you must take it patiently. Sufferings in this world are not always pledges of our future happiness; if children or servants be rude and undutiful, and suffer for it, this will neither be acceptable with God nor procure the praise of men.

(2.) More reasons are given to encourage Christian servants to patience under unjust sufferings, 1Pe 2:21. [1.] From their Christian calling and profession: Hereunto were you called. [2.] From the example of Christ, who suffered for us, and so became our example, that we should follow his steps, whence learn, First, Good Christians are a sort of people called to be sufferers, and therefore they must expect it; by the terms of Christianity they are bound to deny themselves, and take up the cross; they are called by the commands of Christ, by the dispensations of Providence, and by the preparations of divine grace; and, by the practice of Jesus Christ, they are bound to suffer when thus called to it. Secondly, Jesus Christ suffered for you, or for us; it was not the Father that suffered, but he whom the Father sanctified, and sent into the world, for that end; it was both the body and soul of Christ that suffered, and he suffered for us, in our stead and for our good, 1Pe 2:24. Thirdly, The sufferings of Christ should quiet us under the most unjust and cruel sufferings we meet with in the world. He suffered voluntarily, not for himself, but for us, with the utmost readiness, with perfect patience, from all quarters, and all this though he was God - man; shall not we sinners, who deserve the worst, submit to the light afflictions of this life, which work for us unspeakable advantages afterwards?

3. The example of Christ's subjection and patience is here explained and amplified: Christ suffered, (1.) Wrongfully, and without cause; for he did no sin, 1Pe 2:22. He had done no violence, no injustice or wrong to any one - he wrought no iniquity of any sort whatever; neither was guile found in his mouth (Isa 53:9), his words, as well as his actions, were all sincere, just, and right. (2.) Patiently: When he was reviled, he reviled not again (1Pe 2:23); when they blasphemed him, mocked him, called him foul names, he was dumb, and opened not his mouth; when they went further, to real injuries, beating, buffeting, and crowning him with thorns, he threatened not; but committed both himself and his cause to God that judgeth righteously, who would in time clear his innocency, and avenge him on his enemies. Learn, [1.] Our Blessed Redeemer was perfectly holy, and so free from sin that no temptation, no provocation whatsoever, could extort from him so much as the least sinful or indecent word. [2.] Provocations to sin can never justify the commission of it. The rudeness, cruelty, and injustice of enemies, will not justify Christians in reviling and revenge; the reasons for sin can never be so great, but we have always stronger reasons to avoid it. [3.] The judgment of God will determine justly upon every man and every cause; and thither we ought, with patience and resignation, to refer ourselves.

4. Lest any should think, from what is said, 1Pe 2:21-23, that Christ's death was designed merely for an example of patience under sufferings, the apostle here adds a more glorious design and effect of it: Who his own self, etc., where note, (1.) The person suffering - Jesus Christ: His own self - in his own body. The expression his own self is emphatic, and necessary to show that he verified all the ancient prophecies, to distinguish him from the Levitical priests (who offered the blood of others, but he by himself purged our sins, Heb 1:3), and to exclude all others from participation with him in the work of man's redemption: it is added, in his body; not but that he suffered in his soul (Mat 26:38), but the sufferings of the soul were inward and concealed, when those of the body were visible and more obvious to the consideration of these suffering servants, for whose sake this example is produced. (2.) The sufferings he underwent were stripes, wounds, and death, the death of the cross - servile and ignominious punishments! (3.) The reason of his sufferings: He bore our sins, which teaches, [1.] That Christ, in his sufferings, stood charged with our sins, as one who had undertaken to put them away by the sacrifice of himself, Isa 53:6. [2.] That he bore the punishment of them, and thereby satisfied divine justice. [3.] That hereby he takes away our sins, and removes them away from us; as the scape-goat did typically bear the sins of the people on his head, and then carried them quite away, (Lev 16:21, Lev 16:22), so the Lamb of God does first bear our sins in his own body, and thereby take away the sins of the world, Joh 1:29. (4.) The fruits of Christ's sufferings are, [1.] Our sanctification, consisting of the death, the mortification of sin, and a new holy life of righteousness, for both which we have an example, and powerful motives and abilities also, from the death and resurrection of Christ. [2.] Our justification. Christ was bruised and crucified as an expiatory sacrifice, and by his stripes we are healed. Learn, First, Jesus Christ bore the sins of all his people, and expiated them by his death upon the cross. Secondly, No man can depend safely upon Christ, as having borne his sin and expiated his guilt, till he dies unto sin and lives unto righteousness.

5. The apostle concludes his advice to Christian servants, by putting them in mind of the difference between their former and present condition, 1Pe 2:25. They were as sheep going astray, which represents, (1.) Man's sin: he goes astray; it is his own act, he is not driven, but does voluntary go astray. (2.) His misery: he goes astray from the pasture, from the shepherd, and from the flock, and so exposes himself to innumerable dangers. (3.) Here is the recovery of these by conversion: But are now returned. The word is passive, and shows that the return of a sinner is the effect of divine grace. This return is from all their errors and wanderings, to Christ, who is the true careful shepherd, that loves his sheep, and laid down his life for them, who is the most vigilant pastor, and bishop, or overseer of souls. Learn, [1.] Sinners, before their conversion, are always going astray; their life is a continued error. [2.] Jesus Christ is the supreme shepherd and bishop of souls, who is always resident with his flock, and watchful over them. [3.] Those that expect the love and care of this universal pastor must return to him, must die unto sin, and live unto righteousness.

Barclay: 1Pe 2:18-25

Here is the passage which would be relevant to by far the greatest number of the readers of this letter, for Peter writes to servants and slaves, and they formed by far the greatest part of the early church. The word Peter uses for servants is not douloi (1401), which is the commonest word for slaves, but oiketai (3610), the word for the household and domestic slaves.

To understand the real meaning of what Peter is saying we must understand something of the nature of slavery in the time of the early church. In the Roman Empire there were as many as 60,000,000 slaves, Slavery began with Roman conquests, slaves being originally mainly prisoners taken in war, and in very early times Rome had few slaves but by New Testament times slaves were counted by the million.

It was by no means only menial tasks which were performed by slaves. Doctors, teachers, musicians, actors, secretaries, stewards were slaves. In fact, all the work of Rome was done by slaves. Roman attitude was that there was no point in being master of the world and doing one's own work. Let the slaves do that and let the citizens live in pampered idleness. The supply of slaves would never run out.

Slaves were not allowed to marry; but they cohabited; and the children born of such a partnership were the property of the master, not of the parents, just as the lambs born to the sheep belonged to the owner of the flock, and not to the sheep.

It would be wrong to think that the lot of slaves was always wretched and unhappy, and that they were always treated with cruelty. Many slaves were loved and trusted members of the family; but one great inescapable fact dominated the whole situation. In Roman law a slave was not a person but a thing; and he had absolutely no legal rights whatsoever. For that reason there could be no such thing as justice where a slave was concerned. Aristotle writes, "There can be no friendship nor justice towards inanimate things; indeed, not even towards a horse or an ox, nor yet towards a slave as a slave. For master and slave have nothing in common; a slave is a living tool, just as a tool is an inanimate slave." Varro divides the instruments of agriculture into three classes--the articulate, the inarticulate and the mute, "the articulate comprising the slaves, the inarticulate comprising the cattle, and the mute comprising the vehicles." The only difference between a slave and a beast or a farmyard cart was that a slave happened to be able to speak. Peter Chrysologus sums the matter up: "Whatever a master does to a slave, undeservedly, in anger, willingly, unwillingly, in forgetfulness, after careful thought, knowingly, unknowingly, is judgment, justice and law." In regard to a slave, his master's will, and even his master's caprice, was the only law.

The dominant fact in the life of a slave was that, even if he was well treated, he remained a thing. He did not possess even the elementary rights of a person and for him justice did not even exist.

Barclay: 1Pe 2:18-25

Into this situation came Christianity with its message that every man was precious in the sight of God. The result was that within the Church the social barriers were broken down. Callistus, one of the earliest bishops of Rome, was a slave; and Perpetua, the aristocrat, and Felicitas, the slave-girl, met martyrdom hand in hand. The great majority of the early Christians were humble folk and many of them were slaves. It was quite possible in the early days that the slave should be the president of the congregation and the master a member of it. This was a new and revolutionary situation. It had its glory and it had its dangers. In this passage Peter is urging the slave to be a good slave and a faithful workman; for he sees two dangers.

(i) Suppose both master and servant became Christians; there arose the danger that the slave might presume upon the new relationship and make an excuse for shirking his work, assuming that since he and his master were both Christians, he could get away with anything. That situation is by no means at an end. There are still people who trade on the goodwill of a Christian master and think that the fact that both they and their employers are Christians gives them a right to dispense with discipline and punishment. But Peter is quite clear. The relationship between Christian and Christian does not abolish the relationship between man and man. The Christian must, indeed, be a better workman than anyone else. His Christianity is not a reason for claiming exemption from discipline; it should bring him under self-discipline and make him more conscientious than anyone else.

(ii) There was the danger that the new dignity which Christianity brought him would make the slave rebel and seek to abolish slavery altogether. Some students are puzzled that no New Testament writer ever pleads for the abolition of slavery or even says in so many words that it is wrong. The reason was simple. To have encouraged the slaves to rise against their masters would have been the way to speedy disaster. There had been such revolts before and they had always been quickly and savagely crushed. In any event, such teaching would merely have gained for Christianity the reputation of being a subversionary religion. There are some things which cannot happen quickly; there are some situations in which the leaven has to work and in which haste is the surest way to delay the desired end. The leaven of Christianity had to work in the world for many generations before the abolition of slavery became a practical possibility. Peter was concerned that Christian slaves should demonstrate to the world that their Christianity did not make them disgruntled rebels but rather workmen who had found a new inspiration towards doing an honest day's work. It will still often happen that, when some situation cannot at the time be changed, the Christian duty is to be Christian within that situation and to accept what cannot be changed until the leaven has worked.

Barclay: 1Pe 2:18-25

But Christianity did not leave the matter in that merely negative form. It introduced three great new principles into a man's attitude as a servant and a workman.

(i) Christianity introduced a new relationship between master and man. When Paul sent the runaway slave Onesimus back to Philemon, he did not for a moment suggest that Philemon should set Onesimus free. He did not suggest that Philemon should cease to be the master and that Onesimus should cease to be the slave. What he did say was that Philemon must receive Onesimus not now as a servant, but as a brother beloved (Phm 1:16). Christianity did not abolish social differences; but it introduced a new relationship of brotherhood in which these other differences were overpassed and transformed. Where there is real brotherhood, it does not matter if you call one man master and the other servant. There is between them a bond which transforms the necessary differences which the circumstances of life make necessary. The solution of the world's problems lies in the new relationship between man and man.

(ii) Christianity introduced a new attitude to work. It is the conviction of the New Testament that all work must be done for Jesus Christ. Paul writes: "Whatever you do in word or deed, do everything in the name of the Lord Jesus" (Col 3:17). "Whether you eat or drink, or whatever you do, do all to the glory of God" (1Co 10:31). In the Christian ideal work is not done for an earthly master or for personal prestige or to make so much money; it is done for God. It is, of course, true that a man must work in order to earn a wage and he must work to satisfy a master; but beyond that there is for the Christian the conviction that his work must be done well enough to be able to show it to God without shame.

(iii) But when these great ideals were set against the situation in the early church--and the situation does not entirely change--one great question arose. Suppose a man has the Christian attitude to men and to work and is treated with injustice, insult and injury--what then? Peter's great answer is that this is exactly what happened to Jesus. He was none other than the Suffering Servant. 1Pe 2:21-25are full of reminiscences and quotations of Isa 53 , the supreme picture of the Suffering Servant of God, which came to life in Jesus. He was without sin and yet he was insulted and he suffered; but he accepted the insults and the suffering with serene love and bore them for the sins of mankind.

In so doing he left us an example that we should follow in his steps (1Pe 2:21). The word Peter uses for example is very vivid. It is hupogrammos (5261), a word which comes from the way in which children were taught to write in the ancient world. Hupogrammos (5261) can mean two things--an outline sketch which the learner had to fill in or the copyhead of copperplate handwriting in a writing exercise book which the child had to copy out on the lines below. Jesus gave us the pattern which we have to follow. If we have to suffer insult and injustice and injury, we have only to go through what he has already gone through. It may be that at the back of Peter's mind there was a glimpse of a tremendous truth. That suffering of Jesus was for the sake of man's sin; he suffered in order to bring men back to God. And it may be that, when the Christian suffers insult and injury with uncomplaining steadfastness and unfailing love, he shows such a life to others as will lead them to God.

Barclay: 1Pe 2:18-25

(1) The Shepherd Of The Souls Of Men

In the last verse of this chapter we come upon two of the great names for God--the Shepherd and Bishop of our souls--as the King James Version has it.

(i) God is the Shepherd of the souls of men. The Greek is poimen (4166) and shepherd is one of the oldest descriptions of God. The Psalmist has it in the best-loved of all the Psalms: "The Lord is my shepherd" (Psa 23:1). Isaiah has it: "He will feed his flock like a shepherd: he will gather the lambs in his arms; he will carry them in his bosom, and gently lead those that are with young" (Isa 40:11).

The great king whom God was going to send to Israel would be the shepherd of his people. Ezekiel hears the promise of God: "And I will set up over them one shepherd, my servant David, and he shall feed them; he shall feed them, and be their shepherd" (Eze 34:23; Eze 37:24).

This was the title which Jesus took to himself when he called himself the Good Shepherd and when he said that the Good Shepherd lays down his life for the sheep (Joh 10:1-18). To Jesus the men and women who did not know God and who were waiting for what he could give them were like sheep without a shepherd (Mar 6:34). The great privilege given to the servant and the minister of Christ is to shepherd the flock of God (Joh 21:16; 1Pe 5:2).

It may be difficult for those of us who live in an industrial civilization to grasp the greatness of this picture; but in the East the picture would be very vivid, particularly in Judaea, where there was a narrow central plateau which held danger on either side. It was on this narrow tableland that the sheep grazed. Grass was sparse; there were no protecting walls; and the sheep wandered. The shepherd, therefore, had to be ceaselessly and sleeplessly on the watch lest harm should come to his flock.

In The Historical Geography of the Holy Land Sir George Adam Smith describes the shepherd of Judaea. "With us, sheep are often left to themselves; but I do not remember ever to have seen in the East a flock of sheep without a shepherd. In such a landscape as Judaea, where a day's pasture is thinly scattered over an unfenced track of country, covered with delusive paths, still frequented by wild beasts, and rolling off into the desert, the man and his character are indispensable. On some high moor, across which at night the hyenas howl, when you meet him, sleepless, far-sighted, weather-beaten, armed, leaning upon his staff, and looking out over his scattered sheep, everyone of them on his heart, you understand why the shepherd of Judaea sprang to the front in his people's history; why they gave his name to their king, and made him the symbol of providence; why Christ took him as the type of self-sacrifice."

This word shepherd tells us most vividly of the ceaseless vigilance and the self-sacrificing love of God for us who are his flock. "We are his people and the sheep of his pasture" (Psa 100:3).

(2) The Guardian Of Our Souls

(ii) The King James Version speaks of God as the Shepherd and Bishop of our souls; but nowadays Bishop is an inadequate and misleading translation of the Greek (episkopos, 1985).

Episkopos (1985) is a word with a great history. In Homer's Iliad, Hector, the great champion of the Trojans, is called the episkopos (1985) who, during his lifetime, guarded the city of Troy and kept safe its noble wives and infants. Episkopos (1985) is used of the gods who are the guardians of the treaties which men make and of the agreements to which men come, and who are the protectors of house and home. Justice, for instance, is the episkopos (1985), who sees to it that a man shall pay the price for the wrong that he has done.

In Plato's Laws the Guardians of the state are those whose duty it is to oversee the games, the feeding and the education of the children that "they may be sound of hand and foot, and may in no wise, if possible, get their natures warped by their habits." The people whom Plato calls market-stewards are the episkopoi (1985) who "supervise personal conduct, keeping an eye on temperate and outrageous behaviour, so as to punish him who needs punishment."

In Athenian law and administration the episkopoi (1985) were governors and administrators and inspectors sent out to subject states to see that law and order and loyalty were observed. In Rhodes the main magistrates were five episkopoi (1985) who presided over the good government and the law and order of the state.

Episkopos (1985) is, therefore, a many-sided but always a noble word. It means the protector of public safety; the guardian of honour and honesty; the overseer of right education and of public morals; the administrator of public law and order.

So, then, to call God the episkopos (1985) of our souls is to call him our Guardian, our Protector, our Guide, and our Director.

God is the Shepherd and the Guardian of our souls. In his love he cares for us; in his power he protects us; and in his wisdom he guides us in the right way.

Constable: 1Pe 2:11--4:12

III. The responsibilities of the christian individually 2:11--4:11

Since Christians have a particular vocation in the world certain conduct was essential for Peter's readers.

"The address, Dear friends, I appeal to you,' in 2:11 marks a shift from the identity of God's people to their consequent responsibility in a hostile world. If 1:3-2:10 expanded on their identity as chosen people' (cf. 1:2), the reference to them as aliens and strangers' in 2:11 serves as a reminder that they are at the same time living as strangers' (again cf. 1:2) in contemporary society."⁸²

Constable: 1Pe 2:13--3:13

B. Respect for Others 2:13-3:12

This section of the letter clarifies what it means to function obediently as God's people in a hostile world. It contains one of the tables of household duties in the New Testament (2:13-3:7; cf. Eph. 5:21-6:9; Col. 3:18-4:1). Luther referred to these sections as Haustafeln, and some scholars still use this technical term when referring to these lists. However this one begins with instructions regarding the Christian's relationship to the state, which is similar to Romans 13:1-7. It is particularly our duties in view of suffering for our faith that concerned Peter, as is clear from his choice of material.

Constable: 1Pe 2:18-25

2. Slaves' respect for their masters 2:18-25

Peter proceeded to address the situation of Christians working under the authority of others.

"The unusual fact, unnoticed by most Bible readers, is that he [Peter], along with Paul (1 Cor. 7:21; Eph. 6:5-8; Col. 3:22-25; 1 Tim. 6:1-2; Tit. 2:9-10) and later Christian writers (Did. 4:11; Barn. 19:7), addresses slaves at all, for Jewish and Stoic duty codes (which in many respects this code in 1 Peter, as well as those in Ephesians and Colossians, resembles) put no such moral demands on slaves, only on masters.

"The reason for this difference between 1 Peter and other moral codes of his time is simple. For society at large slaves were not full persons and thus did not have moral responsibility. For the church slaves were full and equal persons, and thus quite appropriately addressed as such. The church never addressed the institution of slavery in society, for it was outside its province--society in that day did not claim to be representative, and certainly not representative of Christians, concepts that arrived with the Enlightenment--but it did address the situation in the church, where no social distinctions were to be allowed, for all were brothers and sisters (Gal. 3:28; 1 Cor. 12:13; Col. 3:11; Phile. 16), however shocking that was to society at large."⁹⁶

Peter evidently addressed servants but not masters because he addressed a social situation in which some of his readers were household servants but few, if any, were masters.⁹⁷

2:18 In Peter's culture the servant was the person who faced the most difficulty in relating to the person over him or her in authority. Masters traditionally enjoyed great power over their slaves. The Greek word translated "servants" (oikelai) means domestic servants, but in that society those people were slaves in that they had some limitations on their personal freedom. In our culture Peter's directions apply to how we behave in relation to those directly over us in society (employers, bosses, administrators, teachers, et al.).

Again Peter commanded an attitude of respectful submission (cf. v. 13). The master's personal character or conduct is not the reason for this behavior. We are to respond this way regardless of his or her actions (cf. Eph. 6:5-8).

2:19 The reason we should behave this way is that this behavior is God's will (cf. vv. 13, 17). The fact that this is how God wants us to behave is sufficient reason for compliance. Our conscious commitment to God should move us to do what is right resulting in a clear conscience. Probably many of Peter's readers were suffering because of the persecution of their masters (1:6-7). The translators of the word "favor" in this verse and the next in the NASB (Gr. charis) usually rendered it "grace." In this context it means what counts with God, what pleases Him, rather than what He gives.⁹⁸

2:20 However, Peter hastened to distinguish between justifiable and unjustifiable suffering. He did not want his readers to rest comfortably if they were suffering for their own mistakes. Nevertheless if they were suffering for their testimony, or without having provoked antagonism by improper behavior, they could rest confidently because God approved their conduct even if other people did not. Note that what God rewards is endurance in His will (cf. James 1:4).

"Although v 20 has domestic servants particularly in mind, neither it nor anything that follows is limited to them. Their experience, whether actual or hypothetical, becomes a paradigm for the experience of all Christians everywhere in the empire. The position of a household slave was tenuous, subject to the character and moods of the owner. Despite the justice of the state, the position of Christians in the empire was also tenuous, subject to differing local conditions and sudden changes in the public mood."⁹⁹

2:21 Part of the Christian's calling (1:1; 2:9) includes suffering (cf. 2 Tim. 3:12). Jesus Christ suffered for His righteous conduct at the hands of sinners (cf. Matt. 26:67; Mark 14:65). We too can expect that our righteous behavior will draw the same response from the ungodly of our day (Matt. 11:29; 16:24; Luke 14:27; Acts 14:22). Whereas Jesus' atonement set an example for us, it accomplished much more than that. Peter cited only His example here in view of his purpose, which was to encourage his readers to endure suffering with the proper spirit. They also needed to remember that their experience duplicated that of Jesus. They were like children who place foot after foot in the prints of their elder brother who walks before them in the snow (cf. Rom. 4:12; 2 Cor. 12:18). The Greek word translated "example" (hypogrammon) refers to a writing or drawing that someone placed under another sheet of paper so he or she could trace on the upper sheet.¹⁰⁰ In the next few verses Peter expounded on Jesus' example at length.

"These verses [21-25] contain the fullest elaboration of the example of Jesus Christ for believers in the New Testament."¹⁰¹

"Nothing seems more unworthy and therefore less tolerable, than undeservedly to suffer; but when we turn our eyes to the Son of God, this bitterness is mitigated; for who would refuse to follow him going before us?"¹⁰²

2:22 Peter applied this prophecy to Jesus Christ (Isa. 53:9).

"The OT statement is applied to Christ to indicate that in his total conduct, especially in his words, he followed God's will."¹⁰³

This is quite a statement. Peter had lived with Jesus for more than three years and had observed Him closely, yet he could say that Jesus never sinned.

The absence of deceitful speech would have been ". . . particularly applicable to slaves in the empire, where glib, deceitful speech was one of their notorious characteristics, adroit evasions and excuses being often their sole means of self-protection."¹⁰⁴

2:23 Peter referred specifically to Jesus' sufferings when He was on trial and during His crucifixion. Certainly Peter's readers could find a strong example to follow there. "Revile" means to heap abuse on someone. Often our threats are empty; we cannot follow through with them. However, Jesus could have followed through. Instead He trusted God to deal with His persecutors justly, as we should.

"Peter's picture of what Jesus did not do seems clearly molded by his memory of the messianic picture in Isaiah 53:6-7. Yet rather than quoting this passage, he gives his own confirmatory witness, thereby underlining the veracity of the prophetic portrayal."¹⁰⁵

2:24 Jesus' sufferings reached their climax on the cross. Peter taught that Jesus paid the penalty for our sins and laid down His life as payment for those sins (i.e., penal substitution; cf. Deut. 21:23).

We could translate the second part of this verse as follows: ". . . that, having broken with our sins, we might live for righteousness." Jesus Christ's death separated our sins from us. Consequently we can now live unto righteousness rather than unto sin.

"The idea is that, Christ having died for sins, and to sin, as our proxy or substitute, our consequent standing before God is that of those who have no more connection with our old sins, or with the life of sinning."¹⁰⁶

Some writers have cited the third part of this verse to support the non-biblical doctrine that Jesus by His death made healing from any physical ailment something that every Christian can claim in this life. This is the belief that there is "healing in the atonement." The context of Isaiah 53 as well as the past tense "were healed" here implies spiritual healing from the fatal effects of sin rather than healing from present physical afflictions. Peter used healing as a metaphor for spiritual conversion, as Isaiah did (cf. Mark 2:17; Luke 4:23).¹⁰⁷ "Wounds" refers to the bruising and swelling left by a blow that a fist or whip delivered.

"The expression is highly paradoxical because stripes, which make bloody welts and lay even the flesh bare, are said to have wrought healing."¹⁰⁸

Undoubtedly some of Peter's original readers had received wounds in a similar fashion or were in danger of receiving them.

2:25 Peter concluded his citation of Jesus' example (vv. 21-24). He reminded his readers that they too, as the sheep Isaiah referred to in the passage he just cited, had once wandered from God. Nevertheless now they had returned to the Good Shepherd, Jesus Christ, who would fulfill the function of a shepherd by guarding their souls from hostile adversaries. Their enemies might assail their bodies, but the Lord would preserve their souls (whole persons) safe (cf. 1:3-5).

College: 1Pe 2:1-25

1 PETER 2

F. CRAVE PURE SPIRITUAL MILK (2:1-3)

¹ Therefore, rid yourselves of all malice and all deceit, hypocrisy, envy, and slander of every kind. ² Like newborn babies, crave pure spiritual milk, so that by it you may grow up in your salvation, ³ now that you have tasted that the Lord is good.

This paragraph, a single sentence in the Greek text, continues the emphasis on love and the appeal to the new birth that were begun in the previous paragraph. The exhortation to "love one another deeply" is continued by an exhortation to get rid of those attitudes that destroy loving relationships. The new birth analogy is carried further with a metaphorical use of babies' cravings for milk.

2:1 Therefore, rid yourselves of all malice and all deceit, hypocrisy, envy, and slander of every kind.

The conjunction "therefore" appeals to these Christians' experience of having been born again through the living and enduring word of God (1:23). Because they have been born again through the preaching of the gospel, they need to lay aside whatever is contrary to sincere (cf. 1:22) love for one another. The word used for the first vice (kakiva, kakia ), is sometimes used broadly of wickedness or vice in general, but in this context presumably has the narrower connotation "malice, ill-will." The third vice, hypocrisy (uJpovkrisi", hypokrisis ), is the opposite of the word "sincere" (ajnupovkrito", anypokritos ) in 1:22. Sincere love is diametrically opposed to malice, deceit, hypocrisy, envy, and slander. The use of the Greek word for "all" (or "every") divides the list into three groups as seen in the NRSV: "all malice, and all guile, insincerity, envy, and all slander." Although Christians should of course avoid these vices in contact with those of the world as well, the context indicates Peter is addressing this group about their relationships with each other (cf. 1:22).

2:2 Like newborn babies, crave pure spiritual milk,

Peter resumes the new birth metaphor of 1:23 (cf. 1:3) and extends it to urge his audience to center their lives on the gospel. As a newborn baby cries out for the nourishment of its mother's milk, so Christians should yearn for the nourishment of the word of God. The use of this metaphor does not presume that all the addressees are recent converts, but simply that all Christians may be compared to newborn infants in their need for spiritual milk. It is important not to confuse Peter's use of the metaphors of milk and infancy with the use of these metaphors in Hebrews 5:12-14 (cf. 1 Cor 3:1-3), where milk is contrasted with solid food and infancy is contrasted with maturity. Peter makes no reference to such contrasts. In his metaphor all Christians are like infants and all of God's word is spiritual milk. His point is that every Christian should long for the word of God like a newborn longs for milk.

Peter does not explicitly define what he symbolizes as milk. The usual understanding is that he means the word of God. This is supported contextually by the references to the word of God (= the gospel) in 1:23-25. It may also be supported by the metaphorical use of milk for the word of God elsewhere, for example 1 Corinthians 3:1-3 and Hebrews 5:12-14, although I have already noted that the metaphor is used differently in these cases in which milk only stands for certain elementary aspects of God's word. The idea that the word of God is the means by which one grows into salvation (see the next clause in 2:2) would be parallel to James 1:21: "the implanted word that has the power to save your souls" (NRSV). It is probable that milk in 1 Peter 2:2 refers to the word of God, but it is uncertain. Michaels may be correct in suggesting that "the medium by which the milk is received is the proclaimed message of the gospel, but the milk itself is more appropriately interpreted as the sustaining life of God given in mercy to his children." The difference involved in his view is not great.

This milk is described as "pure" and "spiritual." In the Greek text the first adjective (a[dolo", adolos , "pure" or "without deceit") clearly contrasts with the second attitude verse 1 says Christians should get rid of (dovlo", dolos , "deceit"). The word (logikov", logikos ) translated "spiritual" is problematic. Achtemeier supports the KJV rendering "milk of the word," which would of course clarify what Peter means by milk (see the previous paragraph). Most recent translations and interpreters support the translation "spiritual." Peter may intend the connotation "metaphorical milk" as opposed to "literal milk."

so that by it you may grow up in your salvation,

Just as an infant longs for milk as nourishment to grow to adulthood, so the Christian longs for the word of God, the gospel, in order to grow "into salvation" (the more literal translation of the NRSV). Presumably by "salvation" Peter has in mind the same referent as in 1:5, "the salvation that is ready to be revealed in the last time," and 1:9, "the goal of your faith, the salvation of your souls." By drinking the pure spiritual milk of the gospel, Christians grow spiritually and maintain their hope of salvation.

2:3 now that you have tasted that the Lord is good.

The Christians of Asia Minor should long for the gospel like a baby longs for milk because they have already tasted how good the Lord is. How could anyone who has taken even a sip from the kindness of the Lord resist drinking more? The language alludes to Psalm 34:8. The psalmist exhorts others to "taste and see that the LORD is good." Peter assumes these Christians have already tasted that goodness.

In this verse "the Lord" means Christ: "the Lord" is clearly the antecedent of the "living Stone - rejected by men but chosen by God" in verse 4.

G. GOD'S CHOSEN PEOPLE THROUGH JESUS (2:4-10)

⁴ As you come to him, the living Stone - rejected by men but chosen by God and precious to him - ⁵ you also, like living stones, are being built into a spiritual house to be a holy priesthood, offering spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ. ⁶ For in Scripture it says:

"See, I lay a stone in Zion,

a chosen and precious cornerstone,

and the one who trusts in him

will never be put to shame." ^a

⁷ Now to you who believe, this stone is precious. But to those who do not believe,

"The stone the builders rejected

has become the capstone, ^b" ^c

⁸ and

"A stone that causes men to stumble

and a rock that makes them fall." ^d

They stumble because they disobey the message - which is also what they were destined for.

⁹ But you are a chosen people, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people belonging to God, that you may declare the praises of him who called you out of darkness into his wonderful light. ¹⁰ Once you were not a people, but now you are the people of God; once you had not received mercy, but now you have received mercy.

^a 6 Isaiah 28:16 ^b 7 Or cornerstone ^c 7 Psalm 118:22 ^d 8 Isaiah 8:14

Each of the previous four paragraphs has focused on exhortations built upon imperatives: "be holy in all you do," "live in reverent fear," "love one another," and "crave pure spiritual milk." Immediately after the section at hand (2:4-10), 2:11-12 begins another series of exhortations.

The NRSV translators and a number of interpreters believe that 2:4-5 should also be understood imperativally: "Come to him, . . . let yourselves be built into a spiritual house." However, the NIV translators and other interpreters believe 2:4-5 are a declarative statement: "As you come to him, . . . you . . . are being built into a spiritual house." The decision is not an easy one. The key item in the discussion is that the verb oijkodomei'sqe ( oikodomeisthe ) translated "let yourselves be built" or "you are being built" has a form that may be either imperative (the NRSV translation) or indicative (the NIV). I am hesitantly inclined to agree with the NIV and the majority of recent commentators and treat 2:4-5 as a declarative statement.

If this is correct, then 2:4-10 and 1:1-12 are the only sections of the book that are not built around imperatives or exhortations. They are foundation pieces for the exhortations found throughout the remainder of the book. It should not be overlooked that throughout the paragraphs that center on imperatives there are frequent statements about the grounds for Peter's exhortations. But the greeting (1:1-2), the opening blessing (1:3-12), and the present section (2:4-10) have a special significance in this regard. The earlier section, 1:3-12, focused on the hope of salvation that Christians may look forward to. This present passage, 2:4-10, focuses on the fact that Christians are God's chosen people. Both of these focal points are foundational for Peter's appeals. Modern Christians can also gain great motivation by focusing on our eternal hope and on our identity as God's own people.

2:4 As you come to him, the living Stone - rejected by men but chosen by God and precious to him -

Peter builds 2:4-10 around stone and building imagery. Jesus began the use of this metaphor by his appropriation of Psalm 118:22 ("The stone the builders rejected has become the capstone" - cited by Jesus in Matthew 21:42 and parallels). According to Acts 4:11 Peter used this same reference when he and John were brought to trial before the Sanhedrin. In Romans 9:32-33 Paul referred to stone imagery taken from Isaiah 8:14 and 28:16. In 2:4-10 Peter uses all three Old Testament texts and carries the imagery further.

He enhances the metaphor by describing Jesus as a "living" stone. In verse 5 he will describe his audience as "living" stones. Their participation in the spiritual house of God is through Jesus ("As you come to him").

The first clause describing Jesus, "rejected by men," reflects Psalm 118:22, which Peter will cite in verse 7. The second clause, "but chosen by God and precious to him," reflects Isaiah 28:16, which Peter will cite in verse 6. Like their Lord, the Christians in Asia Minor were also rejected by men, but chosen and precious to God. Peter described them as elect or chosen in the greeting of the letter and he will describe them again with that term in verse 9 ("a chosen people").

2:5 you also, like living stones, are being built into a spiritual house

Here Peter extends the stone metaphor to his audience. Like Jesus they are living stones. God is building them into a spiritual house. Ancient readers, whether Jewish or pagan in background, would recognize this as a reference to a temple, especially in the context of priests and sacrifices (see the rest of the verse). Peter is not the only New Testament author to describe the church as a temple. It is a common idea found also in 1 Corinthians 3:16-17; 2 Corinthians 6:16; 1 Timothy 3:15; Hebrews 3:6; 10:21; and especially Ephesians 2:19-22. The adjective "spiritual" may refer both to the fact that the house Peter has in mind is not a literal one and to the fact that God's Spirit dwells in it.

to be a holy priesthood, offering spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ.

Peter shifts metaphors. He first described Christians as the living stones being built into a spiritual temple. Now he immediately shifts to describe Christians as the priests who offer sacrifices in the temple.

This is the classic text for the Protestant doctrine of the priesthood of all believers: that all Christians, rather than just select Christians, are priests. The doctrine is true, but it is not Peter's point. He is not dealing with Christians' equality with each other, but with the fact that Christians are God's chosen servants, set apart ("holy" - see 1:16) by God to offer spiritual sacrifices to him.

Just as a major purpose of the Old Testament priesthood was to offer sacrifices, so the purpose of Christians as priests is to offer sacrifices. The idea of "spiritual" sacrifices has roots in the Old Testament (e.g., Ps 51:16-17; Micah 6:6-8) and appears elsewhere in the New Testament (e.g., Rom 12:1; Heb 13:15-16). Peter does not specify particular acts that he has in mind as spiritual sacrifices. Verse 9 ("you are . . . a royal priesthood . . . that you may declare the praises of him who called you") suggests one possibility. The book of 1 Peter is full of possibilities. Virtually everything he exhorts his readers to do could be considered a spiritual sacrifice.

It is through Christ that Christians can offer up spiritual sacrifices that are acceptable to God. The idea of acceptable vs. unacceptable sacrifices is found in the Old and New Testament texts cited above as parallels to the notion of spiritual sacrifices.

2:6 For in Scripture it says: "See, I lay a stone in Zion, a chosen and precious cornerstone, and the one who trusts in him will never be put to shame."

Verses 6-8 provide the Scriptures behind verse 4 and Peter's use of the stone imagery for Christ. Peter reverses the order of texts alluded to in verse 4. The last clause of verse 4 stated that the living Stone was "chosen by God and precious to him": verse 6 cites the text Peter had in mind. That text is Isaiah 28:16, also cited in Romans 9:33.

The NIV translates the type of stone as a "cornerstone." The Greek word ajkrogwniai'o" (akrogôniaios, "extreme corner") so translated is unknown outside of Isaiah 28:16 and Christian writings. In verse 7 the NIV's "capstone" translates a two word phrase, kefalhÉn gwniva" (kephalçn gônias, "head of the corner"), the meaning of which is also disputed. As the NIV translation of verse 7 indicates, some believe one or both of these references refer to a capstone at the top of a building or a keystone at the top of an arch. However, according to verse 8 unbelievers stumble over it. Apparently it sits on the ground, which suggests a cornerstone.

The last clause in verse 6 and the first clause in verse 7 highlight the value of the living Stone for those who believe in him. Verses 7b-8 focus on the living Stone as a threat to those who do not believe.

2:7 Now to you who believe, this stone is precious.

The living Stone is precious not only to God, but also to those who believe in him. The last part of the previous verse indicates why: "the one who trusts in him will never be put to shame."

But to those who do not believe, "The stone the builders rejected has become the capstone,"

Verses 7b-8 take up the meaning of the living Stone for those who do not believe. Peter cites Psalm 118:22, a text which Jesus himself had cited (Matt 21:42 and parallels) and which Peter had cited before the Sanhedrin (Acts 4:11). In those earlier contexts the builders were the Jewish leadership in Palestine. In 1 Peter they are the non-Christians in Asia Minor. Despite their rejection of Jesus, he has become the cornerstone of God's house.

2:8 and, "A stone that causes men to stumble and a rock that makes them fall." They stumble because they disobey the message, which is also what they were destined for.

To describe the import of Jesus for those who reject him, Peter cites or alludes to Isaiah 8:14. The Stone the builders rejected will cause them to fall. They will stumble and fall because they disobey the word.

The last clause raises the question of predestination. A key issue is the antecedent of the relative pronoun "which." Perhaps Peter's point is that those who disobey the message are predestined to stumble. He does not necessarily mean that they were predestined to disobey. Perhaps he also means that in a corporate - not individual - sense God predestined that some would disobey. In any case it seems clear that Peter holds those who disobey responsible for their actions.

2:9 But you are a chosen people, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people belonging to God,

In contrast to those who disobey and stumble, Peter's addressees have believed and obeyed and thus become God's chosen people. Verses 9-10 provide the culmination of verses 4-10.

The four descriptions Peter uses are rooted in Exodus 19:6a and Isaiah 43:20-21. The first phrase is preferably translated "chosen race" (as in the NRSV). This phrase comes from Isaiah 43:20 where it describes Israel. Peter uses it to describe God's new people.

The second phrase, "a royal priesthood," is drawn from Exodus 19:6a and contains some ambiguity. The Hebrew text of Exodus 19:6a literally means "a kingdom of priests." The Septuagint translators did not translate it literally. Peter follows the Septuagint. What did he mean by the phrase in his context? A few believe that Peter intended two separate descriptions: "a king's house, a priesthood." However, in view of the structure of the three accompanying phrases, it appears likely that he meant the first word as an adjective, thus "a royal priesthood." By royal priesthood he meant a group of priests in special service of the king, that is, God.

The third phrase, "a holy nation," also comes from Exodus 19:6a. Like the old people of God, the nation of Israel, the new people of God are a nation of people set apart for the service of God.

The fourth phrase, "a people belonging to God," expresses a similar idea. It is rooted in the Septuagint of Isaiah 43:21, which speaks of "my people whom I have acquired."

These four phrases take language first applied to Israel and apply it to the Christians in Asia Minor. Verse 10 will highlight the main point: once they were no people, but now they are God's people.

that you may declare the praises of him who called you out of darkness into his wonderful light.

Peter continues to follow Isaiah 43:20-21, from which he has taken the descriptions, "a chosen race" and "a people belonging to God." God says in Isaiah that he acquired Israel as his people "that they may proclaim my praise." The purpose of God's people is to declare his praises. The word ajretav" ( aretas ) translated "praises" should perhaps be translated, as in the NRSV, "mighty acts."

2:10 Once you were not a people, but now you are the people of God; once you had not received mercy, but now you have received mercy.

This ultimate climax of 2:4-10 is rooted in Hosea 2:23: "I will show my love to the one I called 'Not my loved one.' I will say to those called 'Not my people,' 'You are my people.'" In the Septuagint text the word the NIV translates "love" is the same Greek word that in our verse is translated "received mercy." Peter does not quote Hosea, but he uses Hosea's language and concepts to describe how his readers have been called out of darkness and into light. By God's mercy they are now God's people. The wonder of this transformation should help them face the struggles they are having.

III. INSTRUCTIONS FOR EXEMPLARY LIVING IN SOCIETY'S STRUCTURES (2:11-3:12)

A. LIVE GOOD LIVES AMONG THE PAGANS (2:11-12)

¹¹ Dear friends, I urge you, as aliens and strangers in the world, to abstain from sinful desires, which war against your soul. ¹² Live such good lives among the pagans that, though they accuse you of doing wrong, they may see your good deeds and glorify God on the day he visits us.

The NIV places a subheading after these verses, linking them more strongly to the preceding section. They do contain concepts brought up as early as 1:1 (where Peter first describes his readers as "strangers"), and they express the exhortation for which Peter has laid the foundation by describing his readers as God's people who are to declare his praises (2:4-10).

However, most interpreters correctly argue that these verses function primarily as an introduction to the following paragraphs in which Peter takes up how Christians should relate to the (non-Christian) state, how Christian slaves should relate to their masters (especially non-Christian ones), and how Christian wives and husbands should relate to their spouses (especially Christian wives to non-Christian husbands). In addition to the clear contextual connection of 2:11-12 with what follows, Peter's interjection of "Dear friends" (here and in 4:12) is perhaps an indication of the beginning of a new section.

2:11 Dear friends, I urge you, as aliens and strangers in the world,

"Dear friends" translates ajgaphtoiv (agapçtoi), literally "beloved." This is a common term in the New Testament, used first of Jesus as God's "beloved" Son and then of Christians. It presumably expresses primarily Peter's relationship to his readers (cf. 1 Thess 2:8, "you had become so dear [beloved] to us"), but may also connote the fact that they are loved by God.

As Peter exhorts his readers, he describes them as "aliens and strangers in the world." See 1:1 for Peter's previous use of the word translated "strangers in the world." There he associated that concept with a metaphorical use of the Jewish Diaspora. Here he uses the accompanying term "aliens." The two words have a similar meaning, although "aliens" often referred to "resident aliens," while "strangers" often referred to temporary sojourners. The combination of the two words reflects the language of the Septuagint of Genesis 23:4 (where Abraham describes himself as an alien and a stranger among the Hittites) and Psalm 39:12 (Septuagint Ps 338:13, in which the psalmist describes himself as an alien and stranger). Peter's idea is a powerful one: Christians are exiles on the earth. Their true citizenship is in heaven.

to abstain from sinful desires, which war against your soul.

Christians are to purposefully maintain their status as aliens and refuse to adopt the culture of their neighbors. That culture is characterized by "the desires of the flesh." Galatians 5:16-21 provides a description of the desires of the flesh: for example, sexual immorality, impurity, idolatry, hatred, jealousy, drunkenness, orgies, etc. Peter has already indicated (1:14,18) that his readers participated in these activities in the past. He will be more specific about this in 4:3: "You have spent enough time in the past doing what pagans choose to do - living in debauchery, lust, drunkenness, orgies, carousing and detestable idolatry."

These things "war against your soul." The use of the metaphor of spiritual warfare is found in several places in the New Testament, most notably Ephesians 6:10-17. Here as elsewhere, Peter uses the word "soul" for the whole human person and not to identify a certain spiritual part of the whole (see the comments at 1:9 and 22).

2:12 Live such good lives among the pagans that, though they accuse you of doing wrong, they may see your good deeds and glorify God on the day he visits us.

The word here translated "pagan" (e[qno", ethnos ) is often translated "Gentile." In many occurrences it means "non-Jew" (e.g., Acts 14:2). Because of the immoral behavior of most non-Jews, the Jews also used it to connote immorality. Peter uses it here and in 4:3 in a way that differentiates between his readers, most of whom were non-Jews, and the immoral people they lived among. "Pagan" is a good translation. His readers had once been pagans, but they had ceased that lifestyle.

Examples of how pagans might accuse Christians of wrongdoing are provided in the following paragraphs of 1 Peter. They might be accused of undermining governing authorities (2:13-17). Christian slaves might be accused of failing to submit to their masters (2:18-25). Christian wives might be accused of being rebellious against pagan husbands (3:1-6). Beyond 1 Peter there are numerous examples of ancient pagan criticisms of Christians. In the New Testament see, for example, Acts 16:20-21; 19:23-29. See also the pagan references cited in the "Introduction to 1 Peter." Those who live their lives in opposition to the prevailing culture pay a price.

The statement "they may see your good deeds and glorify God" is similar to Jesus' Sermon on the Mount: "that they may see your good deeds and praise your Father in heaven" (Matt 5:16). The section 2:13-3:7 provides examples of the good works Peter encourages.

"On the day he visits us" is a difficult phrase. In other biblical texts the day or time of God's visitation may be used either in a good sense (e.g., Luke 19:44) or to refer to a time of judgment (e.g., Isa 10:3; Jer 6:15). Michaels and others believe Peter is referring to the day of judgment. As Michaels explains it, the idea is that the slandering pagans will be led to conversion and therefore when the day of judgment comes they will glorify God for the good works that led them to salvation. Selwyn and others believe the day of visitation is a time during human history, a day of conversion in the lives of some pagans. Both of these views coincide in seeing a missionary purpose for Christians' good works. Others, for example Achtemeier, agree with Michaels that the day is the day of judgment, but do not believe Peter is talking about pagans who have been converted glorifying God. Rather, in his view Peter means that the pagans who slandered Christians while on earth will see the truth and glorify God on the day of judgment. For the notion that even the condemned will glorify God at judgment, he refers to Philippians 2:10-11. But 1 Peter 3:1-2 seems to support a missionary view.

B. SUBMIT TO THE GOVERNING AUTHORITIES

(2:13-17)

¹³ Submit yourselves for the Lord's sake to every authority instituted among men: whether to the king, as the supreme authority, ¹⁴ or to governors, who are sent by him to punish those who do wrong and to commend those who do right. ¹⁵ For it is God's will that by doing good you should silence the ignorant talk of foolish men. ¹⁶ Live as free men, but do not use your freedom as a cover-up for evil; live as servants of God. ¹⁷ Show proper respect to everyone: Love the brotherhood of believers, fear God, honor the king.

In 2:13-3:7 Peter provides specifics of what it means to live good lives among the pagans. He addresses three societal structures: the individual and the government, slaves and masters, and husbands and wives.

First Peter 2:13-17 is similar to Romans 13:1-7. Both take a relatively positive view of governmental authorities. Peter was, of course, not ignorant of occasions when governing authorities sought to compel Christians to violate God's will and needed to be resisted (cf. Acts 4:19). But he does write at a time different from that of the book of Revelation, when it appears an emperor (Domitian?) was imposing emperor worship on the Christians in Asia Minor. Peter's views should be understood as general truths: on the whole governing authorities are a good thing, and Christians should submit to them. He does not deal with the exceptions. (The same could be said of Paul in Romans 13.)

2:13 Submit yourselves for the Lord's sake to every authority instituted among men:

Peter's exhortation to Christians in relationship to government, slaves in relationship to masters, and wives in relationship to husbands is the same: submit. This, of course, does not mean that Peter did not have differing conceptions of the nature of the submission involved in each case. Just as Peter would certainly see a difference between the nature of the honor involved in 2:17 when he says "honor everyone" and "honor the king," he would also see a difference between the submission that citizens owe to their rulers and the submission that slaves owe to masters. Nevertheless, all three relationships that he describes involve authority and submission.

The three Greek words translated "every authority instituted among men" (pavsh/ ajnqrwpivnh/ ktivsei, pasç anthrôpinç ktisei) are not clear. The NIV translation reflects the common view that the context calls for a reference to institutions of government, but it is hard to demonstrate that these Greek words can mean that. The primary alternative, one clearly supported for these words, is "every human creature" - but that is more difficult to fit into the context. It is possible, however, that Peter means "submit to every human creature" and then identifies the particular persons he has in mind as rulers. There is a parallel to this flow of thought in 2:17: "Honor everyone. . . . Honor the emperor" (NRSV translation). If Peter means "human creature," he may have chosen this odd-seeming phrase in deliberate contrast to those who would view the emperor as more than human. However this difficult phrase is translated, the focus of the paragraph is on the submission due to rulers.

Christians are to submit to rulers "for the Lord's sake." Verse 15 expands on why the Lord is interested in such behavior: "it is God's will that by doing good you should silence the ignorant talk of foolish men."

whether to the king as the supreme authority,

The earlier phrase "for the Lord's sake" implies who Peter believes the ultimate supreme authority is. It also implicitly qualifies the obedience due to the earthly supreme authority. The king Peter has in mind is the emperor of Rome.

2:14 or to governors, who are sent by him to punish those who do wrong and to commend those who do right.

Between the provinces of Asia Minor and the emperor himself were the governors of the provinces, who were sent by the emperor to oversee the day-to-day matters of government. Even secular sources would agree that one of their chief purposes was to punish those who do wrong and commend those who do right. As noted above in the comments introducing this section, Peter was not naively ignorant of exceptions to this goal. He speaks in generalities.

The letter of 1 Peter has a strong emphasis on doing right vs. doing wrong: see 2:15,20; 3:6,10-12,13-14,17; 4:18-19.

2:15 For it is God's will that by doing good you should silence the ignorant talk of foolish men.

Peter introduced this section by exhorting his readers to live lives that will prove their accusers wrong. His hope, of course, is not only that their opponents will "be put to shame" (3:16), but also that some among them might "be won over" (3:1).

2:16 Live as free men, but do not use your freedom as a cover-up for evil; live as servants of God.

In the Greek text 2:13-16 is all a single sentence and the main verb is "submit." It would be better in breaking the sentence to resume the main verb ("submit") rather than interject one that is not there ("live"). Achtemeier provides a useful translation: "(be subordinate) as free men and women, and not as those who use their freedom as a cover for evil deeds, but as God's slaves." The notion of Christian freedom is restricted both by submission to governing authorities and by slavery to God. Several texts in the New Testament highlight the fact that Christians are "called to be free" (Gal 5:13; cf. John 8:32; Rom 6:17-18; 1 Cor 7:22; 9:19). But like 1 Peter, these same texts often go on to emphasize restrictions on that freedom and the fact that although we are free from sin, law, etc., we are slaves to God (e.g., Gal 5:13; Rom 6:18; 1 Cor 7:22). The Christians of Asia Minor have been set free from human rulers by acceptance of another Ruler. But that Ruler wants them to submit to human rulers insofar as they do not demand disobedience to his will. They must not use their Christian freedom as a "cover-up," literally a "veil" (ejpikavlumma, epikalymma ), for doing evil.

2:17 Show proper respect to everyone: Love the brotherhood of believers, fear God, honor the king.

As the NRSV indicates, the first and last verb are the same: "Honor everyone. . . . Honor the emperor." Their one difference is in tense, with respect to which the first verb in verse 17 differs from the other three. The NIV translation suggests that one way this tense difference might be reflected is to see the first clause as an umbrella clause introducing the other three.

In the New Testament only Peter uses the term "brotherhood," although it is commonplace to find Christians identified as "brothers." Both terms are used generically to include men and women (a usage common to many languages until recently).

See the commentary on 1:17 concerning Peter's instructions to "fear God."

C. SLAVES, SUBMIT TO YOUR MASTERS (2:18-25)

1. Submit Even to Harsh Masters (2:18-20)

¹⁸ Slaves, submit yourselves to your masters with all respect, not only to those who are good and considerate, but also to those who are harsh. ¹⁹ For it is commendable if a man bears up under the pain of unjust suffering because he is conscious of God. ²⁰ But how is it to your credit if you receive a beating for doing wrong and endure it? But if you suffer for doing good and you endure it, this is commendable before God.

In Paul's letters there are two sections, Ephesians 5:22-6:9 and Colossians 3:18-4:1 (cf. Titus 2:1-10), in which he gives instructions to three pairs of relationships: wives and husbands, children and fathers, and slaves and masters. These relationships were the building blocks of ancient households and thus Paul's instructions concerning them are commonly labeled "household codes." There is an extensive literature on this subject and on possible precedents for the structure and content of these "codes." First Peter 2:18-3:7 is similar to Paul's "household codes," although Peter does not use the same order and does not address masters or the father-child relationship. Peter is primarily concerned with his theme of "living good lives among the pagans" (2:12). Therefore he primarily addresses slaves who need encouragement to submit even to harsh masters and wives who need encouragement to submit to unbelieving husbands. (There is but one concluding sentence for husbands.) Paul's household codes are more comprehensive and also address relationships between household members in cases where they are all Christians.

2:18 Slaves, submit yourselves to your masters with all respect,

Peter addresses slaves as exemplifying those who had to make great sacrifices to "live such good lives among the pagans that, though they accuse you of doing wrong, they may see your good deeds and glorify God" (2:12). Peter's word for slave (oijkevth", oiketçs, "household slave") is not the usual New Testament term. It may refer specifically to slaves who worked in the house as opposed to those who worked outside the house, but it was also used for slaves in general and there is little reason to presume Peter wants to identify a certain kind of slave.

On the word "submit" see the comments on verse 13. There is a grammatical problem concerning the use of this verb here in verse 18 and again in 3:1. The NIV translation ("submit yourselves") accepts the common view that in these two cases a participle functions as an imperative.

The NIV translation "with all respect" suggests that this prepositional phrase applies to masters. Most recent commentators argue, I think rightly, that it applies to God and should be translated something like "with all reverent fear." The phrase is identical to the phrase the NIV translates "in reverent fear" in 1:17, with the addition of the word "all." Peter has just commanded his readers to "fear God" (2:17) and in the next verse (2:19) he will commend suffering because one is "conscious of God." On the fear of God as a motivation in 1 Peter see the comments on 1:17. Peter is not encouraging slaves to submit to their masters out of fear of their masters but out of the fear of God.

not only to those who are good and considerate, but also to those who are harsh.

No doubt this was extraordinarily difficult advice. Peter needed strong arguments and support if he expected slaves to willingly suffer even when they had done no wrong. This is perhaps the most difficult advice in 1 Peter and in verses 21-25 he brings up the ultimate support - the example of Christ.

2:19 For it is commendable if a man bears up under the pain of unjust suffering because he is conscious of God. 2:20 But how is it to your credit if you receive a beating for doing wrong and endure it? But if you suffer for doing good and you endure it, this is commendable before God.

A Christian slave's commitment to submitting to his or her master is truly tested when the master treats him or her harshly and unfairly. Notice the extent of the harsh treatment: not just harsh words, but a beating. This is the only specific reference to physical persecution in 1 Peter.

The phrase translated "because he is conscious of God" is difficult. Some argue it means something like "because of his conscience before God." The NIV reflects the more common view that the key word means something like "consciousness" rather than "conscience." In either case this phrase indicates that the person patiently endures the beating because of commitment to God and not simply because he or she has no recourse. It may also suggest that the reason for the beating is something he has done out of duty to God. The NIV translation of the last sentence of verse 20 is probably correct in indicating that Peter has in mind not only suffering while doing good, but suffering "for" doing good. Presumably the slave has chosen to do what is right before God against what the master has commanded or would allow.

Achtemeier rightly points out that although this section is directed to slaves, "they and their fate stand as exemplary both of the Christian's situation in the Roman Empire and of the Christlike reaction they must adopt to it." All Christians should learn from Peter's advice to slaves.

2. Follow the Example of Christ (2:21-25)

²¹ To this you were called, because Christ suffered for you, leaving you an example, that you should follow in his steps.

²²"He committed no sin,

and no deceit was found in his mouth." ^a

²³ When they hurled their insults at him, he did not retaliate; when he suffered, he made no threats. Instead, he entrusted himself to him who judges justly. ²⁴ He himself bore our sins in his body on the tree, so that we might die to sins and live for righteousness; by his wounds you have been healed. ²⁵ For you were like sheep going astray, but now you have returned to the Shepherd and Overseer of your souls.

^a 22 Isaiah 53:9

This is actually not a new paragraph, but the completion of the paragraph encouraging slaves to submit to their masters and to endure patiently unjust suffering. Nevertheless, it has a critical importance not just to the slaves Peter directly addresses, but to all of Peter's readers and to every Christian of all generations. Therefore, it seems appropriate to single out these verses as if they constituted a separate paragraph.

As noted above, Peter needs strong support to encourage slaves to endure patiently even unjust beatings and to remain submissive. He therefore turns to the example of Christ and in the process provides one of the most compelling paragraphs of the New Testament.

2:21 To this you were called

Peter is still speaking to slaves, but every Christian reader recognizes that "you" includes all of us, just as (see the next clause) Christ suffered for us all. Peter opened the letter with a reference to the Christian's calling (the Greek word there translated "elect" is a cognate of the verb here translated "you were called"). In 1:15 he identified the One who did the calling as God and the goal of the calling as holiness. Here in verse 21 the antecedent of the word "this" is patient endurance of unjust suffering. This is an important aspect of fulfilling the call to be holy. It is an important part of the effort to "live such good lives among the pagans that . . . they may see your good deeds and glorify God . . ." (v. 12).

because Christ suffered for you,

The NIV translation omits the word "also" (NRSV: "because Christ also suffered for you"). Probably Peter used "also" because he has just used the same verb "suffer" with respect to what the slaves must endure (v. 20b).

This clause has been interpreted in two ways. Some believe that the prepositional phrase "for you" reflects the common New Testament statement that "Christ died for us" and is therefore a reference to the atoning value of Christ's suffering and death - so that your sins may be forgiven. They see verse 21 as anticipating verse 24: "he himself bore our sins in his body on the tree."

Others, probably correctly, note that in verse 21 Peter does not say "Christ also died for you" but "Christ also suffered for you." They suggest that Peter is not using "for you" in the sense of "for your sins," but rather that "for you" is explained by the next part of the verse. "Christ suffered for you" means Christ suffered in order to provide you with an example to follow.

leaving you an example, that you should follow in his steps.

The word uJpogrammovn ( hypogrammon ) translated "example" was used literally of a pattern of letters of the Greek alphabet for children to copy and thus learn to write. It was also used figuratively, as here, for a pattern for behavior. Christ's suffering is a pattern for Christian slaves to follow. Jesus himself had summoned his disciples to follow him in contexts in which he discussed his coming suffering (e.g., Mark 8:31,34). Peter's wonderful addition of the phrase "in his steps" was the inspiration for the title of Charles Sheldon's famous book In His Steps . Christians are called to imitate Christ's willingness to suffer for doing good. He did it for us. We do it for him.

2:22 "He committed no sin, and no deceit was found in his mouth."

This citation of Isaiah 53:9 highlights the fact that Christ is a pattern for the type of suffering Peter endorses for Christian slaves. He did not "receive a beating for doing wrong," but rather he was one of those who "suffer for doing good" (see v. 20). Peter calls upon slaves to endure unjust suffering as innocent victims by pointing to Christ as the ultimate example of innocence.

Isaiah 53 was an important Old Testament passage in early Christian understanding of the suffering and the death of Christ (cf. the citations in Luke 22:37 and Acts 8:32-33).

2:23 When they hurled their insults at him, he did not retaliate; when he suffered, he made no threats.

The pattern of Christ shows how one should endure unjust suffering for doing good. Having urged Christian slaves to submit willingly even to harsh masters and to endure patiently unjust suffering, Peter uses Jesus' behavior at his arrest, trials, and crucifixion as the example they are called to follow. He did not return insult for insult, nor did he threaten his enemies. It was surely difficult for Christian slaves to follow this example - more difficult than for the rest of us, to whom it also applies.

Peter does not use specific language reflecting Isaiah 53 in this verse. However, the clear citation of Isaiah 53 in verse 22 and the allusions in verse 24 suggest the possibility that he here alludes to Isaiah 53:7 ("He was oppressed and afflicted, yet he did not open his mouth; he was led like a lamb to the slaughter, and as a sheep before her shearers is silent, so he did not open his mouth.").

Instead, he entrusted himself to him who judges justly.

This last clause of verse 23 expands on the pattern provided by Christ's suffering. His nonretaliation reflected his trust in God. The Greek text does not specify what Jesus entrusted or delivered over to God. Some suggest he delivered over "his enemies"; others, "his cause." The NIV and NRSV suggest "himself." It is a difficult decision, but the last suggestion is perhaps best in the light of 1 Peter 4:19 where Peter encourages his readers to "commit themselves to their faithful creator."

2:24 He himself bore our sins in his body on the tree,

If Peter was not including the death of Jesus and its atoning significance in verse 21 ("Christ suffered for you"), he clearly does now. He refers to Christ's dying for sins in order to continue to encourage his readers to "live for righteousness."

Peter's comment that "He himself bore our sins" reflects Isaiah 53:4 ("this one bears our sins"), 11 ("their sins he himself will bear"), and 12 ("he himself bore the sins of many"). Moving beyond Isaiah he adds that he bore those sins "in his body on the tree," clearly referring to the crucifixion. The word xuvlon ( xylon ), translated "tree," refers to wood or anything made of it. In the New Testament it is used several times for the cross (Acts 5:30; 10:39; 13:29; Gal 3:13).

so that we might die to sins and live for righteousness;

In saying we have "parted with" sins, Peter does not use the usual verb for "die to," although "die to sins" is a legitimate translation and captures the basic idea of ajpogivnomai ( apoginomai ). The thought of the clause is similar to Romans 6:11: "count yourselves dead to sin but alive to God." Peter uses the atoning significance of Jesus' death to urge us on to do what is right.

by his wounds you have been healed.

This clause is similar in meaning to the first part of verse 24, and is likewise rooted in Isaiah 53. The last clause of Isaiah 53:5 is "and by his wounds we are healed." Peter again points to the vicarious nature of what Jesus accomplished when he suffered and died for us. He was wounded so that we could be healed. We should therefore live righteously, which includes enduring unjust suffering for doing right.

2:25 For you were like sheep going astray, but now you have returned to the Shepherd and Overseer of your souls.

Peter reminds his readers of their past (cf. 1 Pet 1:14,18; 2:10; 4:3) in order to encourage them to stay on their new path. Sheep herding was common in the Mediterranean world and sheep/shepherd imagery is common in Scripture. In this case Peter is still following Isaiah 53. Having referred to Isaiah 53:5, he now moves on to verse 6: "We all, like sheep, have gone astray."

Peter's readers were once like lost sheep, but now they are under the care and guidance of the great Shepherd. It is doubtful that the verb "returned" implies that Peter's readers had at an earlier time been part of the great Shepherd's flock. Other statements in the book (see the verses cited in the previous paragraph) indicate that their past was in paganism.

Although in the Old Testament God is often described as the shepherd of Israel, in 1 Peter 5:4 Peter uses "chief Shepherd" with reference to Christ. He probably means Christ in this instance as well. Christ is further described as our Overseer, using the word ejpivskopo" ( episkopos ) often rendered in other translations as "bishop" when it refers to human overseers of the church. Peter wants his readers to follow the example of their Shepherd and Overseer.

On the word "souls" see the comments on 1:9. Peter probably does not intend a part of the person separable from the body, but rather a more holistic reference to the person. Achtemeier legitimately translates "shepherd and guardian of your lives."

-College Press New Testament Commentary: with the NIV

Introduction / Outline

Robertson: 1 Peter (Book Introduction)

THE FIRST EPISTLE GENERAL OF PETER

ABOUT a.d. 65

By Way of Introduction

The Author

The Epistle is not anonymous, but claims to be written by " Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ" (1Pe_1:1), that is Cephas (Simon Peter). If this is not true, then the book is pseudonymous by a late writer who assumed Peter’s name, as in the so-called Gospel of Peter, Apocalypse of Peter, etc. " There is no book in the New Testament which has earlier, better, or stronger attestation, though Irenaeus is the first to quote it by name" (Bigg). Eusebius ( H.E . iii. 25.2) places it among the acknowledged books, those accepted with no doubt at all. We here assume that Simon Peter wrote this Epistle or at any rate dictated it by an amanuensis, as Paul did in Romans (Rom_16:22). Bigg suggests Silvanus (Silas) as the amanuensis or interpreter (1Pe_5:12), the obvious meaning of the language ( dia , through). He may also have been the bearer of the Epistle. It happens that we know more of Peter’s life than of any of the twelve apostles because of his prominence in the Gospels and in the first fifteen chapters of the Acts. In the Student’s Chronological New Testament I have given a full list of the passages in the Gospels where Peter appears with any clearness and the material is rich and abundant. The account in Acts is briefer, though Peter is the outstanding man in the first five chapters during his career in Jerusalem. After the conversion of Saul he begins to work outside of Jerusalem and after escaping death at the hands of Herod Agrippa I (Act_12:3.) he left for a while, but is back in Jerusalem at the Conference called by Paul and Barnabas (Act_15:6-14; Gal_2:1-10). After that we have no more about him in Acts, though he reappears in Antioch and is rebuked by Paul for cowardice because of the Judaizers (Gal_2:11-21). He travelled for the Gospel among the Jews of the Dispersion (Gal_2:9) with his wife (1Co_9:5), and went to Asia Minor (1Pe_1:1) and as far as Babylon or Rome (1Pe_5:13). Besides Silvanus he had John Mark with him also (1Pe_5:13), who was said by the early Christian writers to have been Peter’s " interpreter" in his preaching, since Peter was not expert in the Greek (Act_4:13), and who also wrote his Gospel under the inspiration of Peter’s preaching. We are not able to follow clearly the close of his life or to tell precisely the time of his death. He was apparently put to death in a.d. 67 or 68, but some think that he was executed in Rome in a.d. 64.

The Date

This question is tied up with that of the genuineness of the Epistle, the time of Peter’s death, the use of Paul’s Epistles, the persecution referred to in the Epistle. Assuming the genuineness of the Epistle and the death of Peter about a.d. 67 or 68 and the persecution to be not that under Domitian or Trajan, but under Nero, the date can be assumed to be about a.d. 65.

The Use of Paul’s Epistles

There are two extremes about the relation of Peter to Paul. One is that of violent antithesis, with Peter and Paul opposing one another by exaggerating and prolonging Paul’s denunciation of Peter’s cowardice in Antioch (Gal_2:11-21) and making Peter also the exponent of a Jewish type of Christianity (practically a Judaizing type). This view of Baur once had quite a following, but it has nearly disappeared. Under its influence Acts and Peter’s Epistles were considered not genuine, but documents designed to patch up the disagreement between Peter and Paul. The other extreme is to deny any Pauline influence on Peter or of Peter on Paul. Paul was friendly to Peter (Gal_1:18), but was independent of his ecclesiastical authority (Gal_2:1-10) and Peter championed Paul’s cause in the Jerusalem Conference (Act_15:7-13). Peter was certainly not a Judaizer (Acts 11:1-18), in spite of his temporary defection in Antioch. Undoubtedly Peter was won back to cordial relations with Paul if any confidence can be placed in 2Pe_3:15. There is no reason for doubting that Peter was familiar with some of Paul’s Epistles as there indicated. There is some indication of Peter’s use of Romans and Ephesians in this Epistle. It is not always conclusive to find the same words and even ideas which are not formally quoted, because there was a Christian vocabulary and a body of doctrinal ideas in common though with personal variations in expression. Peter may have read James, but not the Pastoral Epistles. There are points of contact with Hebrews which Von Soden considers sufficiently accounted for by the fact that Peter and the author of Hebrews were contemporaries.

The Persecution Pictured in the Epistle

Peter himself knew what persecution was at the hands of the Sanhedrin and of Herod Agrippa I (both church and state). If First Peter was written a.d. 65, there was time enough for the persecution of Nero in Rome in a.d. 64 to spread to Asia Minor. The province easily imitated the capital city. Paul’s life in the Acts and his Epistles abundantly show how early persecution arose in Asia Minor. The Apocalypse, written during the reign of Domitian, shows that persecution from the state had been on hand long before and was an old burden. We know too little of the history of Christianity in Asia Minor from a.d. 60 to 70 to deny that the fiery trials and suffering as a Christian (1Pe_4:16) can be true of this period. So we locate the persecution at this time as an echo from Rome.

The Place of Writing

Peter states that he is in Babylon (1Pe_5:13), apparently with his wife (1Co_9:5). It is not certain whether he means actual Babylon, where Jews had been numerous, or mystical Babylon (Rome) as in the Apocalypse. We do not know when Rome began to be called Babylon. It may have started as a result of Nero’s persecution of the Christians after the burning of Rome. The Christians were called " evil-doers" (1Pe_2:12) in the time of Nero (Tacitus, Ann . XV. 44). So we can think of Rome as the place of writing and that Peter uses " Babylon" to hide his actual location from Nero. Whether Peter came to Rome while Paul was still there we do not know, though John Mark was there with Paul (Col_4:10). " At the time when it was written Babylon had not yet unmasked all its terrors, and the ordinary Christian was not in immediate danger of the tunica ardens , or the red-hot iron chair, or the wild beasts, or the stake" (Bigg).

The Readers

Peter writes " to the elect who are sojourners of the Dispersion in Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia" (1Pe_1:1). These five Roman provinces are naturally given from the standpoint of Babylon. In Galatia and Asia Paul had labored, though not all over these provinces. At any rate, there is no reason to wonder that Peter should himself work in the same regions where Paul had been. In a general way Paul and Peter had agreed on separate spheres of activity, Paul to the Gentiles and Peter to the Jews (Gal_2:7.), though the distinction was not absolute, for Paul usually began his work in the Jewish synagogue. Probably the readers are mainly Jewish Christians. but not to the exclusion of Gentiles. Peter has clearly Paul’s idea that Christianity is the true Judaism of God’s promise (1Pe_2:4-10).

The Purpose

Evidently Peter’s object is to cheer and strengthen the Christians in these five provinces who are undergoing fiery trials (1Pe_1:7.). There is every reason why Peter, as the leading apostle to the circumcision, should write to these believers in the provinces, especially since Paul’s long imprisonment in Caesarea and Rome had removed him from his accustomed activities and travel.

The Style and Vocabulary

Like Peter’s discourses in the Acts, the Epistle is mainly hortatory, with a minimum of argument and little of the closely knit reasoning seen in Romans. There is frequent use of the lxx and the Greek is decent Koiné with little of the uncouth Aramaic of the Galilean (Mat_26:73), or of the vernacular Koiné as seen in the papyri or in 2 Peter (Act_4:13). This fact may be accounted for by the help of Silvanus as amanuensis. There are sixty-two words in the Greek of the Epistle not occurring elsewhere in the N.T. There is verbal iteration as in 2 Peter. " One idea haunts the whole Epistle; to the author, as to the patriarch Jacob, life is a pilgrimage; it is essentially an old man’s view" (Bigg). But it is an old man who has lived long with Christ. Peter has learned the lesson of humility and patience from Jesus his Lord.

JFB: 1 Peter (Book Introduction)

ITS GENUINENESS is attested by 2Pe 3:1. On the authority of Second Peter, see the Introduction. Also by POLYCARP (in EUSEBIUS [Ecclesiastical History, 4.14]), who, in writing to the Philippians, quotes many passages: in the second chapter he quotes 1Pe 1:13, 1Pe 1:21; 1Pe 3:9; in the fifth chapter, 1Pe 2:11. EUSEBIUS says of PAPIAS [Ecclesiastical History, 3.39] that he, too, quotes Peter's First Epistle. IRENÆUS [Against Heresies, 4.9.2] expressly mentions it; and in [4.16.5], 1Pe 2:16. CLEMENT OF ALEXANDRIA [Miscellanies, 1.3, p. 544], quotes 1Pe 2:11-12, 1Pe 2:15-16; and [p. 562], 1Pe 1:21-22; and [4, p. 584], 1Pe 3:14-17; and [p. 585], 1Pe 4:12-14. ORIGEN (in EUSEBIUS [Ecclesiastical History, 6.25]) mentions this Epistle; in [Homily 7, on Joshua, vol. 2, p. 63], he mentions both Epistles; and [Commentary on Psalm 3 and on John], he mentions 1Pe 3:18-21. TERTULLIAN [Antidote to the Scorpion's Sting, 12], quotes expressly 1Pe 2:20-21; and [Antidote to the Scorpion's Sting, 14], 1Pe 2:13, 1Pe 2:17. EUSEBIUS states it as the opinion of those before him that this was among the universally acknowledged Epistles. The Peschito Syriac Version contains it. The fragment of the canon called MURATORI'S omits it. Excepting this, and the Paulician heretics, who rejected it, all ancient testimony is on its side. The internal evidence is equally strong. The author calls himself the apostle Peter, 1Pe 1:1, and "a witness of Christ's sufferings," and an "elder," 1Pe 5:1. The energy of the style harmonizes with the warmth of Peter's character; and, as ERASMUS says, this Epistle is full of apostolic dignity and authority and is worthy of the leader among the apostles.

PETER'S PERSONAL HISTORY.--Simon, Or Simeon, was a native of Bethsaida on the Sea of Galilee, son of Jonas or John. With his father and his brother Andrew he carried on trade as a fisherman at Capernaum, his subsequent place of abode. He was a married man, and tradition represents his wife's name as Concordia or Perpetua. CLEMENT OF ALEXANDRIA says that she suffered martyrdom, her husband encouraging her to be faithful unto death, "Remember, dear, our Lord." His wife's mother was restored from a fever by Christ. He was brought to Jesus by his brother Andrew, who had been a disciple of John the Baptist, but was pointed to the Saviour as "the Lamb of God" by his master (Joh 1:29). Jesus, on first beholding him, gave him the name by which chiefly he is known, indicative of his subsequent character and work in the Church, "Peter" (Greek) or "Cephas" (Aramaic), a stone (Mat 4:18). He did not join our Lord finally until a subsequent period. The leading incidents in his apostolic life are well known: his walking on the troubled waters to meet Jesus, but sinking through doubting (Mat 14:30); his bold and clear acknowledgment of the divine person and office of Jesus (Mat 16:16; Mar 8:29; Joh 11:27), notwithstanding the difficulties in the way of such belief, whence he was then also designated as the stone, or rock (Mat 16:18); but his rebuke of his Lord when announcing what was so unpalatable to carnal prejudices, Christ's coming passion and death (Mat 16:22); his passing from one extreme to the opposite, in reference to Christ's offer to wash his feet (Joh 13:8-9); his self-confident assertion that he would never forsake his Lord, whatever others might do (Mat 26:33), followed by his base denial of Christ thrice with curses (Mat 26:75); his deep penitence; Christ's full forgiveness and prophecy of his faithfulness unto death, after he had received from him a profession of "love" as often repeated as his previous denial (Joh 21:15-17). These incidents illustrate his character as zealous, pious, and ardently attached to the Lord, but at the same time impulsive in feeling, rather than calmly and continuously steadfast. Prompt in action and ready to avow his convictions boldly, he was hasty in judgment, precipitate, and too self-confident in the assertion of his own steadfastness; the result was that, though he abounded in animal courage, his moral courage was too easily overcome by fear of man's opinion. A wonderful change was wrought in him by his restoration after his fall, through the grace of his risen Lord. His zeal and ardor became sanctified, being chastened by a spirit of unaffected humility. His love to the Lord was, if possible, increased, while his mode of manifesting it now was in doing and suffering for His name, rather than in loud protestations. Thus, when imprisoned and tried before the Sanhedrim for preaching Christ, he boldly avowed his determination to continue to do so. He is well called "the mouth of the apostles." His faithfulness led to his apprehension by Herod Agrippa, with a view to his execution, from which, however, he was delivered by the angel of the Lord.

After the ascension he took the lead in the Church; and on the descent of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost, he exercised the designed power of "the keys" of Christ's kingdom, by opening the door of the Church, in preaching, for the admission of thousands of Israelites; and still more so in opening (in obedience to a special revelation) an entrance to the "devout" (that is, Jewish proselyte from heathendom) Gentile, Cornelius: the forerunner of the harvest gathered in from idolatrous Gentiles at Antioch. This explains in what sense Christ used as to him the words, "Upon this rock I will build my Church" (Mat 16:18), namely, on the preaching of Christ, the true "Rock," by connection with whom only he was given the designation: a title shared in common on the same grounds by the rest of the apostles, as the first founders of the Church on Christ, "the chief corner-stone" (Eph 2:20). A name is often given in Hebrew, not that the person is actually the thing itself, but has some special relation to it; as Elijah means Mighty Jehovah, so Simon is called Peter "the rock," not that he is so, save by connection with Jesus, the only true Rock (Isa 28:16; 1Co 3:11). As subsequently he identified himself with "Satan," and is therefore called so (Mat 16:23), in the same way, by his clear confession of Christ, the Rock, he became identified with Him, and is accordingly so called (Mat 16:18). It is certain that there is no instance on record of Peter's having ever claimed or exercised supremacy; on the contrary, he is represented as sent by the apostles at Jerusalem to confirm the Samaritans baptized by Philip the deacon; again at the council of Jerusalem, not he, but James the president, or leading bishop in the Church of that city, pronounced the authoritative decision: Act 15:19, "My sentence is," &c. A kind of primacy, doubtless (though certainly not supremacy), was given him on the ground of his age, and prominent earnestness, and boldness in taking the lead on many important occasions. Hence he is called "first" in enumerating the apostles. Hence, too, arise the phrases, "Peter and the Eleven," "Peter and the rest of the apostles"; and Paul, in going up to Jerusalem after his conversion, went to see Peter in particular.

Once only he again betrayed the same spirit of vacillation through fear of man's reproach which had caused his denial of his Lord. Though at the Jerusalem council he advocated the exemption of Gentile converts from the ceremonial observances of the law, yet he, after having associated in closest intercourse with the Gentiles at Antioch, withdrew from them, through dread of the prejudices of his Jewish brethren who came from James, and timidly dissembled his conviction of the religious equality of Jew and Gentile; for this Paul openly withstood and rebuked him: a plain refutation of his alleged supremacy and infallibility (except where specially inspired, as in writing his Epistles). In all other cases he showed himself to be, indeed, as Paul calls him, "a pillar" (Gal 2:9). Subsequently we find him in "Babylon," whence he wrote this First Epistle to the Israelite believers of the dispersion, and the Gentile Christians united in Christ, in Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia.

JEROME [On Illustrious Men, 1] states that "Peter, after having been bishop of Antioch, and after having preached to the believers of the circumcision in Pontus, &c. [plainly inferred from 1Pe 1:1], in the second year of Claudius went to Rome to refute Simon Magus, and for twenty-five years there held the episcopal chair, down to the last year of Nero, that is, the fourteenth, by whom he was crucified with his head downwards, declaring himself unworthy to be crucified as his Lord, and was buried in the Vatican, near the triumphal way." EUSEBIUS [Chronicles, Anno 3], also asserts his episcopate at Antioch; his assertion that Peter founded that Church contradicts Act 11:19-22. His journey to Rome to oppose Simon Magus arose from JUSTIN'S story of the statue found at Rome (really the statue of the Sabine god, Semo Sanctus, or Hercules, mistaken as if Simon Magus were worshipped by that name, "Simoni Deo Sancto"; found in the Tiber in 1574, or on an island in the Tiber in 1662), combined with the account in Acts 8:9-24. The twenty-five years' bishopric is chronologically impossible, as it would make Peter, at the interview with Paul at Antioch, to have been then for some years bishop of Rome! His crucifixion is certain from Christ's prophecy, Joh 21:18-19. DIONYSIUS OF CORINTH (in EUSEBIUS [Ecclesiastical History, 2.25]) asserted in an epistle to the Romans, that Paul and Peter planted both the Roman and Corinthian churches, and endured martyrdom in Italy at the same time. So TERTULLIAN [Against Marcion, 4.5, and The Prescription Against Heretics, 36, 38]. Also Caius, the presbyter of Rome, in EUSEBIUS [Ecclesiastical History, 2.25] asserts that some memorials of their martyrdom were to be seen at Rome on the road to Ostia. So EUSEBIUS [Ecclesiastical History, 2.25, and Demonstration of the Gospel, 3.116]. So LACTANTIUS [Of the Manner in Which the Persecutors Died, 2]. Many of the details are palpably false; whether the whole be so or not is dubious, considering the tendency to concentrate at Rome events of interest [ALFORD]. What is certain is, that Peter was not there before the writing of the Epistle to the Romans (A.D. 58), otherwise he would have been mentioned in it; nor during Paul's first imprisonment at Rome, otherwise he would have been mentioned in some one of Paul's many other Epistles written from Rome; nor during Paul's second imprisonment, at least when he was writing the Second Epistle to Timothy, just before his martyrdom. He may have gone to Rome after Paul's death, and, as common tradition represents, been imprisoned in the Mamertine dungeon, and crucified on the Janiculum, on the eminence of St. Pietro in Montorio, and his remains deposited under the great altar in the center of the famous basilica of St. Peter. AMBROSE [Epistles, 33 (Edition Paris, 1586), p. 1022] relates that St. Peter, not long before his death, being overcome by the solicitations of his fellow Christians to save himself, was fleeing from Rome when he was met by our Lord, and on asking, "Lord, whither goest Thou?" received the answer, "I go to be crucified afresh." On this he returned and joyfully went to martyrdom. The church called "Domine quo vadis" on the Appian Way, commemorates the legend. It is not unlikely that the whole tradition is built on the connection which existed between Paul and Peter. As Paul, "the apostle of the uncircumcision," wrote Epistles to Galatia, Ephesus, and Colosse, and to Philemon at Colosse, making the Gentile Christians the persons prominently addressed, and the Jewish Christians subordinately so; so, vice versa, Peter, "the apostle of the circumcision," addressed the same churches, the Jewish Christians in them primarily, and the Gentile Christians also, secondarily.

TO WHOM HE ADDRESSES THIS EPISTLE.--The heading, 1Pe 1:1, "to the elect strangers (spiritually pilgrims) of the dispersion" (Greek), clearly marks the Christians of the Jewish dispersion as prominently addressed, but still including also Gentile Christians as grafted into the Christian Jewish stock by adoption and faith, and so being part of the true Israel. 1Pe 1:14; 1Pe 2:9-10; 1Pe 3:6; 1Pe 4:3 clearly prove this. Thus he, the apostle of the circumcision, sought to unite in one Christ Jew and Gentile, promoting thereby the same work and doctrine as Paul the apostle of the uncircumcision. The provinces are named by Peter in the heading in the order proceeding from northeast to south and west. Pontus was the country of the Christian Jew Aquila. To Galatia Paul paid two visits, founding and confirming churches. Crescens, his companion, went there about the time of Paul's last imprisonment, just before his martyrdom. Ancyra was subsequently its ecclesiastical metropolis. Men of Cappadocia, as well as of "Pontus" and "Asia," were among the hearers of Peter's effective sermon on the Pentecost whereon the Spirit decended on the Church; these probably brought home to their native land the first tidings of the Gospel. Proconsular "Asia" included Mysia, Lydia, Caria, Phrygia, Pisidia, and Lyaconia. In Lycaonia were the churches of Iconium, founded by Paul and Barnabas; of Lystra, Timothy's birthplace, where Paul was stoned at the instigation of the Jews; and of Derbe, the birthplace of Gaius, or Caius. In Pisidia was Antioch, where Paul was the instrument of converting many, but was driven out by the Jews. In Caria was Miletus, containing doubtless a Christian Church. In Phrygia, Paul preached both times when visiting Galatia in its neighborhood, and in it were the churches of Laodicea, Hierapolis, and Colosse, of which last Church Philemon and Onesimus were members, and Archippus and Epaphras leaders. In Lydia was the Philadelphian Church, favorably noticed in Rev 3:7, &c.; that of Sardis, the capital, and of Thyatira, and of Ephesus, founded by Paul, and a scene of the labors of Aquila and Priscilla and Apollos, and subsequently of more than two whole years' labor of Paul again, and subsequently censured for falling from its first love in Rev 2:4. Smyrna of Ionia was in the same quarter, and as one of the seven churches receives unqualified praise. In Mysia was Pergamos. Troas, too, is known as the scene of Paul's preaching and raising Eutychus to life (Act 20:6-10), and of his subsequently staying for a time with Carpus (2Ti 4:13). Of "Bithynia," no Church is expressly named in Scripture elsewhere. When Paul at an earlier period "assayed to go into Bithynia" (Act 16:7), the Spirit suffered him not. But afterwards, we infer from 1Pe 1:1, the Spirit did impart the Gospel to that country, possibly by Peter's ministry, In government, these several churches, it appears from this Epistle (1Pe 5:1-2, "Feed," &c.), were much in the same states as when Paul addressed the Ephesian "elders" at Miletus (Act 20:17, Act 20:28, "feed") in very similar language; elders or presbyter-bishops ruled, while the apostles exercised the general superintendence. They were exposed to persecutions, though apparently not systematic, but rather annoyances and reproach arising from their not joining their heathen neighbors in riotous living, into which, however, some of them were in danger of falling. The evils which existed among themselves, and which are therefore reproved, were ambition and lucre-seeking on the part of the presbyters (1Pe 5:2-3), evil thoughts and words among the members in general, and a want of sympathy and generosity towards one another.

HIS OBJECT seems to be, by the prospect of their heavenly portion and by Christ's example, to afford consolation to the persecuted, and prepare them for a greater approaching ordeal, and to exhort all, husbands, wives, servants, presbyters, and people, to a due discharge of relative duties, so as to give no handle to the enemy to reproach Christianity, but rather to win them to it, and so to establish them in "the true grace of God wherein they stand" (1Pe 5:12). However, see on 1Pe 5:12, on the oldest reading. ALFORD rightly argues that "exhorting and testifying" there, refer to Peter's exhortations throughout the Epistle grounded on testimony which he bears to the Gospel truth, already well known to his readers by the teaching of Paul in those churches. They were already introduced "into" (so the Greek, 1Pe 5:12) this grace of God as their safe standing-ground. Compare 1Co 15:1, "I declare unto you the Gospel wherein ye stand." Therefore he does not, in this Epistle, set forth a complete statement of this Gospel doctrine of grace, but falls back on it as already known. Compare 1Pe 1:8, 1Pe 1:18, "ye know"; 1Pe 3:15; 2Pe 3:1. Not that Peter servilely copies the style and mode of teaching of Paul, but as an independent witness in his own style attests the same truths. We may divide the Epistle into: (I) The inscription (1Pe 1:1-2). (II) The stirring-up of a pure feeling in believers as born again of God. By the motive of hope to which God has regenerated us (1Pe 1:3-12); bringing forth the fruit of faith, considering the costly price paid for our redemption from sin (1Pe 1:14-21). Being purified by the Spirit unto love of the brethren as begotten of God's eternal word, as spiritual priest-kings, to whom alone Christ is precious (1Pe 1:22; 1Pe 2:10); after Christ's example in suffering, maintaining a good conversation in every relation (1Pe 2:10; 1Pe 3:14), and a good profession of faith as having in view Christ's once-offered sacrifice, and His future coming to judgment (1Pe 3:15; 1Pe 4:11); and exhibiting patience in adversity, as looking for future glorification with Christ, (1) in general as Christians, 1Pe 4:12-19; (2) each in his own sphere, 1Pe 5:1-11. "The title "Beloved" marks the separation of the second part from the first, 1Pe 2:11; and of the third part from the second, 1Pe 4:12" [BENGEL]. (III). The conclusion.

TIME AND PLACE OF WRITING.--It was plainly before the open and systematic persecution of the later years of Nero had begun. That this Epistle was written after Paul's Epistles, even those written during his imprisonment at Rome, ending in A.D. 63, appears from the acquaintance which Peter in this Epistle shows he has with them. Compare 1Pe 2:13 with 1Ti 2:2-4; 1Pe 2:18 with Eph 6:5; 1Pe 1:2 with Eph 1:4-7; 1Pe 1:3 with Eph 1:3; 1Pe 1:14 with Rom 12:2; 1Pe 2:6-10 with Rom 9:32-33; 1Pe 2:13 with Rom 13:1-4; 1Pe 2:16 with Gal 5:13; 1Pe 2:18 with Eph 6:5; 1Pe 3:1 with Eph 5:22; 1Pe 3:9 with Rom 12:17; 1Pe 4:9 with Phi 2:14; Rom 12:13 and Heb 13:2; 1Pe 4:10 with Rom 12:6-8; 1Pe 5:1 with Rom 8:18; 1Pe 5:5 with Eph 5:21; Phi 2:3, Phi 2:5-8; 1Pe 5:8 with 1Th 5:6; 1Pe 5:14 with 1Co 16:20. Moreover, in 1Pe 5:13, Mark is mentioned as with Peter in Babylon. This must have been after Col 4:10 (A.D. 61-63), when Mark was with Paul at Rome, but intending to go to Asia Minor. Again, in 2Ti 4:11 (A.D. 67 or 68), Mark was in or near Ephesus, in Asia Minor, and Timothy is told to bring him to Rome. So that it is likely it was after this, namely, after Paul's martyrdom, that Mark joined Peter, and consequently that this Epistle was written. It is not likely that Peter would have entrenched on Paul's field of labor, the churches of Asia Minor, during Paul's lifetime. The death of the apostle of the uncircumcision, and the consequent need of someone to follow up his teachings, probably gave occasion to the testimony given by Peter to the same churches, collectively addressed, in behalf of the same truth. The relation in which the Pauline Gentile churches stood towards the apostles at Jerusalem favors this view. Even the Gentile Christians would naturally look to the spiritual fathers of the Church at Jerusalem, the center whence the Gospel had emanated to them, for counsel wherewith to meet the pretensions of Judaizing Christians and heretics; and Peter, always prominent among the apostles in Jerusalem, would even when elsewhere feel a deep interest in them, especially when they were by death bereft of Paul's guidance. BIRKS [Horæ Evangelicæ] suggests that false teachers may have appealed from Paul's doctrine to that of James and Peter. Peter then would naturally write to confirm the doctrines of grace and tacitly show there was no difference between his teaching and Paul's. BIRKS prefers dating the Epistle A.D. 58, after Paul's second visit to Galatia, when Silvanus was with him, and so could not have been with Peter (A.D. 54), and before his imprisonment at Rome, when Mark was with him, and so could not have been with Peter (A.D. 62); perhaps when Paul was detained at Cæsarea, and so debarred from personal intercourse with those churches. I prefer the view previously stated. This sets aside the tradition that Paul and Peter suffered martyrdom together at Rome. ORIGEN'S and EUSEBIUS' statement that Peter visited the churches of Asia in person seems very probable.

The PLACE OF WRITING was doubtless Babylon on the Euphrates (1Pe 5:13). It is most improbable that in the midst of writing matter-of-fact communications and salutations in a remarkably plain Epistle, the symbolical language of prophecy (namely, "Babylon" for Rome) should be used. JOSEPHUS [Antiquities, 15.2.2; 3.1] states that there was a great multitude of Jews in the Chaldean Babylon; it is therefore likely that "the apostle of the circumcision" (Gal 2:7-8) would at some time or other visit them. Some have maintained that the Babylon meant was in Egypt because Mark preached in and around Alexandria after Peter's death, and therefore it is likely he did so along with that apostle in the same region previously. But no mention elsewhere in Scripture is made of this Egyptian Babylon, but only of the Chaldean one. And though towards the close of Caligula's reign a persecution drove the Jews thence to Seleucia, and a plague five years after still further thinned their numbers, yet this does not preclude their return and multiplication during the twenty years that elapsed between the plague and the writing of the Epistle. Moreover, the order in which the countries are enumerated, from northeast to south and west, is such as would be adopted by one writing from the Oriental Babylon on the Euphrates, not from Egypt or Rome. Indeed, COSMAS INDICOPLEUSTES, in the sixth century, understood the Babylon meant to be outside the Roman empire. Silvanus, Paul's companion, became subsequently Peter's, and was the carrier of this Epistle.

STYLE.--Fervor and practical truth, rather than logical reasoning, are the characteristics, of this Epistle, as they were of its energetic, warm-hearted writer. His familiarity with Paul's Epistles shown in the language accords with what we should expect from the fact of Paul's having "communicated the Gospel which he preached among the Gentiles" (as revealed specially to him) to Peter among others "of reputation" (Gal 2:2). Individualities occur, such as baptism, "the answer of a good conscience toward God" (1Pe 3:21); "consciousness of God" (Greek), 1Pe 2:19, as a motive for enduring sufferings; "living hope" (1Pe 1:3); "an inheritance incorruptible, undefiled, and that fadeth not away" (1Pe 1:4); "kiss of charity" (1Pe 5:14). Christ is viewed less in relation to His past sufferings than as at present exalted and hereafter to be manifested in all His majesty. Glory and hope are prominent features in this Epistle (1Pe 1:8), so much so that WEISS entitles him "the apostle of hope." The realization of future bliss as near causes him to regard believers as but "strangers" and "sojourners" here. Chastened fervor, deep humility, and ardent love appear, just as we should expect from one who had been so graciously restored after his grievous fall. "Being converted," he truly does "strengthen his brethren." His fervor shows itself in often repeating the same thought in similar words.

In some passages he shows familiarity with the Epistle of James, the apostle of special weight with the Jewish legalizing party, whose inspiration he thus confirms (compare 1Pe 1:6-7 with Jam 1:2-3; 1Pe 1:24 with Jam 1:10; 1Pe 2:1 with Jam 1:21; 1Pe 4:8 with Jam 5:20, both quoting Pro 10:12; Pro 5:5 with Jam 4:6, both quoting Pro 3:34). In most of these cases Old Testament quotations are the common ground of both. "Strong susceptibility to outward impressions, liveliness of feeling, dexterity in handling subjects, dispose natures like that of Peter to repeat afresh the thoughts of others" [STEIGER].

The diction of this Epistle and of his speeches in Acts is very similar: an undesigned coincidence, and so a mark of genuineness (compare 1Pe 2:7 with Act 4:11; 1Pe 1:12 with Act 5:32; 1Pe 2:24 with Act 5:30; Act 10:39; 1Pe 5:1 with Act 2:32; Act 3:15; 1Pe 1:10 with Act 3:18; Act 10:43; 1Pe 1:21 with Act 3:15; Act 10:40; 1Pe 4:5 with Act 10:42; 1Pe 2:24 with Act 3:19, Act 3:26).

There is, too, a recurrence to the language of the Lord at the last interview after His resurrection, recorded in Joh 21:15-23. Compare "the Shepherd . . . of . . . souls," 1Pe 2:25; "Feed the flock of God," "the chief Shepherd," 1Pe 5:2, 1Pe 5:4, with Joh 21:15-17; "Feed My lambs . . . sheep"; also "Whom . . . ye love," 1Pe 1:8; 1Pe 2:7, with Joh 21:15-17; "lovest thou Me?" and 2Pe 1:14, with Joh 21:18-19. WIESINGER well says, "He who in loving impatience cast himself into the sea to meet the Lord, is also the man who most earnestly testifies to the hope of His return; he who dated his own faith from the sufferings of his Master, is never weary in holding up the suffering form of the Lord before his readers to comfort and stimulate them; he before whom the death of a martyr is in assured expectation, is the man who, in the greatest variety of aspects, sets forth the duty, as well as the consolation, of suffering for Christ; as a rock of the Church he grounds his readers against the storm of present tribulation on the true Rock of ages."

JFB: 1 Peter (Outline)

• ADDRESS TO THE ELECTED OF THE GODHEAD: THANKSGIVING FOR THE LIVING HOPE TO WHICH WE ARE BEGOTTEN, PRODUCING JOY AMIDST SUFFERINGS: THIS SALVATION AN OBJECT OF DEEPEST INTEREST TO PROPHETS AND TO ANGELS: ITS COSTLY PRICE A MOTIVE TO HOLINESS AND LOVE, AS WE ARE BORN AGAIN OF THE EVER-ABIDING WORD OF GOD. (1Pe. 1:1-25)
• EXHORTATIONS. (1Pe. 2:1-25)
• RELATIVE DUTIES OF HUSBANDS AND WIVES: EXHORTATIONS TO LOVE AND FORBEARANCE: RIGHT CONDUCT UNDER PERSECUTIONS FOR RIGHTEOUSNESS' SAKE, AFTER CHRIST'S EXAMPLE, WHOSE DEATH RESULTED IN QUICKENING TO US THROUGH HIS BEING QUICKENED AGAIN, OF WHICH BAPTISM IS THE SACRAMENTAL SEAL. (1Pe. 3:1-22)
• LIKE THE RISEN CHRIST, BELIEVERS HENCEFORTH OUGHT TO HAVE NO MORE TO DO WITH SIN. (1Pe. 4:1-19)
• EXHORTATIONS TO ELDERS, JUNIORS, AND ALL IN GENERAL. PARTING PRAYER. CONCLUSION. (1Pe 5:1-14)

TSK: 1 Peter (Book Introduction)

As the design of this Epistle is excellent, remarks Dr. Macknight, so is its execution, in the judgment of the best critics, does not fall short of its design. Ostervald says of the first Epistle of Peter, " it is one of the finest books in the New Testament." Erasmus pronounces it to be " worthy of the prince of the Apostles, and full of apostolical dignity and authority;" and adds, " it is sparing in words, but full of sense - verbis pauca, sententiis differta ." " As the true church of Christ," says Dr. Clarke, " has generally been in a state of suffering, the Epistles of St. Peter have ever been most highly prized by all believers. That which we have just finished is an admirable letter, containing some of the most important maxims and consolations for the Church in the wilderness. No Christian can read it without deriving from it both light and life. Ministers especially should study it well, that they may know how to comfort their flocks when in persecution and adversity. He never speaks to good in any spiritual case who is not furnished out of the Divine treasury. God’s words invite, solicit, and command assent. on them a man may confidently rely. The words of man may be true, but they are not infallible; this is the character of God’s word alone." To these valuable remarks on the varied excellences and uses of this inimitable Epistle, it may be only necessary to add, that it is not only important in these respects, but is a rich treasury of Christian doctrines and duties from which the mind may be enriched and the heart improved, with the most ennobling sentiments.

TSK: 1 Peter 2 (Chapter Introduction)

Overview

1Pe 2:1, He exhorts them from the breach of charity; 1Pe 2:4, shewing that Christ is the foundation whereupon they are built; 1Pe 2:11, He beseeches them also to abstain from fleshly lusts; 1Pe 2:13, to be obedient to magistrates; 1Pe 2:18, and teaches servants how to obey their masters; 1Pe 2:20, patiently suffering for well doing, after the example of Christ.

Poole: 1 Peter 2 (Chapter Introduction)

PETER CHAPTER 2

MHCC: 1 Peter (Book Introduction)

The same great doctrines, as in St. Paul's epistles, are here applied to same practical purposes. And this epistle is remarkable for the sweetness, gentleness, and humble love, with which it is written. It gives a short, and yet a very clear summary, both of the consolations and the instructions needful for the encouragement and direction of a Christian in his journey to heaven, raising his thoughts and desires to that happiness, and strengthening him against all opposition in the way, both from corruption within, and temptations and afflictions without.

MHCC: 1 Peter 2 (Chapter Introduction)

(1Pe 2:1-10) A temper suitable to the Christian character as born again, is recommended.

(1Pe 2:11, 1Pe 2:12) Holy conversation among the Gentiles directed.

(1Pe 2:13-17) Subjects exhorted to pay all proper obedience to their civil governors.

(1Pe 2:18-25) Also servants to their masters, and all to be patient, according to the example of the suffering Saviour.

Matthew Henry: 1 Peter (Book Introduction)

An Exposition, with Practical Observations, of The First Epistle General of Peter

Two epistles we have enrolled in the sacred canon of the scripture written by Peter, who was a most eminent apostle of Jesus Christ, and whose character shines brightly as it is described in the four Gospels and in the Acts of the Apostles, but, as it is painted by the papists and legendary writers, it represents a person of extravagant pride and ambition. It is certain from scripture that Simon Peter was one of the first of those whom our Lord called to be his disciples and followers, that he was a person of excellent endowments, both natural and gracious, of great parts and ready elocution, quick to apprehend and bold to execute whatever he knew to be his duty. When our Saviour called his apostles, and gave them their commission, he nominated him first in the list; and by his behaviour towards him he seems to have distinguished him as a special favourite among the twelve. Many instances of our Lord's affection to him, both during his life and after his resurrection, are upon record. But there are many things confidently affirmed of this holy man that are directly false: as, That he had a primacy and superior power over the rest of the apostles - that he was more than their equal - that he was their prince, monarch, and sovereign - and that he exercised a jurisdiction over the whole college of the apostles: moreover, That he as the sole and universal pastor over all the Christian world, the only vicar of Christ upon earth - that he was for above twenty years bishop of Rome - that the popes of Rome succeed to St. Peter, and derive from him a universal supremacy and jurisdiction over all churches and Christians upon earth - and that all this was by our Lord's ordering and appointment; whereas Christ never gave him any pre-eminence of this kind, but positively forbade it, and gave precepts to the contrary. The other apostles never consented to any such claim. Paul declares himself not a whit behind the very chief apostles, 2Co 11:5 and 2Co 12:11. Here is no exception of Peter's superior dignity, whom Paul took the freedom to blame, and withstood him to the face, Gal 2:11. And Peter himself never assumed any thing like it, but modestly styles himself an apostle of Jesus Christ; and, when he writes to the presbyters of the church, he humbly places himself in the same rank with them: The elders who are among you I exhort, who am also an elder, 1Pe 5:1. See Dr. Barrow on the pope's supremacy.

The design of this first epistle is, I. To explain more fully the doctrines of Christianity to these newly-converted Jews. II. To direct and persuade them to a holy conversation, in the faithful discharge of all personal and relative duties, whereby they would secure their own peace and effectually confute the slanders and reproaches of their enemies. III. To prepare them for sufferings. This seems to be his principal intention; for he has something to this purport in every chapter, and does, by a great variety of arguments, encourage them to patience and perseverance in the faith, lest the persecutions and sad calamities that were coming upon them should prevail with them to apostatize from Christ and the gospel. It is remarkable that you find not so much as one word savouring of the spirit and pride of a pope in either of these epistles.

Matthew Henry: 1 Peter 2 (Chapter Introduction)

The general exhortation to holiness is continued, and enforced by several reasons taken from the foundation on which Christians are built, Jesus Christ, and from their spiritual blessings and privileges in him. The means of obtaining it, the word of God, is recommended, and all contrary qualities are condemned (1Pe 2:1-12). Particular directions are given how subjects ought to obey the magistrates, and servants their masters, patiently suffering in well doing, in imitation of Christ (1Pe 2:13 to the end).

Barclay: 1 Peter (Book Introduction)

INTRODUCTION TO THE FIRST LETTER OF PETER

The Catholic Or General Epistles

First Peter belongs to that group of New Testament letters which are known as the Catholic or General Epistles. Two explanations of that title have been offered.

(i) It is suggested that these letters were so called because they were addressed to the Church at large, in contradistinction to the Pauline letters which were addressed to individual churches. But that is not so. James is addressed to a definite, though widely scattered, community. It is written to the twelve tribes who are scattered abroad (Jam_1:1 ). It needs no argument that Second and Third John are addressed to definite communities; and, although First John has no specific address, it is clearly written with the needs and perils of a particular community in mind. First Peter itself is written to the strangers scattered abroad through Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia and Bithynia (1Pe_1:1 ). It is true that these General Epistles have a wider range than the letters of Paul; at the same time, they all have a definite community in mind.

(ii) So we must turn to the second explanation--that these letters were called Catholic or General because they were accepted as Scripture by the whole Church in contradistinction to that large number of letters which enjoyed a local and temporary authority but never universally ranked as Scripture. At the time when these letters were being written there was an outbreak of letter-writing in the Church. We still possess many of the letters which were then written--the letter of Clement of Rome to Corinth, the letter of Barnabas, the letters of Ignatius and the letters of Polycarp. All were regarded as very precious in the Churches to which they were written but were never regarded as having authority throughout the Church; on the other hand the Catholic or General Epistles gradually won a place in Scripture and were accepted by the whole Church. Here is the true explanation of their title.

The Lovely Letter

Of all the General Epistles it is probably true that First Peter is the best known and loved, and the most read. No one has ever been in any doubt about its charm. Moffatt writes of it: "The beautiful spirit of the pastoral shines through any translation of the Greek text. ¯fectionate, loving, lowly, humble, re lzaak Waltonquaternion of adjectives for the Epistles of James, John and Peter, but it is First Peter which deserves them preeminently." It is written out of the love of a pastorheart to help people who were going through it and on whom worse things were still to come. "The key-note," says Moffatt, "is steady encouragement to endurance in conduct and innocence in character." It has been said that its distinctive characteristic is warmth. E. J. Goodspeed wrote: "First Peter is one of the most moving pieces of persecution literature." To this day it is one of the easiest letters in the New Testament to read, for it has never lost its winsome appeal to the human heart.

The Modern Doubt

Until a comparatively short time ago few would have raised any doubts about the authenticity of First Peter. Renan, who was by no means a conservative critic, wrote of it: "The First Epistle is one of the writings of the New Testament which are most anciently and most unanimously cited as genuine." But in recent times the Petrine authorship of the letter has been widely questioned. The commentary by F. W. Beare, published in 1947, goes the length of saying, "There can be no possible doubt that ters a pseudonym." That is to say, Beare has no doubt that someone else wrote this letter under the name of Peter. We shall go on in fairness to investigate that view; but first we shall set out the traditional view--which we ourselves unhesitatingly accept--of the date and authorship of this letter. This is that First Peter was written from Rome by Peter himself, about the year A.D. 67, in the days immediately following the first persecution of the Christians by Nero, to the Christians in those parts of Asia Minor named in the address. What is the evidence for this early date and, therefore, for the Petrine authorship?

The Second Coming

When we go to the letter we find that expectation of the second coming of Christ is in the very forefront of its thought. Christians are being kept for the salvation which is to be revealed at the last time (1Pe_1:5 ). Those who keep the faith will be saved from the coming judgment (1Pe_1:7 ). Christians are to hope for the grace which will come at the revelation of Jesus Christ (1Pe_1:13 ). The day of visitation is expected (1Pe_2:12 ). The end of all things is at hand (1Pe_4:7 ). Those who suffer with Christ will also rejoice with Christ when his glory is revealed (1Pe_4:13 ). Judgment is to begin at the house of God (1Pe_4:17 ). The writer himself is sure that he will be a sharer in the glory to come (1Pe_5:1 ). When the Chief Shepherd shall appear the faithful Christian will receive a crown of glory (1Pe_5:4 ).

From beginning to end of the letter the second coming is in the forefront of the writermind. It is the motive for steadfastness in the faith, for the loyal living of the Christian life and for gallant endurance amidst the sufferings which have come and will come upon them.

It would be untrue to say that the second coming ever dropped out of Christian belief, but it did recede from the forefront of Christian belief as the years passed on and Christ did not return. It is, for instance, significant that in Ephesians, one of Paullatest letters, there is no mention of it. On this ground it is reasonable to suppose that First Peter is early and comes from the days when the Christians vividly expected the return of their Lord at any moment.

Simplicity Of Organization

It is clear that First Peter comes from a time when the organization of the Church is very simple. There is no mention of deacons; nor of the episkopos (G1985), the bishop, who begins to emerge in the Pastoral Epistles and becomes prominent in Ignatiusetters in the first half of the second century. The only Church officials mentioned are the elders. "I exhort the elders among you as a fellow-elder" (1Pe_5:1 ). On this ground, also, it is reasonable to suppose that First Peter comes from an early date.

The Theology Of The Early Church

What is most significant of all is that the theology of First Peter is the theology of the very early church. E. G. Selwyn has made a detailed study of this; and he has proved beyond all question that the theological ideas of First Peter are exactly the same as those we meet in the recorded sermons of Peter in the early chapters of Acts.

The preaching of the early church was based on five main ideas. One of the greatest contributions of C. H. Dodd to New Testament scholarship was his formulation of these. They form the framework of all the sermons of the early church, as recorded in Acts; and they are the foundation of the thought of all the New Testament writers. The summary of these basic ideas has been given the name Kerugma (G2782), which means the announcement or the proclamation of a herald.

These are the fundamental ideas which the Church in its first days heralded forth. We shall take them one by one and shall set down after each, first, the references in the early chapters of Acts and, second, the references in First Peter; and we will make the significant discovery that the basic ideas of the sermons of the early church and the theology of First Peter are precisely the same. We are not claiming, of course, that the sermons in Acts are verbatim reports of what was actually preached, but we believe that they give correctly the substance of the message of the first preachers.

(i) The age of fulfilment has dawned; the Messianic age has begun. This is Godlast word. A new order is being inaugurated and the elect are summoned to join the new community. Act_2:14-16 ; Act_3:12-26 ; Act_4:8-12 ; Act_10:34-43 ; 1Pe_1:3 ; 1Pe_1:10-12 ; 1Pe_4:7 .

(ii) This new age has come through the life, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ, all of which are in direct fulfilment of the prophecies of the Old Testament and are, therefore, the result of the definite plan and foreknowledge of God. Act_2:20-31 ; Act_3:13-14 ; Act_10:43 ; 1Pe_1:20-21 .

(iii) By virtue of the resurrection Jesus has been exalted to the right hand of God and is the Messianic head of the new Israel. Act_2:22-26 ; Act_3:13 ; Act_4:11 ; Act_5:30-31 ; Act_10:39-42 ; 1Pe_1:21 ; 1Pe_2:7 ; 1Pe_2:24 ; 1Pe_3:22 .

(iv) These Messianic events will shortly reach their consummation in the return of Christ in glory and the judgment of the living and the dead. Act_3:19-23 ; Act_10:42 ; 1Pe_1:5 , 1Pe_1:7 , 1Pe_1:13 ; 1Pe_4:5 , 1Pe_4:13 ; 1Pet 17-18; 1Pe_5:1 , 1Pe_5:4 .

(v) These facts are made the grounds for an appeal for repentance, and the offer of forgiveness and of the Holy Spirit, and the promise of eternal life. Act_2:38-39 ; Act_3:19 ; Act_5:31 ; Act_10:43 ; 1Pe_1:13-25 ; 1Pe_2:1-3 ; 1Pe_4:1-5 .

These declarations are the five main planks in the edifice of early Christian preaching, as recorded for us in the sermons of Peter in the early chapters of Acts. They are also the dominant ideas in First Peter. The correspondence is so close and so consistent that we almost certainly with entire probability see the same hand and mind in both.

Quotations From The Fathers

We may add another point to our evidence that First Peter is early; very early the fathers and preachers of the Church begin to quote it. The first person to quote First Peter by name is Irenaeus, who lived from A.D. 130 until well into the next century. He twice quotes 1Pe_1:8 : "Without having seen him you love him; though you do not now see him you believe in him and rejoice with unutterable and exalted joy." And he once quotes 1Pe_2:16 , with its command not to use liberty as a cloak for maliciousness. But even before this the fathers of the Church are quoting Peter without mentioning his name. Clement of Rome, writing about A.D. 95, speaks of "the precious blood of Christ," an unusual phrase which may well come from Peterstatement that we are redeemed by the precious blood of Christ (1Pe_1:19 ). Polycarp, who was martyred in A.D. 155, continuously quotes Peter without using his name. We may select three passages to show how closely he gives Peterwords.

Wherefore, girding up your loins, serve God in fear ... believing on him who raised up our Lord Jesus Christ from the dead, and gave him glory (Polycarp, To the Philippians chapter 2: 1).

Therefore, gird up your minds...through him you have confidence in God, who raised him from the dead and gave him glory (1Pe_1:13 , 1Pe_1:21 ).

Christ Jesus who bare our sins in his own body on the tree, who did no sin, neither was guile found in his mouth (Polycarp 8: 1).

He committed no sin; no guile was found on his life... He himself bore our sins in his body on the tree (1Pe_2:22 , 1Pe_2:24 ).

Having your conversation blameless among the Gentiles (Polycarp 10: 2).

Maintain good conduct among the Gentiles (1Pe_2:12 ).

There can be no doubt that Polycarp is quoting Peter, although he does not name him. It takes some time for a book to acquire such an authority and familiarity that it can be quoted almost unconsciously, its language woven into the language of the Church. Once again we see that First Peter must be a very early book.

The Excellence Of The Greek

If, however, we are defending the Petrine authorship of this letter, there is one problem we must face--and that is the excellence of the Greek. It seems impossible that it should be the work of a Galilaean fisherman. New Testament scholars are at one in praising the Greek of this letter. F. W. Beare writes: "The epistle is quite obviously the work of a man of letters, skilled in all the devices of rhetoric, and able to draw on an extensive, and even learned, vocabulary. He is a stylist of no ordinary capacity, and he writes some of the best Greek in the whole New Testament, far smoother and more literary than that of the highly-trained Paul." Moffatt speaks of this letter"plastic language and love of metaphor." Mayor says that First Peter has no equal in the New Testament for "sustained stateliness of rhythm." Bigg has likened certain of First Peter.s phrases to the writing of Thucydides. Selwyn has spoken of First Peter"Euripidean tenderness" and of its ability to coin compound words as Aeschylus might have done. The Greek of First Peter is not entirely unworthy to be set beside that of the masters of the language. It is difficult, if not impossible, to imagine Peter using the Greek language like that.

The letter itself supplies the solution to this problem. In the concluding short section Peter himself says, "By Silvanus...I have written briefly" (1Pe_5:12 ). By Silvanus--dia (G1223) Silouanou (G4610)--is an unusual phrase. The Greek means that Silvanus was Peteragent in the writing of the letter; it means that he was more than merely Peterstenographer.

Let us approach this from two angles. First, let us enquire what we know about Silvanus. (The evidence is set out more fully in our study section on 1Pe_5:12 ). In all probability he is the same person as the Silvanus of Paulletters and the Silas of Acts, Silas being a shortened and more familiar form of Silvanus. When we examine these passages, we find that Silas or Silvanus was no ordinary person but a leading figure in the life and counsels of the early church.

He was a prophet (Act_15:32 ); he was one of the "chief among the brethren" at the council of Jerusalem and one of the two chosen to deliver the decisions of the council to the Church at Antioch (Act_15:22 , Act_15:27 ). He was Paulchosen companion in the second missionary journey, and was with Paul both in Philippi and in Corinth (Act_15:37-40 ; Act_16:19 , Act_16:25 , Act_16:29 ; Act_18:5 ; 2Co_1:19 ). He was associated with Paul in the initial greetings of 1 and 2 Thessalonians (1Th_1:1 ; 2Th_1:1 ). He was a Roman citizen (Act_16:37 ).

Silvanus, then, was a notable man in the early church; he was not so much the assistant as the colleague of Paul; and, since he was a Roman citizen, there is at least a possibility that he was a man of an education and culture such as Peter could never have enjoyed.

Now let us add our second line of thought. In a missionary situation, when a missionary can speak a language well enough but cannot write it very well, it is quite common for him to do one of two things in order to send a message to his people. He either writes it out in as good a style as he can, and then gets a native speaker of the language to correct his mistakes and to polish his style; or, if he has a native colleague whom he can fully trust, he tells him what he wishes said, leaves him to put the message into written form and then vets the result.

We can well imagine that this was the part Silvanus played in the writing of First Peter. Either he corrected and polished Peternecessarily inadequate Greek; or he wrote in his own words what Peter wanted said, with Peter setting the final product and adding the last personal paragraph to it.

The thought is that of Peter; but the style is that of Silvanus. And so, although the Greek is so excellent, there is no necessity to deny that the letter comes from Peter himself.

The Recipients Of The Letter

The recipients of the letter are the exiles (a Christian is always a sojourner on the earth) scattered throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia and Bithynia.

Almost all of these words had a double significance. They stood for ancient kingdoms and they stood for Roman provinces to which the ancient names had been given; and the ancient kingdoms and the new provinces did not always cover the same territory. Pontus was never a province. It had originally been the kingdom of Mithradates and part of it was incorporated in Bithynia and part of it in Galatia. Galatia had originally been the kingdom of the Gauls in the area of the three cities Ancyra, Pessinus, and Tavium, but the Romans had expanded it into a much larger unit of administration, including sections of Phrygia, Pisidia, Lycaonia, and Isauria. The kingdom of Cappadocia had become a Roman province in A.D. 17 in practically its original form. Asia was not the continent of Asia as we use the term. It had been an independent kingdom, whose last king, Attalus the Third, had bequeathed it as a gift to Rome in 133 B.C. It embraced the centre of Asia minor and was bounded on the north by Bithynia, on the south by Lycia, and on the east by Phrygia and Galatia. In popular language it was that part of Asia Minor which lay along the shores of the Aegean Sea.

We do not know why these particular districts were picked out; but this much is certain--they embraced a large area with a very large population; and the fact that they are all mentioned is one of the greatest proofs of the immense missionary activity of the early church, apart altogether from the missionary activities of Paul.

All these districts lie in the north-east corner of Asia Minor. Why they are named as a group and why they are named in this particular order, we do not know. But a glance at the map will show that, if the bearer of this letter--who may well have been Silvanus--sailed from Italy and landed at Sinope in north-east Asia Minor, a journey through these provinces would be a circular tour which would take him back to Sinope. From Sinope in Bithynia he would go south to Galatia, further south to Cappadocia, west to Asia, north again to Bithynia, and then east to arrive back in Sinope.

It is clear from the letter itself that its recipients were mainly Gentiles. There is no mention of any question of the law, a question which always arose when there was a Jewish background. Their previous condition had been one of fleshly passion (1Pe_1:14 ; 1Pe_4:3-4 ) which fits gentiles far better than Jews. Previously they had been no people--Gentiles outside the covenant--but now they are the people of God (1Pe_2:9-10 ).

The form of his name which Peter uses also shows that this letter was intended for Gentiles for Peter is a Greek name. Paul calls him Cephas (1Co_1:12 ; 1Co_3:22 ; 1Co_9:5 ; 1Co_15:5 ; Gal_1:18 ; Gal_2:9 , Gal_2:11 , Gal_2:14 ); among his fellow Jews, he was known as Simeon (Act_15:14 ), which is the name by which he is called in Second Peter (2Pe_1:1 ). Since he uses his Greek name here, it is likely that he was writing to Greek people.

The Circumstances Behind The Letter

That this letter was written in a time when persecution threatened, is abundantly clear. They are in the midst of various trials (1Pe_1:6 ). They are likely to be falsely accused as evil-doers (1Pe_3:16 ). A fiery ordeal is going to try them (1Pe_4:12 ). When they suffer, they are to commit themselves to God (1Pe_4:19 ). They may well have to suffer for righteousnessake (1Pe_3:14 ). They are sharing in the afflictions which the Christian brotherhood throughout the world is called upon to endure (1Pe_5:9 ). At the back of this letter there are fiery trial, a campaign of slander and suffering for the sake of Christ. Can we identify this situation?

There was a time when the Christians had little to fear from the Roman government. In Acts it is repeatedly the Roman magistrates and the Roman soldiers and officials who save Paul from the fury of Jews and pagans alike. As Gibbon had it, the tribunal of the pagan magistrate proved the most assured refuge against the fury of the synagogue. The reason was that in the early days the Roman government was not able to distinguish between Jews and Christians. Within the empire Judaism was what was called a religio licita, a permitted religion, and Jews had full liberty to worship in their own way. It was not that the Jews did not try to enlighten the Romans to the true facts of the situation; they did so in Corinth, for example (Act_18:12-17 ). But for some time the Romans simply regarded the Christians as a Jewish sect and, therefore, did not molest them.

The change came in the days of Nero and we can trace almost every detail of the story. On 19th July, A.D. 64, the great fire of Rome broke out. Rome, a city of narrow streets and high wooden tenements, was in real danger of being wiped out. The fire burned for three days and three nights, was checked, and then broke out again with redoubled violence. The Roman populace had no doubt who was responsible and put the blame on the Emperor. Nero had a passion for building; and they believed so that he had deliberately taken steps to obliterate Rome that he might build it again. Neroresponsibility must remain for ever in doubt; but it is certain that he watched the raging inferno from the tower of Maecenas and expressed himself as charmed with the flower and loveliness of the flames. It was freely said that those who tried to extinguish the fire were deliberately hindered and that men were seen to rekindle it again, when it was likely to subside. The people were overwhelmed. The ancient landmarks and the ancestral shrines had vanished; the Temple of Luna, the Ara Maxima, the great altar, the Temple of Jupiter Stator, the shrine of Vesta, their very household gods were gone. They were homeless and, in Farrarphrase, there was "a hopeless brotherhood of wretchedness."

The resentment of the people was bitter. Nero had to divert suspicion from himself; a scapegoat had to be found. The Christians were made the scapegoat. Tacitus, the Roman historian, tells the story (Annals 15.44):

Neither human assistance in the shape of imperial gifts, nor

attempts to appease the gods, could remove the sinister report

that the fire was due to Neroown orders. And, so, in the hope

of dissipating the rumour, he falsely diverted the charge on to a

set of people to whom the vulgar gave the name of Chrestians, and

who were detested for the abominations they perpetrated. The

founder of the sect, one Christus by name, had been executed

by Pontius Pilate in the reign of Tiberius; and the dangerous

superstition, though put down for the moment, broke out again, not

only in Judaea, the original home of the pest, but even in Rome,

where everything shameful and horrible collects and is practised.

Clearly Tacitus had no doubt that the Christians were not to blame for the fire and that Nero was simply choosing them to be the scapegoats for his own crime.

Why did Nero pick on the Christians and how was it possible even to suggest that they were responsible for the fire of Rome? There are two possible answers.

(i) The Christians were already the victims of certain slanders.

(a) They were in the popular mind connected with the Jews. Antisemitism is no new thing and it was easy for the Roman mob to attach any crime to the Jews and, therefore, to the Christians.

(b) The LordSupper was secret, at least in a sense. It was open only to the members of the Church. And certain phrases connected with it were fruitful sources of pagan slanders, phrases about eating someonebody and drinking someoneblood. That was enough to produce a rumour that the Christians were cannibals. In time the rumour grew until it became a story that the Christians killed and ate a Gentile, or a newly born child. At the LordTable the Christians gave each other the kiss of peace (1Pe_5:14 ). Their meeting was called the Agape (G26), the Love Feast. That was enough for stories to spread that the Christian meetings were orgies of vice.

(c) It was always a charge against the Christians that they "tampered with family relationships." There was this much truth in such a charge that Christianity did indeed become a sword to split families, when some members of a family became Christian and some did not. A religion which split homes was bound to be unpopular.

(d) It was the case that the Christians spoke of a coming day when the world would dissolve in flames. Many a Christian preacher must have been heard preaching of the second coming and the fiery dissolution of all things (Act_2:19-20 ). It would not be difficult to put the blame for the fire on to people who spoke like that.

There was abundant material which could be perverted into false charges against the Christians by anyone maliciously disposed to victimise them.

(ii) The Jewish faith had always appealed especially to women because of its moral standards in a world where chastity did not exist. There were, therefore, many well-born women who had embraced the Jewish faith. The Jews did not hesitate to work upon these women to influence their husbands against the Christians. We get a definite example of that in what happened to Paul and his company in Antioch of Pisidia. There it was through such women that the Jews stirred up action against Paul (Act_13:50 ). Two of Nerocourt favourites were Jewish proselytes. There was Aliturus, his favourite actor; and there was Poppaea, his mistress. It is very likely that the Jews through them influenced Nero to take action against the Christians.

In any event, the blame for the fire was attached to the Christians and a savage outbreak of persecution occurred. Nor was it simply persecution by legal means. What Tacitus called an ingens multitudo, a huge multitude, of Christians perished in the most sadistic ways. Nero rolled the Christians in pitch, set light to them and used them as living torches to light his gardens. He sewed them up in the skins of wild animals and set his hunting-dogs upon them, to tear them limb from limb while they still lived.

Tacitus writes:

Mockery of every sort was added to their deaths. Covered with the

skins of beasts, they were torn by dogs and perished, or were

nailed to crosses, or were doomed to the flames and burned, to

serve as a nightly illumination, when daylight had expired. Nero

offered his gardens for the spectacle and was exhibiting a show

in the circus, while he mingled with the people in the dress of a

charioteer or stood aloft on a car. Hence, even for criminals who

deserve extreme and exemplary punishment, there arose a feeling of

compassion; for, it was not, as it seemed, for the public good,

but to glut one mancruelty that they were being destroyed

(Tacitus, Annals 15: 44).

The same terrible story is told by the later Christian historian, Sulipicius Severus, in his Chronicle:

In the meantime, the number of Christians being now very large,

it happened that Rome was destroyed by fire, while Nero was

stationed at Antium. But the opinion of all cast the odium of

causing the fire upon the emperor, and he was believed in this way

to have sought for the glory of building a new city. And, in fact,

Nero could not, by any means he tried, escape from the charge that

the fire had been caused by his orders. He, therefore, turned the

accusation against the Christians and the most cruel tortures were

accordingly inflicted upon the innocent. Nay, even new kinds of

death were invented so that, being covered in the skins of wild

beasts, they perished by being devoured by dogs, while many were

crucified, or slain by fire, and not a few were set apart for this

purpose, that, when the day came to a close, they should be

consumed to serve for light during the night. In this way, cruelty

first began to be manifested against the Christians. Afterwards,

too, their religion was prohibited by laws which were enacted; and

by edicts openly set forth it was proclaimed unlawful to be a

Christian.

It is true that this persecution was confined originally to Rome; but the gateway to persecution had been opened and in every place they were ready victims for the mob.

Moffatt writes:

After the Neronic wave had passed over the capital, the wash of it

was felt on the far shores of the provinces; the dramatic publicity

of the punishment must have spread the name of Christian urbi et

orbi, far and wide, over the entire empire; the provincials would

soon hear of it, and when they desired a similar outburst at the

expense of the loyal Christians, all that they needed was a

proconsul to gratify their wishes and some outstanding disciple to

serve as a victim.

For ever after the Christians were to live under threat. The mobs of the Roman cities knew what had happened in Rome and there were always these slanderous stories against the Christians. There were times when the mob loved blood and there were many governors ready to pander to their blood-lust. It was not Roman law but lynch law which threatened the Christians.

From now on the Christian was in peril of his life. For years nothing might happen; then some spark might set off the explosion; and the terror would break out. That is the situation at the back of First Peter; and it is in face of it that Peter calls his people to hope and to courage and to that lovely Christian living which alone can give the lie to the slanders with which they are attacked and which are the grounds for taking measures against them. First Peter was written to meet no theological heresy; it was written to strengthen men and women in jeopardy of their lives.

The Doubts

We have set out in full the arguments which go to prove that Peter is really the author of the first letter which bears his name. But, as we have said, not a few first-class scholars have felt that it cannot have been his work. We ourselves accept the view that Peter is the author of the letter; but in fairness we set out the other side, largely as it is presented in the chapter on First Peter in The Primitive Church by B. H. Streeter

Strange Silences

Bigg writes in his introduction: "There is no book in the New Testament which has earlier, better, or stronger attestation (than First Peter). It is true that Eusebius, the great fourth century scholar and historian of the Church, classes First Peter among the books universally accepted in the early church as part of scripture" (Eusebius: Ecclesiastical History 3.25.2). But certain things are to be noted.

(a) Eusebius adduces certain quotations from earlier writers to prove his contention that First Peter was universally accepted. This he never does in connection with the gospels or the letters of Paul; and the very fact that he feels called upon to produce his evidence in the case of First Peter might be held to indicate that in it he felt some necessity to prove his point, a necessity which did not exist in connection with the other books. Was there a doubt in Eusebiuswn mind? Or, were there people who had to be convinced? Was the universal acceptance of First Peter not so unanimous after all?

(b) In his book, The Canon of the New Testament, Westcott noted that, although no one in the early church questions the right of First Peter to be part of the New Testament, surprisingly few of the early fathers quote it and, still more surprising, very few of the early fathers in the west and in Rome quote it. Tertullian is an immense quoter of scripture. In his writings there are 7,258 quotations from the New Testament, but only 2 of them are from First Peter. If Peter wrote this letter and wrote it in Rome, we would expect it to be well known and largely used in the Church of the west.

(c) The earliest known official list of New Testament books is the Muratorian Canon, so called after Cardinal Muratori who discovered it. It is the official list of New Testament books as accepted in the Church at Rome about the year A.D. 170. It is an extraordinary fact that First Peter does not appear at all. It can be fairly argued that the Muratorian Canon, as we possess it, is defective and that it may originally have contained a reference to First Peter. But that argument is seriously weakened by the next consideration.

(d) It is a fact that First Peter was still not in the New Testament of the Syrian Church as late as A.D. 373. It did not get in until the Syriac version of the New Testament known as the Peshitto was made about A.D. 400. We know that it was Tatian who brought the New Testament books to the Syriac-speaking Church; and he brought them to Syria from Rome when he went to Edessa and founded the Church there in A.D. 172. It could, therefore, be argued that the Muratorian Canon is correct as we possess it and that First Peter was not part of the Roman ChurchNew Testament as late as A.D. 170. This would be a very surprising fact if Peter wrote it--and actually wrote it at Rome.

When all these facts are put together, it does seem that there are some strange silences in regard to First Peter and that its attestation may not be as strong as is usually assumed.

First Peter And Ephesians

Further, there is definitely some connection between First Peter and Ephesians. There are many close parallels of thought and expression between the two and we select the following specimens of this similarity.

Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ. By his

great mercy we have been born anew to a living hope through the

resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead (1Pe_1:3 ).

Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who

has blessed us in Christ with every spiritual blessing in the

heavenly places (Eph_1:3 ).

Therefore, gird up your minds, be sober, set your hope fully upon

the grace that is coming to you at the revelation of Jesus Christ

(1Pe_1:13 ).

Stand, therefore, having girded your loins with truth (Eph_6:14 ).

Jesus Christ, was destined before the foundation of the world, but

was made manifest at the end of the times for your sake

(1Pe_1:20 ).

Even as he chose us in him, before the foundation of the world

(Eph_1:4 ).

Jesus Christ, who has gone into heaven, and is at the right hand

of God, with angels and authorities and powers subject to him

(1Pe_3:22 ).

God made him sit at his right hand in the heavenly places, far

above all rule and authority, and power and dominion (Eph_1:20-21 ).

In addition, the injunctions to slaves, husbands and wives in First Peter and Ephesians are very similar.

The argument is put forward that First Peter is quoting Ephesians. Although Ephesians must have been written somewhere about A.D. 64, Paulletters were not collected and edited until about A.D. 90. If, then, Peter was also writing in A.D. 64, how could he know Ephesians?

This is an argument to which there is more than one reply. (a) The injunctions to slaves, husbands and wives are part of the standardized ethical teaching given to all converts in all churches. Peter was not borrowing from Paul; both were using common stock. (b) All the similarities quoted can well be explained from the fact that certain phrases and lines of thought were universal in the early church. For instance, "Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ," was part of the universal devotional language of the early church, which both Peter and Paul would know and use without any borrowing from each other. (c) Even if there was mutual borrowing, it is by no means certain that First Peter borrowed from Ephesians; the borrowing might well have been the other way round and probably was, for First Peter is much simpler than Ephesians. (d) Lastly, even if First Peter borrowed from Ephesians, if Peter and Paul were in Rome at the same time, it is perfectly possible that Peter could have seen a copy of Ephesians before it was sent to Asia Minor, and he might well have discussed its ideas with Paul.

The argument that First Peter must be late because it quotes from Ephesians seems to us very uncertain and insecure, and probably mistaken.

Your Fellow-elder

It is objected that Peter could not well have written the sentence: "The elders among you I exhort, as a fellow-elder" (1Pe_5:1 ). It is maintained that Peter could not have called himself an elder. He was an apostle whose function was quite different from that of an elder. The apostle was characteristically a man whose work and authority were not confined to any one congregation, but whose writ ran throughout the Church at large; whereas the elder was the governing official of the local congregation.

That is perfectly true. But it must be remembered that amongst the Jews there was no office more universally honoured than that of elder. The elder had the respect of the whole community and to him the community looked for guidance in its problems and justice in its disputes. Peter, as a Jew, would feel nothing out of place in calling himself an elder; and in so doing he would avoid the conscious claim of authority that the title of apostle might have implied, and graciously and courteously identify himself with the people to whom he spoke.

A Witness Of The Sufferings Of Christ

It is objected that Peter could not honestly have called himself a witness of Christsufferings, for after the arrest in the garden all the disciples forsook Jesus and fled (Mat_26:56 ) and, apart from the beloved disciple, none was a witness of the Cross (Joh_19:26-27 ). A witness of the resurrection Peter could call himself, and indeed to be such was the function of an apostle (Act_1:22 ), but a witness of the Cross he was not. In a sense that is undeniable. And yet Peter is not here claiming to be a witness of the crucifixion, but to be a witness of the sufferings of Christ. He did see Christ suffer, in his continual rejection by men, in the poignant moments of the Last Supper, in the agony in the garden and in that moment when, after he had denied him, Jesus turned and looked on him (Luk_22:61 ). It is an insensitive and pedestrian criticism which denies to Peter the right to say that he had been a witness of the sufferings of Christ.

Persecution For The Name

The main argument for a late date for First Peter is drawn from its references to persecution. It is argued that First Peter implies that it was already a crime to be a Christian and that Christians were brought before the courts, not for any crime but for the bare fact of their faith. First Peter speaks about being reproached for the name of Christ (1Pe_4:14 ); it speaks of suffering as a Christian (1Pe_4:16 ). It is argued that this stage of persecution was not reached until after A.D. 100, and that prior to that date their persecution was on the score of alleged evil-doing, as in the time of Nero.

There is no doubt that this was the law by A.D. 112. At that time Pliny was governor of Bithynia. He was a personal friend of the Emperor Trajan and he had a way of referring all his difficulties to Trajan for solution. He wrote to the Emperor to tell how he dealt with the Christians. Pliny was well aware that they were law-abiding citizens to whose practices no crimes were attached. They told him that "they had been accustomed to assemble on a fixed day before daylight, and sing by turns a hymn to Christ as God; that they had bound themselves with an oath, not for any crime, but to commit neither theft, nor robbery, nor adultery, nor to break their word, and not to deny a deposit when demanded." Pliny accepted all this; but, when they were brought before him, he asked only one question. "I have asked them whether they were Christians. Those who confessed I asked a second and a third time, threatening punishment. Those who persisted I ordered to be led away to execution." Their sole crime was that of being a Christian.

Trajan replied that this was the correct proceeding and that anyone who denied being a Christian and proved it by sacrificing to the gods was immediately to be set free. From the letters it is clear that there was a good deal of information being laid against the Christians; and Trajan laid it down that no anonymous letters of information were to be accepted or acted upon (Pliny: Letters 96 and 97).

It is argued that this stage of persecution did not emerge until the time of Trajan; and that First Peter, therefore, implies a situation which must be as late as Trojantime.

The only way in which we can settle this is to sketch the progress of persecution and the reason for it in the Roman Empire. We may do so by setting out one basic fact and three developments from it.

(i) Under the Roman system, religions were divided into two kinds. There were those which were religiones licitae, permitted religions; these were recognized by the state and it was open to any man to practise them. There were religiones illicitae; these were forbidden by the state and it was illegal for any man to practise them on pain of automatic prosecution as a criminal. It is to be noted that Roman toleration was very wide; and that any religion which did not affect public morality and civil order was certain to be permitted.

(ii) Judaism was a religio licita; and in the very early days the Romans, not unnaturally, did not know the difference between Judaism and Christianity. Christianity, as far as they were concerned, was merely a sect of Judaism and any tension and hostility between the two was a private quarrel which was no concern of the Roman government. Because of that in the very early days Christianity was under no danger of persecution. It enjoyed the same freedom of worship as Judaism enjoyed because it was assumed to be a religio licita.

(iii) The action of Nero changed the situation. However it came about, and most likely it was by the deliberate action of the Jews, the Roman government discovered that Judaism and Christianity were different. It is true that Nero first persecuted the Christians, not for being Christians, but for burning Rome. But the fact remains that Christianity had been discovered by the government to be a separate religion.

(iv) The consequence was immediate and inevitable. Christianity was at once a prohibited religion and immediately, ipso facto, every Christian became an outlaw. In the Roman historian, Suetonius, we have direct evidence that this was precisely what happened. He gives a kind of list of the legislative reforms initiated by Nero:

During his reign many abuses were severely punished and put

down, and not a few new laws were made; a limit was set to

expenditures; the public banquets were confined to a distribution

of food; the sale of any kind of cooked viands in the taverns was

forbidden, with the exception of pulse and vegetables, whereas,

before, every kind of dainty was exposed for sale. Punishment was

inflicted on the Christians, a class of men given to a new and

mischievous superstition. He put an end to the diversions of the

chariot-drivers, who from immunity of long standing claimed the

right of ranging at large and amusing themselves by cheating

and robbing the people. The pantomimic actors and their

partisans were banished from the city.

We have quoted that passage in full because it is proof that by the time of Nero the punishment of Christians had become an ordinary police affair. It is abundantly clear that we do not need to wait until the time of Trajan for the mere fact of being a Christian to be a crime. Any time after Nero a Christian was liable to punishment and death simply for the name he bore,

This does not mean that persecution was constant and consistent; but it does mean that any Christian was liable to execution at any time, purely as a police matter. In one area a Christian might live a whole lifetime at peace; in another there might be outbreaks of persecution every few months. It depended very largely on two things. It depended on the governor himself who might either leave the Christians unmolested or equally set the processes of the law in action against them. It depended on informers. The governor might not wish to act against the Christians, but if information was laid against a Christian he had to; and there were times when the mob were out for blood, information was laid and Christians were butchered to make a Roman holiday.

To compare small things with great, the legal position of the Christians and the attitude of the Roman law can be parallelled in Britain today. There are certain actions which are illegal--to take a very small example, parking a car partly on the pavement--but which for long enough may be permitted. But if the police authorities decide to institute a drive against such an action, or if it develops into too blatant a breaking of the law, or if someone lays a complaint and information, the law will go into action and due penalty and punishment will be exacted. That was the position of the Christians in the empire all of whom were technically outlaws. In actual fact no action might be taken against them; but a kind of sword of Damocles was for ever suspended over them. None knew when information would be laid against him; none knew when a governor would take action; none knew when he might have to die. And that situation obtained consistently after the action of Nero. Up to that time the Roman authorities had not realized that Christianity was a new religion; but from then on the Christian was automatically an outlaw.

Let us, then, look at the situation as depicted in First Peter. Peterpeople are undergoing various trials (1Pe_1:6 ). Their faith is liable to be tried as metal is tested with fire (1Pe_1:7 ). Clearly they are undergoing a campaign of slander in which ignorant and baseless charges are being maliciously directed against them (1Pe_2:12 ; 1Pe_2:15 ; 1Pe_3:16 ; 1Pe_4:4 ). At this very moment they are in the midst of an outbreak of persecution because they are Christians (1Pe_4:12 , 1Pe_4:14 , 1Pe_4:16 ; 1Pe_5:9 ). Such suffering is only to be expected and they must not be surprised at it (1Pe_4:12 ). In any event it gives them the happiness of suffering for righteousnessake (1Pe_3:14 , 1Pe_3:17 ), and of being sharers in the sufferings of Christ (1Pe_4:13 ). There is no need to come down to the time of Trajan for this situation. It is one in which Christians daily found themselves in every part of the empire at any time after their true status had been disclosed by the action of Nero. The persecution situation in First Peter does not in any way compel us to date it after the lifetime of Peter.

Honour The King

But we must proceed with the arguments of those who cannot hold the Petrine authorship. It is argued that in the situation which obtained in the time of Nero, Peter could never have written: "Be subject for the Lordsake to every human institution, whether it be to the emperor as supreme, or to governors as sent by him to punish those who do wrong and to praise those who do right.... Fear God. Honour the emperor." (1Pe_2:13-17 ). The fact is, however, that this is precisely the point of view expressed in Rom_13:1-7 . The whole teaching of the New Testament, except only in the Revelation in which Rome is damned, is that the Christian must be a loyal citizen and must demonstrate the falsity of the charges made against him by the excellence of his behaviour as such. (1Pe_2:15 ). Even in times of persecution the Christian fully acknowledged his obligation to be a good citizen; and his only defence against persecution was to show by the excellence of his citizenship that he did not deserve such treatment. It is by no means impossible that Peter should have written like that.

A Sermon And A Pastoral

What is the view of those who cannot believe that First Peter is the work of Peter himself?

First of all, it is suggested that the initial address (1Pe_1:1-2 ), and the closing greetings and salutations (1Pe_5:12-14 ) are later additions and no part of the original letter.

It is then suggested that First Peter as it stands is composed of two separate and quite different works. In 1Pe_4:11 we find a doxology. The natural place for a doxology is at the end; and it is suggested that 1Pe_1:3-25 ; 1Pet 2-3; 1Pe_4:1-11 is the first of the two works of which the letter is composed. It is further suggested that this part of First Peter was originally a baptismal sermon. There is indeed in it a reference to the baptism which saves us (1Pe_3:21 ); and the advice to slaves, wives and husbands (1Pe_2:18-25 ; 1Pe_3:1-7 ) would be entirely relevant to those who were entering the Christian Church from paganism and setting out on the newness of the Christian life.

It is suggested that the second part of the letter, 1Pe_4:12-19 ; 1Pe_5:1-11 , contains the substance of a pastoral letter, written to strengthen and comfort during a time of persecution (1Pe_4:12-19 ). At such a time the elders were very important; on them the resistance power of the Church depended. The writer of this pastoral fears that greed and arrogance are creeping in (1Pe_5:1-3 ), and he urges them faithfully to perform their high task (1Pe_5:4 ).

On this view First Peter is composed of two separate works--a baptismal sermon, and a pastoral letter written in time of persecution and neither has anything to do with Peter.

Asia Minor, Not Rome

If First Peter is a baptismal sermon and a pastoral letter in time of persecution, where is its place of origin? If the letter is not Peter there is no necessity to connect it with Rome; and, in any event, it appears that the Roman Church did not know or use First Peter. Let us put together certain facts.

(a) Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia and Bithynia (1Pe_1:1 ) are all in Asia Minor and all centred in Sinope.

(b) The first extensive quoter of First Peter is Polycarp bishop of Smyrna, and Smyrna is in Asia Minor.

(c) Certain phrases in First Peter immediately turn our thoughts to parallel phrases in other parts of the New Testament. In 1Pe_5:13 the Church is called "she that is elect," and in 2Jo_1:13 the Church is also described as an "elect sister." 1Pe_1:8 speaks of Jesus Christ, "without having seen him you love him; though you do not now see him you believe in him and rejoice with unutterable and exalted joy." This turns our thoughts very naturally to Jesusaying to Thomas in the Fourth Gospel: "Blessed are those who have not seen, and believe" (Joh_20:29 ). First Peter urges the elders to tend, that is, to shepherd, the flock of God (1Pe_5:2 ). That turns our thoughts to Jesusnjunction to Peter to feed his lambs and his sheep (Joh_21:15-17 ), and to Paulfarewell injunction to the elders of Ephesus to take heed to the flock over which the Holy Spirit has made them guardians (Act_20:28 ). All this is to say that the memories First Peter awakens are of the Fourth Gospel, the Letters of John and of Paul at Ephesus. The Fourth Gospel and the Letters of John were most probably written at Ephesus, and Ephesus is in Asia Minor.

It seems that in the case of First Peter all roads lead to Asia Minor.

The Occasion Of The Publication Of First Peter

Assuming that First Peter has its origin in Asia Minor, can we suggest an occasion for its writing? It was written at a time of persecution. We know from Plinyletters that in Bithynia about A.D. 112 there was a serious persecution of the Christians and Bithynia is one of the provinces named in the address. We may well conjecture that it was to give courage to the Christians then that First Peter was issued. It may be that at that time someone in a church in Asia Minor came upon these two documents and sent them out under the name of Peter. This would not be looked upon as forgery. Both in Jewish and in Greek practice it was the regular custom to attach books to the name of the great writers of the past.

The Author Of First Peter

If Peter did not write First Peter, is it possible to guess at the author? Let us reconstruct some of his essential qualifications. On our previous assumption, he must come from Asia Minor. On the basis of First Peter itself, he must be an elder and an eye-witness of the sufferings of Christ (1Pe_5:1 ). Is there anyone who fits these requirements? Papias, Bishop of Hierapolis about A.D. 170, who spent his life collecting all the information he could about the early days of the Church, tells of his methods and his sources: "Nor shall I hesitate, along with my own interpretations, to set down for thee whatsoever I learned with care and remembered with care from the elders, guaranteeing its truth.... Furthermore, if anyone chanced to arrive who had been really a follower of the elders, I would enquire as to the sayings of the elders--as to what Andrew or Peter said, or Philip, or Thomas or James, or John or Matthew, or any other of the Lorddisciples, also as to what Aristion or the Presbyter John, the Lorddisciples say. For I supposed that things out of books would not be of such use to me as the utterances of a living voice which was still with us." Here we have an elder called Aristion who was a disciple of the Lord and, therefore, a witness of his sufferings. Is there anything to connect him with First Peter?

Aristion Of Smyrna

When we turn to the Apostolic Constitutions we find that one of the first bishops of Smyrna was called Ariston--which is the same name as Aristion. Now who is the great quoter of First Peter? None other than Polycarp, a later Bishop of Smyrna. What more natural than that Polycarp should quote what might well have been the devotional classic of his own Church?

Let us turn to the letters to the Seven Churches in the Revelation and read the letter to Smyrna: "Do not fear what you are about to suffer. Behold, the devil is about to throw some of you into prison, that you may be tested, and for ten days you will have tribulation. Be faithful unto death, and I will give you the crown of life" (Rev_2:10 ). Can this be the very same persecution as that which originally lay behind First Peter? And was it for this persecution that Aristion, the Bishop of Smyrna, first wrote the pastoral letter which was afterwards to become a part of First Peter?

Such is the suggestion of B. H. Streeter. He thinks that First Peter is composed of a baptismal sermon and a pastoral letter written by Aristion, Bishop of Smyrna. Originally the pastoral letter was written to comfort and strengthen the people of Smyrna in A.D. 90 when the persecution mentioned in the Revelation threatened the Church. These writings of Aristion became the devotional classics and the cherished possessions of the Church at Smyrna. Rather more than twenty years later a much wider and more far-reaching persecution broke out in Bithynia and spread throughout northern Asia Minor. Someone remembered the letter and the sermon of Aristion, felt that they were the very thing the Church needed in her time of trial, and sent them out under the name of Peter, the great apostle.

An ApostleLetter

We have stated in full both views of the origin, date and authorship of First Peter. There is no doubt of the ingenuity of the theory which B. H. Streeter has produced nor that those who favour a later date have produced arguments which have to be considered. For our own part, however, we see no reason to doubt that the letter is the work of Peter himself, and that it was written not long after the great fire of Rome and the first persecution of the Christians with the object of encouraging the Christians of Asia Minor to stand fast when the onrushing tide of persecution sought to engulf them and take their faith away.

FURTHER READING

1 Peter

F. W. Beare, The First Epistle of Peter (G)

E. Best, 1 Peter (NCB; E)

C. Bigg, St. Peter and St. Jude (ICC; G)

C. E. B. Cranfield, 1 and 2 Peter and Jude (Tch; E)

E. G. Selwyn, The First Epistle of St. Peter (MmC; G)

Abbreviations

ICC: International Critical Commentary

MC: Moffatt Commentary

MmC: Macmillan Commentary

NCB: New Century Bible

Tch: Torch Commentary

E: English Text

G: Greek Text

Barclay: 1 Peter 2 (Chapter Introduction)

What To Lose And What To Yearn For (1Pe_2:1-3)

That On Which To Set The Heart (1Pe_2:1-3 Continued)

The Nature And Function Of The Church (1Pe_2:4-10)

Reasons For Right Living (1Pe_2:11-12)

The Greatest Answer And Defence (1Pe_2:11-12 Continued)

The Duty Of The Christian-As A Citizen (1Pe_2:13-15)

The Duty Of The Christian-In Society (1Pe_2:16)

A Summary Of Christian Duty (1Pe_2:17)

The Duty Of The Christian As A Servant (1Pe_2:18-25)

The Peril Of The New Situation (1Pe_2:18-25 Continued)

The New Attitude To Work (1Pe_2:18-25 Continued)

Two Precious Names For God (1Pe_2:18-25 Continued)

Constable: 1 Peter (Book Introduction)

Introduction

Historical background

This epistle claims that the Apostle Peter wrote it (1:1). Since there is only one Peter who was an apostle we may be confident of the identity of the writer. There is only one Peter that the entire New Testament mentioned. Scholars did not question Peter's authorship until the nineteenth century when destructive biblical criticism became popular.

"The epistle has been well known and consistently acknowledged as Petrine from the second century well into modern times. . . .

"Aside from the four Gospels and the letters of Paul, the external attestation for 1 Peter is as strong, or stronger, than that for any NT book. There is no evidence anywhere of controversy over its authorship or authority"¹

Peter first sent this letter to believers living in the northern regions of Asia Minor (1:1). The locations of these Christians as well as allusions in the epistle indicate that they were mainly Gentiles but also Jews (e.g., 1:14; 2:10).

Peter stated his reason for writing, namely, to encourage his readers who were facing persecution for their faith to stand firm (5:12). Evidently this persecution was widespread among his readers. Local enemies of the gospel were not the only people responsible for it. When Paul travelled around the Roman Empire preaching the gospel, some churches he planted experienced persecution from the unsaved in their communities, but others did not. However 1 Peter reflects persecution of the Christians throughout northern Asia Minor. This condition prevailed after Nero blamed the Christians for burning Rome in A.D. 64. While persecution seems to have been widespread, it may not have been official yet.

Peter died in the mid 60s and spent the last decade of his life in Rome according to reliable tradition.² Many interpreters have regarded his reference to Babylon (5:13) as a reference to Rome that Peter described as Babylon to highlight its paganism. In view of all this information it seems likely that Peter wrote this epistle from Rome about A.D. 64.³

Theologically this epistle is apocalyptic (dealing with the end times). Along with its eschatological focus there is much emphasis on holiness (personal, social, and communal), hope, salvation, community, relationship to the world, the Trinity, and especially suffering.⁴

". . . much of the material in 1 Peter is the stuff of basic Christian teaching rather than advanced instruction that assumes the mastery (and perhaps the perversion) of the basics, as in the Pauline letters."⁵

"In many . . . respects, 1 Peter and James form a matched pair within the NT canon. They are Christian diaspora letters roughly similar in length, one directed (probably from Jerusalem) to scattered messianic Jews (i.e., Christians) who are real Jews, and the other directed from Babylon' to scattered Jews' who are in fact Gentile Christians."⁶

Message⁷

One writer has identified five major motifs in 1 Peter. These are the believer's behavior, the believer's unfair circumstances, the believer's deference, the believer's motivation by Christ's example, and the believer's anticipation of future glory. These are certainly important emphases in this epistle.

Putting these together he has stated the message of 1 Peter as follows. "The behavior of believers when they encounter unfair circumstances reflects a spirit of deference in all relationships as they follow Christ's example and anticipate future glory."⁸

This is a very fine statement of what the Holy Spirit has said to us through Peter in this epistle. However, I would add one more important motif. It is the believer's resource of God's grace. This is not an incidental motif but one that underlies all of what Peter called on his readers to do. We must understand and apply what he wrote about God's grace as our resource to follow his exhortations.

It seems to me that Peter stated the message of this epistle clearly: stand firm in the true grace of God (5:12).

The subject of the letter therefore is the true grace of God. Grace is the key word in the argument of this epistle. In each case the word "grace" occurs in the practical rather than in the doctrinal part of each section of the letter. Throughout 1 Peter the fact of God's grace was in Peter's mind as crucial to the believer's practice. How does one explain God's grace? Grace means both undeserved favor and divine enablement.

The main purpose of this epistle was to strengthen the readers so they would persevere through their persecution with the right attitude. Peter did this by showing that God's grace provided all they needed for strength. In a larger sense, the purpose is to help Christians know how to live as aliens in the world.

This epistle reveals above all else that God's grace is sufficient for all our needs. We could write over this whole book: 2 Corinthians 12:9. Notice five things Peter reminds us about God's grace. Let's trace the references to grace though 1 Peter.

1. Grace proceeds from God. God in His grace has chosen us (1:1). Now we need to realize God's grace in its fullest measure in our experience (1:2).

2. Grace produces confidence. The prophets foretold God's grace (1:10). The advents of Jesus Christ supplied God's grace (1:13). It came into the world at His first advent through His sufferings and death. It will come into the world again at His second advent through His glorification. This pattern gives us confidence. God has united us with Christ. As He suffered once, we suffer now. As certainly as He will receive glory in the future, we too will experience glorification in the future. We need to remember our hope.

3. What proclaims God's grace is our conduct (2:19-20). The Christian's conduct in trying and difficult circumstances manifests God's grace in a human life. The submissive conduct of servants whose masters are persecuting them manifests God's grace. The submissive conduct of wives whose antagonistic husbands are persecuting them manifests grace. The submissive conduct of husbands whom unbelievers are persecuting manifests grace. The husband demonstrates his submission to God by treating his wife as a fellow heir of God's grace (3:7). Our patient endurance of trials displays our submission to God's will. Thus our conduct manifests God's grace. Sometimes we marvel at the ability God gives his persecuted saints to endure. We say, "How can he (or she) do it?"

4. Grace perfects character. Grace is the source of service (4:10). Grace is also the source of humility (5:5). An attitude of humility manifests itself in service of others. God's grace is the secret of both the attitude and the activity. Jesus established "the order of the towel" by washing the disciples' feet (John 13).

5. Grace promotes courage (5:10). We need courage to resist the devil (5:8-9). God's grace gives us strength to defend ourselves against his attacks.

The epistle exhorts us to stand firm in this grace. This is Peter's appeal to us.

When God tries our faith, we need to remember that we have an adequate source of strength in God's grace.

When our faith is trembling, we need to remember that we have an adequate source of confidence in God's grace.

When our circumstances are difficult we need to remember that we have an adequate source of conduct in God's grace.

When we suffer for conscience's sake we need to remember that we have an adequate source of character in God's grace.

When assaulted by the adversary we need to remember that we have an adequate source of courage in God's grace.

We stand firm in the true grace of God when we respond to suffering for Christ's sake as Peter directed us. God's grace is what we need to rely on as we commit ourselves to continue to walk in the will of God. Trust and obey!

Constable: 1 Peter (Outline)

Outline

I. Introduction 1:1-2

II. The identity of Christians 1:3-2:10

A. Our great salvation 1:3-12

1. The hope of our salvation 1:3-5

2. The joy of our salvation 1:6-9

3. The witnesses of our salvation 1:10-12

B. Our new way of life 1:13-25

1. A life of holiness 1:13-16

2. A life of reverence 1:17-21

3. A life of love 1:22-25

C. Our priestly calling 2:1-10

1. Listening to God 2:1-3

2. Growing in God 2:4-5

3. Building on Christ 2:6-8

4. Summary affirmation of our identity 2:9-10

III. The responsibilities of Christians individually 2:11-4:11

A. Our mission in the world 2:11-12

B. Respect for others 2:13-3:12

1. Respect for everyone 2:13-17

2. Slaves' respect for their masters 2:18-25

3. Wives' respect for their husbands 3:1-6

4. Husbands' respect for their wives 3:7

5. The importance of loving enemies 3:8-12

C. Eventual vindication 3:13-4:6

1. Suffering for doing good 3:13-17

2. The vindication of Christ 3:18-22

3. Living with the promise in view 4:1-6

D. The importance of mutual love in end-times living 4:7-11

IV. The responsibilities of Christians corporately 4:12-5:11

A. The fiery trial 4:12-19

1. Suffering and glory 4:12-14

2. Suffering as Christians 4:15-19

B. The church under trial 5:1-11

1. The responsibilities of the elders 5:1-4

2. The responsibilities of the others 5:5

3. The importance of humility and trust in God 5:6-7

4. The importance of resisting the devil 5:8-11

VII. Conclusion 5:12-14

Note the essentially chiastic structure of thought in the letter, excluding the introduction and conclusion.

Constable: 1 Peter

1 Peter

Bibliography

Bailey, Mark L., and Thomas L. Constable. The New Testament Explorer. Nashville: Word Publishing Co., 1999.

Balch, D. L. Let Wives Be Submissive: The Domestic Code in I Peter. Chico: Calif.: Scholars Press, 1981.

_____. "Let Wives Be Submissive . . .": The Origin, Form, and Apolegetic Function of the Household Duty Code (Haustafel) in I Peter. Ph.D. dissertation, Yale University, 1974.

Barbieri, Louis A. First and Second Peter. Everyman's Bible Commentary series. Chicago: Moody Press, 1978.

Barclay, William. The Letters of James and Peter. Daily Study Bible series. 2nd ed. Edinburgh: Saint Andrew Press, 1960.

Baxter, J. Sidlow. Explore the Book. 6 vols. London: Marshall, Morgan & Scott, 1965.

Beare, F. W. The First Epistle of Peter: The Greek Text with Introduction and Notes. Third edition. Oxford: Blackwell, 1970.

Bengel, John Albert. New Testament Word Studies. Reprint ed. Grand Rapids: Kregel Publications, 1971.

Berding, Kenneth. "Confusing Word and Concept in Spiritual Gifts': Have We Forgotten James Barr's Exhortations?" Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 43:1 (March 200):37-51.

Best, Ernest. 1 Peter. New Century Bible Commentary series. London: Oliphants, 1971; reprint ed. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., and London: Marshall, Morgan & Scott, 1982.

Bigg, Charles. A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Epistles of St. Peter and St. Jude. International Critical Commentary series. 2nd ed. and reprint ed. Edinburgh: T. and T. Clark, 1961.

Birkey, Del. The House Church: A Model for Renewing the Church. Scottdale, Pa.: Herald Press, 1988.

Blass, F., and A. Debrunner. A Greek Grammar of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature. Translated and revised by Robert W. Funk. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1961.

Blum, Edwin A. "1 Peter." In Hebrews-Revelation. Vol. 12 of The Expositor's Bible Commentary. 12 vols. Edited by Frank E. Gaebelein. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1981.

Chafer, Lewis Sperry. Systematic Theology. 8 vols. Dallas: Dallas Seminary Press, 1948.

Caffin, B. C. "I Peter." In The Pulpit Commentary. Reprint ed. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1950.

Calvin, John. Commentaries on the Catholic Epistles. Translated by John Owen. Reprint ed. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1948.

_____. "The Epistles of Paul the Apostle to the Hebrews and the First and Second Epistles of St Peter." In Calvin's Commentaries. Translated by William B. Johnston. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1963.

Cedar, Paul A. James, 1, 2 Peter, Jude. The Communicator's Commentary series. Waco: Word Books, 1984.

The Confessions of St. Augustine. Translated by Edward B. Pusey. New York: Washington Square Press, 1960.

Constable, Thomas L. "Analysis of Bible Books--New Testament." Paper submitted for course 686 Analysis of Bible Books--New Testament. Dallas Theological Seminary, January 1968.

Cook, W. Robert. "Biblical Light on the Christian's Civil Responsibility." Bibliotheca Sacra 127:505 (January-March 1970):44-57.

Cullmann, Oscar. The Christology of the New Testament. Revised ed. Translated by Shirley C. Guthrie and Charles A. M. Hall. Philadelphia: Westminster Press, 1963.

Dalton, William J. Christ's Proclamation to the Spirits. Rome: Pontifical Biblical Institute, 1965.

Darby, John Nelson. Synopsis of the Books of the Bible. 5 vols. Revised ed. New York: Loizeaux Brothers Publishers, 1942.

Davids, Peter H. The First Epistle of Peter. New International Commentary on the New Testament series. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1990.

Dictionary of the Apostolic Church. Edited by James Hastings. 1915 ed. Edinburgh: T. and T. Clark. S.v. "Peter, Epistles of," by S. J. Case.

Dictionary of the Bible. Edited by James Hastings. 1910 ed. Edinburgh: T. and T. Clark. S.v. "Peter, First Epistle of," by F. H. Chase.

Dillow, Joseph C. The Reign of the Servant Kings. Miami Springs, Fla.: Schoettle Publishing Co., 1992.

Dutile, Gordon. "A Concept of Submission in the Husband-Wife Relationship in Selected New Testament Passages." Ph.D. dissertation, Southwestern Baptist Theological Seminary, 1980.

English, E. Schuyler. "Was St. Peter Ever in Rome?" Bibleotheca Sacra 124:496 (October-December 1967):314-20.

Erickson, Millard J. "Is There Opportunity for Salvation after Death?" Bibliotheca Sacra 152:606 (April-June 1995):131-44.

Eustace, Lord Perry. John Knox. London: Hodder and Stoughton, n.d.

Family Life Conference. Little Rock, Ark.: Family Ministry, 1990.

Fanning, Buist M. "A Theology of Peter and Jude." In A Biblical Theology of the New Testament, pp. 437-71. Edited by Roy B. Zuck. Chicago: Moody Press, 1994.

Feinberg, John S. "1 Peter 3:18-20, Ancient Mythology, and the Intermediate State." Westminster Theological Journal 48:2 (Fall 1986):303-36

Gaebelein, Arno C. The Annotated Bible. 4 vols. Reprint ed. Chicago: Moody Press, and New York: Loizeaux Brothers, Inc., 1970.

Geisler, Norman L. "A Premillennial View of Law and Government." Bibliotheca Sacra 142:567 (July-September 1985):250-66.

Glenny, W. Edward. "The Israelite Imagery of 1 Peter 2." In Dispensationalism, Israel and the Church: The Search for Definition, pp. 156-87. Edited by Craig A. Blaising and Darrell L. Bock. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1992.

Goppelt, Leonhard. A Commentary on I Peter. Edited by Ferdinand Hahn. Translated and augmented by John E. Alsup. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1993.

A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament. By C. G. Wilke. Revised by C. L. Wilibald Grimm. Translated, revised and enlarged by Joseph Henry Thayer, 1889.

Grudem, Wayne. 1 Peter. Tyndale New Testament Commentaries series. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1988.

_____. "Christ Preaching through Noah: 1 Peter 3:19-20 in the Light of Dominant Themes in Jewish Literature." Trinity Journal 7NS:2 (Fall 1986):3-31.

Guthrie, Donald. New Testament Introduction. 3 vols. 2nd ed. London: Tyndale Press, 1966.

Hiebert, D. Edmond. "Counsel for Christ's Undershepherds: An Exposition of 1 Peter 5:1-4." Bibliotheca Sacra 139:556 [October-December 1982]:330-41.

_____. "Designation of the Readers in 1 Peter 1:1-2." Bibliotheca Sacra 137:545 (January-March 1980):64-75.

_____. "Following Christ's Example: An Exposition of 1 Peter 2:21-25." Bibliotheca Sacra 139:553 (January-March 1982):32-45.

_____. "Living in the Light of Christ's Return: An Exposition of 1 Peter 4:7-11." Bibliotheca Sacra 139:555 (July-September 1982):243-54.

_____. "The Suffering and Triumphant Christ: An Exposition of 1 Peter 3:18-22." Bibliotheca Sacra 139:554 (April-June 1982):146-58.

_____. Working with God: Scriptural Studies in Intercession. New York: Carlton Press, 1987.

Hillyer, C. Norman. "Rock-Stone' Imagery in I Peter." Tyndale Bulletin 22 (1971):58-81.

Hort, F. J. A. The First Epistle of St. Peter 1:1-2:17. London: Macmillan, 1898.

Howe, Frederic R. "Christ, the Building Stone, in Peter's Theology." Bibliotheca Sacra 157:625 (January-March 2000):35-43.

_____. "The Cross of Christ in Peter's Theology." Bibliotheca Sacra 157:626 (April-June 2000):190-99.

International Standard Bible Encyclopedia. Edited by James Orr. 1957 ed. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co. S.v. "Peter, The First Epistle of," by William G. Moorehead.

Johnson, D. E. "Fire in God's House: Imagery from Malachi 3 in Peter's Theology of Suffering (1 Pet 4:12-19)." Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 29 (1989):285-94.

Johnson, John E. "The Old Testament Offices as Paradigm for Pastoral Identity." Bibliotheca Sacra 152:606 (April-June 1995):182-200.

Kelly, J. N. D. A Commentary on the Epistles of Peter and Jude. Thornapple Commentaries series. Reprint ed. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1981.

Kennard, Douglas W. "Petrine Redemption: Its Meaning and Extent." Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 30:4 (December 1987):399-405.

Kirk, Gordon E. "Endurance in Suffering in 1 Peter." Bibliotheca Sacra 138:549 (January-March 1981):46-56.

Lange, John Peter, ed. Commentary on the Holy Scripture. 12 vols. Reprint ed. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1960. Vol. 12: James--Revelation, by J. P. Lange, J. J. Van Oosterzee, G. T. C. Fronmuller, and Karl Braune. Enlarged and edited by E. R. Craven. Translated by J. Isider Mombert and Evelina Moore.

Lenski, Richard C. H. The Interpretation of the Epistles of St. Peter, St. John and St. Jude. Reprint ed. Minneapolis: Augsburg Publishing House, 1961.

MacArthur, John F., Jr. Faith Works: The Gospel According to the Apostles. Dallas: Word Publishing, 1993.

Mason, A. J. "The First Epistle General of Peter." In Ellicott's Commentary on the Whole Bible. 8 vols. Reprint ed. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, n.d.

McGee, J. Vernon. Thru the Bible with J. Vernon McGee. 5 vols. Pasadena, Calif.: Thru the Bible Radio, 1983.

McNeile, A. H. An Introduction to the Study of the New Testament. 2nd ed. Revised by C. S. C. Williams. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1965.

Meyer, F. B. "Tried by Fire." London: Morgan and Scott, n.d.

Michaels, J. Ramsey. 1 Peter. Word Biblical Commentary series. Waco: Word Books, 1988.

Moffatt, James. "The General Epistles, James, Peter, and Judas." In The Moffatt New Testament Commentary. Reprint ed. London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1947.

Morgan, G. Campbell. Living Messages of the Books of the Bible. 2 vols. New York: Fleming H. Revell Co., 1912.

Morris, Leon. New Testament Theology. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1986.

Paine, Stephen W. "The First Epistle of Peter." In The Wycliffe Bible Commentary, pp. 1441-52. Edited by Charles F. Pfeiffer and Everett F. Harrison. Chicago: Moody Press, 1962.

Pentecost, J. Dwight. "The Apostles' Use of Jesus' Predictions of Judgment on Jerusalem in A.D. 70." In Integrity of Heart, Skillfulness of Hands, pp. 134-43. Edited by Charles H. Dyer and Roy B. Zuck. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1994.

Pryor, John W. "First Peter and the New Covenant." Reformed Theological Review 45:1&2 (January-April & May-August 1986):1-3, 44-50.

Pyne, Robert A. "Antinomianism and Dispensationalism." Bibliotheca Sacra 153:610 (April-June 1996):141-54.

Raymer, Roger M. "1 Peter." In The Bible Knowledge Commentary: New Testament, pp. 837-58. Edited by John F. Walvoord and Roy B. Zuck. Wheaton: Scripture Press Publications, Victor Books, 1983.

Richards, E. Randolph. "Silvanus Was Not Peter's Secretary: Theological Bias in Interpreting dia Silouanou . . . egrapha in 1 Peter 5:12." Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 43:3 (September 2000):417-32.

Robertson, Archibald Thomas. Word Pictures in the New Testament. 6 vols. Nashville: Broadman Press, 1931.

Rogers, Cleon L., Jr. "The Davidic Covenant in Acts-Revelation." Bibliotheca Sacra 151:601 (January-March 1994):71-84.

Ross, Allen P. Creation and Blessing. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1988.

Ryrie, Charles C. "The Christian and Civil Disobedience." Bibliotheca Sacra 127:506 (April-June 1970):153-62.

_____. Dispensationalism. Chicago: Moody Press, 1995.

_____. Dispensationalism Today. Chicago: Moody Press, 1965.

Saucy, Robert L. The Case for Progressive Dispensationalism. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Publishing House, 1993.

Schaeffer, Francis A. A Christian Manifesto. Westchester, Ill.: Good News Publishers, Crossway Books, 1981.

Selwyn, Edward Gordon. The First Epistle of St. Peter. 2nd ed. London: Macmillan and Co. Ltd., 1964.

Siefker, Mrs. Glenn R. "God's Plans for Wives." Good News Broadcaster, February 1975, pp. 22-25.

Slaughter, James R. "The Importance of Literary Argument for Understanding 1 Peter." Bibliotheca Sacra 152:605 (January-March 1995):72-91.

_____. "Peter's Instructions to Husbands in 1 Peter 3:7." In Integrity of Heart, Skillfulness of Hands, pp. 175-85. Edited by Charles H. Dyer and Roy B. Zuck. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1994.

_____. "Sarah as a Model for Christian Wives (1 Pet. 3:5-6)." Bibliotheca Sacra 153:611 (July-September 1996):357-65.

_____. "Submission of Wives (1 Pet. 3:1a) in the Context of 1 Peter." Bibliotheca Sacra 153:609 (January-March 1996):63-74.

_____. "Winning Unbelieving Husbands to Christ (1 Pet. 3:1b-4)." Bibliotheca Sacra 153:610 (April-June 1996):199-211.

Steele, Paul E., and Charles C. Ryrie. Meant to Last. Wheaton: Victor Books, 1983.

Stibbs, Alan M. The First Epistle General of St. Peter. Tyndale New Testament Commentary series. Reprint ed. London: Tyndale Press, 1966.

Strauch, Arthur. Biblical Eldership. Littleton, Colo.: Lewis and Roth Publishers, 1986.

Strauss, Lehman. "Our Only Hope." Bibliotheca Sacra 120:478 (April-June 1963):154-64.

Theological Dictionary of the New Testament. S. v. "hypotasso," by Gerhard Delling, 8 (1972):39-46.

Thiessen, Henry Clarence. Introduction to the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co., 1962.

Thomas, W. H. Griffith. "Is the New Testament Minister a Priest?" Bibliotheca Sacra 136:541 (January-March 1979):65-73.

Tite, Philip L. "The Compositional Function of the Petrine Prescript: A Look at 1 Pet 1:1-3." Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society 39:1 (March 1996):47-56.

Tuni, Jose Oriol. "Jesus of Nazareth in the Christology of 1 Peter." Haythrop Journal 28:3 (July 1987):292-304.

Vaughn, Marilyn. "When Should a Wife Not Submit?" Moody Monthly, October 1977, pp. 104-107.

Vos, Geerhardus. "A Sermon on I Peter 1:3-5." Kerux 1:2 (September 1986):4-17.

Wall, Joe L. Going for the Gold. Chicago: Moody Press, 1991.

Wand, J. W. C. The General Epistles of St. Peter and St. Jude. Westminster Commentaries. London: Methuen & Co., 1934.

Wiersbe, Warren W. The Bible Exposition Commentary. 2 vols. Wheaton: Scripture Press Publications, Victor Books, 1989.

Wilkin, Robert N. "Election and the Gospel." Grace Evangelical Society News 4:7 (July 1989):1, 3.

Witmer, John A. "The Man with Two Countries." Bibliotheca Sacra 133:532 (October-December 1976):338-49.

Wolston, W. T. P. Simon Peter: His Life and Letters. 2nd ed. London: James Nisbet and Co., 1896.

Zuck, Roy B. "The Doctrine of Conscience." Bibliotheca Sacra 126:504 (October-December 1969):329-40.

Copyright 2003 by Thomas L. Constable

Haydock: 1 Peter (Book Introduction)

THE

FIRST EPISTLE OF ST. PETER,

THE APOSTLE.

INTRODUCTION.

This first Epistle of St. Peter, though brief, contains much doctrine concerning faith, hope, and charity, with divers instructions to all persons of every state and condition. The apostle commands submission to rulers and superiors, and exhorts all to the practice of a virtuous life, in imitation of Christ. This epistle was written with such apostolical dignity, as to manifest the supreme authority with which its writer, the prince of the apostles, had been invested by his Lord and Master, Jesus Christ. He wrote it at Rome, which figuratively he calls Babylon, about fifteen years after our Lord's ascension. (Challoner) --- St. Peter, otherwise called Simon, son of John or Jonas, was from Bethsaida, a city of Galilee. He was married, and lived at Capharnaum, and was employed with his brother Andrew, as fishermen, when our Lord called them. St. Peter on every occasion testified a more than usual zeal for his Master, and hence our Lord shewed him a very particular and very marked attention. He would have Peter present at his transfiguration; (Luke ix. 28.) and at another time declared that he [Peter] was a rock, upon which he [Jesus Christ] would build his Church, against which the gates of hell should never prevail. (Matthew xvi. 18.) Although St. Peter had the misfortune or weakness to deny Jesus Christ in his passion, our Lord, after his resurrection, gave him fresh proofs of his regard. (Matthew xvi. 7.) He continued him in his primacy over all, and appointed him in the most explicit manner visible head of his Church, when thrice asking Peter: "lovest thou me more than these?" and St. Peter as often answering, Christ said to him: "feed my lambs, feed my sheep." (John xxi. 15.) --- This epistle was always received in the Church as canonical, and as written by St. Peter, prince of the apostles. It is commonly agreed that it was written from Rome, which St. Peter calls Babylon, (Chap. v. 13.) and directed to those in the provinces of Pontus, Galatia, &c. (ver. 1.) who were before Jews or Gentiles, and had been converted to the Christian faith. It is certain this letter was not written till after the true believers had the name of Christians. (Chap. iv. 16.) Many think it was written before the year 49; but this is not certain. Others judge not till after the year 60, and some not till a short time before he wrote his second epistle. See Tillemont, t. i. Art. 31. on S. Pet. and tom. ii. on S. Mark, p. 89.) The main design is to confirm the new converts in the faith of Christ, with divers instructions to a virtuous life. (Witham) --- Grotius, Erasmus, and Estius, discover in this epistle, a strength and majesty worthy the prince of the apostles. Est autem epistola profecto digna Apostolorum Principe, plena authoritatis et majestatis Apostolicæ: verbis parca, sententiis referta.

====================

Gill: 1 Peter (Book Introduction)

INTRODUCTION TO 1 PETER

That Simon, called Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ, was the writer of this epistle, is not questioned by any; nor was the genuineness and authenticity of it ever made a doubt of. Eusebius says ^a, that it had been confessed by all, and received without controversy; and that the ancients, without any scruple, had made use of it in their writings. It is called his "general", or catholic epistle, because it was not written to any particular person, or to any particular church, but in general, to a number of Christians dispersed in several places. The time when this epistle was written is not certain; some place it in the year of Christ 44 or 45, and so make it to be the most ancient of all the epistles, and which is the more commonly received opinion; but Dr. Lightfoot ^b places it in the year 65, because in it the apostle speaks of the end of all things being at hand, and of the fiery trial just coming on them, and of judgment beginning at the house of God, 1Pe 4:7 all which he applies to the destruction of Jerusalem; though others fix it to 61, in the seventh year of Nero ^c. The place from whence it seems to be written was Babylon, 1Pe 5:13 which is to be understood not figuratively, either of Rome or Jerusalem, but properly of Babylon, the metropolis of Chaldea, or Assyria. The persons to whom it is written were Jews, at least chiefly; for there might be some Gentiles among them, who may be taken notice of in some parts of the epistle; but the principal part were Jews, as appears from their being called the strangers of the dispersion, or, as James calls them, "the twelve tribes scattered abroad"; from the mention of the tradition of their fathers; from their having their conversation honest among the Gentiles, and their past life among them; from urging subjection to the civil magistrates among the Heathens, and the right use of their Christian liberty as to the ceremonies of the law; and from the near destruction of Jerusalem, which could only affect them; and from the use made of the writings of the Old Testament, and the authority of the prophets; see 1Pe 1:1 as well as from the second epistle, which was written to the same; see 2Pe 1:19 in which he seems to refer to the epistle to the Hebrews, written by Paul, as to these. And besides, Peter was the minister of the circumcision, or of the circumcised Jews, as Paul was of the Gentiles; and even those passages in this epistle, which seem most likely to concern the Gentiles, may be understood of the Jews, as which speak of their ignorance, idolatry, and having not been a people, 1Pe 1:14 which were true of them before conversion, and as living among Gentiles. The occasion of writing it was this; Peter meeting with Sylvanus, a faithful brother, and who had been a companion of the Apostle Paul, he takes this opportunity of sending a letter by him to the converted Jews, dispersed among the Gentile countries, where he, with Paul, and others, travelled: the design of which is to testify of the true doctrine of grace, in which they were agreed; see 1Pe 5:12. And accordingly in it he does treat of the doctrine of electing grace, of redeeming grace, of regenerating and sanctifying grace, and of persevering grace; and exhorts believers to the exercise of grace, of faith, hope, and love, and to the discharge of such duties becoming their several stations, whereby they might evidence to others the truth of grace in themselves, and adorn the doctrine of the grace of God, and recommend it to others: and particularly he exhorts them patiently to bear all afflictions and persecutions they should meet with, for their profession of the true grace of God, in which he encourages them to stand steadfast: and this is the general scope and design of the epistle.

Gill: 1 Peter 2 (Chapter Introduction)

INTRODUCTION TO 1 PETER 2

This chapter consists of exhortations, in general, to a holy life; and, in particular, to obedience to superiors. It begins with an exhortation to lay aside various vices, which were unbecoming regenerate persons, 1Pe 2:1 and, agreeably to their character, as new born babes, to express a desire after the Gospel, which is commended from its nature, being comparable to milk; and from its quality, being reasonable, sincere, and unmixed; and from the end and usefulness of it, a spiritual growth; and the argument engaging to such a desire is the experience they had of the grace of Christ in it, 1Pe 2:2 whose excellency is declared, under the metaphor of a stone, said to be living, to be chosen of God, and precious to him, though rejected by men; to whom the saints are encouraged to come, as lively stones built up, a spiritual house, for the exercise of the holy office of the priesthood, by offering up spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Christ, 1Pe 2:4 and that Christ is such a precious stone, is proved from Isa 28:16 and not only to God, but to all them that believe; though to them that believe not, he is the stone of rejection, stumbling, and offence; to stumble at which, and the doctrine of it, through disobedience, they were of old appointed by God, 1Pe 2:6 but the character of the persons the apostle writes to was very different, quite the reverse, being chosen and called, and manifestly the people of God, and sharing in his grace and mercy, 1Pe 2:9 and these he exhorts, suitable to their state and condition, to abstain from sin, as an enemy to their souls, and to live an honest life and conversation among the Gentiles, that they, instead of speaking evil of them, might, by beholding their good works, glorify God, 1Pe 2:11. And particularly he exhorts them to obedience to civil magistrates, both superior and inferior; partly from the author of them, they being of the Lord; and partly from the usefulness of them to punish wicked men, and to encourage good men; and also from its being the will of God, by such obedience, to silence the cavils of foolish men, 1Pe 2:13. And whereas it might be objected, that they were made free by Christ, and therefore should not be the servants of men; it is granted, that they were free; but then it is denied, that they should use their liberty for a cloak of maliciousness: and besides, it should be observed, that they were the servants of God, and therefore ought to do what he enjoined them; and, among other things, yield obedience to civil magistrates, 1Pe 2:16. And to this purpose are various exhortations in 1Pe 2:17, and another particular one is added, which is to servants, to be subject to their masters, and fear them, whether they be good or bad, 1Pe 2:18 and then he comforts such that had bad masters, and encourages them to bear the injuries they received from them patiently; because so to do was grateful to God, and acceptable in his sight; and because they were called unto it by him; and because of the example Christ had left them in suffering for them, 1Pe 2:19. And this is further urged from the character of Christ, who was without sin, and yet suffered, and from his conduct, who, when reviled, made no return, but left his cause with God, 1Pe 2:22 which leads on the apostle take notice of the nature of Christ's sufferings in his body on the cross, and the ends of them, which were expiation of sin, healing diseases, and holiness of life, as a consequent thereof, 1Pe 2:24 previous to which conversion, which is illustrated by the former state and condition men are in, being as sheep going astray; and by their present one, being returned to Christ, the Shepherd and Bishop of souls, 1Pe 2:25.

College: 1 Peter (Book Introduction)

INTRODUCTION

This commentary is written for the general reader with a serious interest in Scripture. Its purpose is to provide a historical interpretation of 1 Peter; that is, an interpretation of what Peter meant to say to his ancient audience. I write with the conviction that modern readers can only determine God's message to us after and on the basis of a determination of Peter's message to his ancient contemporaries. Because I believe God worked through Peter and inspired his work, I believe it has great relevance to every reader in every age. But we can only determine what it means to us if we have first determined what it meant when Peter wrote it. It is this latter task that is the focus of most commentaries, including this one. I will occasionally make comments about what a given passage means today, but not consistently. I will consistently comment on what Peter meant to say to his original readers. I hope and pray that my readers will recognize the contemporary relevance of Peter's letter, even though it will not be my purpose to point it out or illustrate it. My purpose is to provide a base to build on for contemporary application.

I have been especially influenced by the commentaries by Paul Achtemeier and Ramsey Michaels. I have also frequently consulted the commentaries by Leonard Goppelt and Peter Davids. I often refer the reader to these works for further information, and even where I do not, the reader would be well advised to consult them for a scholar's depth of treatment.

I have commented on the NIV text. In some places where it seems deficient, I have provided an alternative translation, usually from the NRSV. The commentary makes note of the most significant textual variants and my opinions concerning them, but does not provide a list of manuscripts, versions, or church fathers. Interested readers should use the United Bible Societies' Greek New Testament .

AUTHOR

Peter identifies himself in the opening words of the letter: "Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ." The book clearly claims to have been written by the well-known apostle, a leading figure in the Gospels and in the first half of the book of Acts.

This claim is well supported by second century evidence. Some even argue that 1 Clement, written near the end of the first century, reflects use of 1 Peter. It is certainly true that Polycarp of Smyrna knew and used 1 Peter. This is repeatedly reflected in his letter to the Philippians, written in the first half of the second century. It is all the more significant since Smyrna was in one of the regions Peter addressed.

This is also true of Hierapolis, the home of Papias, who also wrote in the first half of the second century. According to Eusebius, Papias used quotations from the first epistle of Peter.

In the latter part of the second century Irenaeus cited 1 Peter and explicitly mentioned Peter as the author. All subsequent ancient Christian authors agree.

The only evidence that some believe might indicate another opinion is that the Muratorian Canon (late second century) does not list 1 Peter. Others believe that 1 Peter was originally listed and is omitted because of the corrupt state of our copy of this list. In any case it would be a questionable argument from silence to use the omission as evidence that the author of the Canon knew 1 Peter and considered it to be falsely ascribed. He was quite capable of identifying works which he considered to be falsely ascribed.

Until modern times Peter's authorship of 1 Peter was universally accepted among Christians. However, many modern scholars, including Goppelt and Achtemeier, consider the book pseudepigraphical. Their arguments are not compelling.

One argument against Petrine authorship is the good quality of the Greek in 1 Peter. However, in recent decades there has been a growing awareness that Greek was widely used as a second language in Palestine. It is not improbable that, even without a special gift from the Spirit, Peter would have known Greek. Furthermore, 1 Peter 5:12 may indicate that Silvanus assisted Peter as his secretary. This is a debated point which is discussed in the comments on that verse. But if Silvanus did secretarial work for Peter, then he may have influenced the Greek style.

A second argument used against Peter having written 1 Peter is the similarity of the content of parts of 1 Peter to the letters of Paul. However, such similarities are not surprising. The incident Paul recounts in Galatians 2 does not indicate that he and Peter remained at odds with each other or that they did not share many common emphases.

A third argument is that the references to persecution indicate a late date, perhaps during the reign of Domitian (A.D. 81-96) or Trajan (A.D. 98-117) - after the death of Peter during the reign of Nero (A.D. 54-68). However, there are no clear indications of state-ordered persecution in 1 Peter. Fortunately, this argument has lost much of its force because most contemporary scholars agree that the persecution reflected in 1 Peter does not presuppose a government-sponsored persecution.

In the light of the weakness of arguments to the contrary and the strength of the second century support for Peter as the author, the claim made in 1 Peter 1:1 should be accepted. The author is Peter the apostle.

PLACE OF COMPOSITION

First Peter 5:13 says "She who is in Babylon, chosen together with you, sends you her greetings, and so does my son Mark." Peter was in "Babylon." There are three possible referents: Mesopotamian Babylon, a Roman military settlement named Babylon (located near modern Cairo, Egypt), and the city of Rome. The most likely choice is Rome. Rome is symbolically designated "Babylon" in the book of Revelation and several Jewish works (including 4 Ezra and 2 Baruch). One weakness of this approach is that 1 Peter appears to be the earliest such reference.

But there is reasonably good evidence that Peter went to Rome. Clement of Rome, writing in the mid-90s, implies that Peter and Paul were martyred in Rome during the Neronian persecution brought on by the fire in Rome in July of A.D. 64. In the early second century Ignatius's letter to the Romans seems to assume that Peter had been in Rome. Beginning in the second half of the second century there is a steady stream of references to Peter in Rome (although many of them are mixed in with dubious assertions about Peter founding the Roman church).

In addition to Peter, 1 Peter 5:13 places Mark in "Babylon" as well. If Colossians and Philemon were written from Rome, they place Mark there with Paul (Col 4:10; Phlm 24).

DATE

The previous paragraph points out that 1 Clement 5-6 suggests that Peter died in the Neronian persecution. As in the case of Peter's presence in Rome, sources from the late second century and beyond provide a steady stream of references to Peter's martyrdom under Nero (mixed with various dubious claims). The vast majority of scholars accept the idea that Peter was martyred by order of Nero between A.D. 64 and 68. Since Peter is the author, 1 Peter must have been written no later than A.D. 68.

Few, if any, would suggest a date earlier than the 60s. Earlier dates might not allow adequate time for Peter to come to Rome or for Christianity to spread through most of Asia Minor.

RECIPIENTS

Concerning the five provinces listed in 1 Peter 1:1 see the commentary for details. They encompass most of Asia Minor (modern Turkey). Peter addressed Christians who were scattered throughout these areas.

The fact that Peter addressed his readers with the term "Diaspora" or "Dispersion" (1:1) misled many in the past to maintain that his readers were primarily Jewish Christians. The term "Diaspora," meaning "scattered," was used frequently by the Jews to refer to those who had been scattered throughout the world, away from their Palestinian homeland. However, there is a consensus among modern interpreters that Peter used it metaphorically to include Gentile Christians. All Christians live away from their homeland with God.

Besides the likelihood that many Gentiles had become Christians in these predominantly Gentile regions, several verses in 1 Peter indicate that many of the readers came out of a pagan past. See, for example, 1:14, "do not conform to the evil desires you had when you lived in ignorance"; 1:18, "you were redeemed from the evil way of life handed down to you from your forefathers"; and 4:3, "you have spent enough time in the past doing what pagans choose to do."

ENCOURAGING THE PERSECUTED

First Peter 5:12 sums up Peter's purpose: "I have written to you briefly, encouraging you and testifying that this is the true grace of God. Stand fast in it." Peter's letter was a word of encouragement to Christians who were facing persecution and needed encouragement to stand firm in their faith.

Earlier interpreters often thought of these persecutions as state-sponsored persecutions leading to imprisonment and death. More recent interpreters have noticed that the nature and extent of the persecutions is not very specific. The only specific reference to physical persecution is the reference in 2:20 to Christian slaves being beaten. There is no reference to state-sponsored persecution.

But that the persecutions were severe is clear from such references as 1:6, "You may have had to suffer grief in all kinds of trials" and 4:12, "do not be surprised at the painful trial you are suffering."

We are familiar with the antagonistic environment the early Christians lived in from reading Acts and Paul's letters. In the early second century several pagan writers provide further evidence of how Christians were perceived by others. In writing about Nero's persecution of Christians Tacitus describes them as "a class hated for their abominations" and calls Christianity "a deadly superstition . . . hideous and shameful." In describing the same event Suetonius describes Christians as "a class of men given to a new and wicked superstition." During roughly the same period of time Pliny, the Roman governor of Bithynia (one of the five regions Peter addressed), wrote to the emperor Trajan and described Christianity as "a perverse and extravagant superstition." These are the kinds of criticisms Peter presumably had in mind when he made comments like "they accuse you of doing wrong" (2:12) and they "speak maliciously against your good behavior in Christ" (3:16).

Peter wrote to remind these readers of what God had done for them in Christ (e.g., 1:1-12; 2:4-10) and to encourage them to stand firm (e.g., 1:13-25; 2:11-25). We can benefit from overhearing what he said.

-College Press New Testament Commentary: with the NIV

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Achtemeier, Paul J. 1 Peter . Hermeneia. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1996.

Aland, Barbara, Kurt Aland, et al., eds. The Greek New Testament . 4th Rev. Ed. United Bible Societies, 1993.

Bauer, Walter. A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature. 2d Ed. Rev. William F. Arndt, F. Wilbur Gingrich, and Frederick W. Danker. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1979.

Bigg, Charles. Epistles of St. Peter and St. Jude . International Critical Commentary. Edinburgh: T & T Clark, 1901.

Bruce, F.F. The Canon of Scripture. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 1988.

Carson, D.A., D.J. Moo, and L. Morris. An Introduction to the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1992.

Dalton, W.J. Christ's Proclamation to the Spirits: A Study of 1 Peter 3:18-4:6. 2nd Ed. Analecta Biblica 23. Rome: Pontifical Biblical Institute, 1989.

Davids, Peter H. The First Epistle of Peter. New International Commentary on the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1990.

Elliott, J.H. The Elect and the Holy: An Exegetical Examination of 1 Peter 2:4-10 and the Phrase basivleion iJeravteuma. Novum Testamentum. Supplement 12. Leiden: Brill, 1966.

Ferguson, Everett. Backgrounds of Early Christianity. 2nd Ed. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1993.

Finegan, Jack. Handbook of Biblical Chronology . Rev. ed. Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1998.

France, R.T. "Exegesis in Practice: Two Samples." In New Testament Exegesis. Ed. I. Howard Marshall. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1977.

Goppelt, Leonard. A Commentary on 1 Peter . Ed. Ferdinand Hahn. Trans. and Aug. John E. Alsup. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1993.

Grudem, Wayne. The First Epistle of Peter. Tyndale New Testament Commentaries. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1988.

Hemer, Colin. "The Address of 1 Peter." Expository Times 89 (1977-78): 239-243.

Hort, F.J.A. The First Epistle of St. Peter 1:1-2:17. London: Macmillan, 1898.

Jones, R.B. "Christian Behavior under Fire (First Epistle of Peter)." Review and Expositor 46 (1949): 56-66.

Kelly, J.N.D. A Commentary on the Epistles of Peter and of Jude. Harper New Testament Commentary. New York: Harper and Row, 1969.

Marshall, I. Howard. 1 Peter . IVP New Testament Commentary Series. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 1991.

Metzger, Bruce M. A Textual Commentary on the Greek New Testament . 2nd Ed. United Bible Societies, 1994.

Michaels, J. Ramsey. 1 Peter. Word Biblical Commentary. Vol. 49. Waco, TX: Word, 1988.

Moffatt, James. The General Epistles. The Moffatt New Testament Commentary. New York: Harper and Brothers, 1940.

O'Brien, P.T. "Letters, Letter Forms." In Dictionary of Paul and His Letters . Eds. G.F. Hawthorne, R.P. Martin, and D.G. Reid. 550-553. Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity, 1993.

Osburn, Carroll D., ed. Essays on Women in Earliest Christianity . 2 Vols. Joplin, MO: College Press, 1993, 1995.

Piper, John and Wayne Grudem, eds. Recovering Biblical Manhood and Womanhood: A Response to Evangelical Feminism. Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 1991.

Selwyn, E.G. The First Epistle of St. Peter. London: Macmillan, 1946.

Wallace, Daniel B. Greek Grammar beyond the Basics. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1996.

-College Press New Testament Commentary: with the NIV

ABBREVIATIONS

BAGD A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament by Bauer, Arndt, Gingrich, and Danker

KJV King James Version

NASB New American Standard Bible

NIV New International Version

NRSV New Revised Standard Version

UBS ⁴ United Bible Society Greek New Testament, 4th Edition

-College Press New Testament Commentary: with the NIV

College: 1 Peter (Outline)

OUTLINE

I. THE GREETING - 1:1-2

II. A CALL TO BE HOLY - 1:3-2:10

A. The Hope of Salvation - 1:3-9

B. The Glory of This Salvation - 1:10-12

C. Be Holy in All You Do - 1:13-16

D. Live in Reverent Fear as Those Redeemed by Christ's Blood - 1:17-21

E. Love One Another as Those Born Again through the Word of God - 1:22-25

F. Crave Pure Spiritual Milk - 2:1-3

G. God's Chosen People through Jesus - 2:4-10

III. INSTRUCTIONS FOR EXEMPLARY LIVING IN SOCIETY'S STRUCTURES - 2:11-3:12

A. Live Good Lives among the Pagans - 2:11-12

B. Submit to the Governing Authorities - 2:13-17

C. Slaves, Submit to Your Masters - 2:18-25

1. Submit Even to Harsh Masters - 2:18-20

2. Follow the Example of Christ - 2:21-25

D. Wives, Submit to Your Husbands - 3:1-6

E. Husbands, Be Considerate - 3:7

F. General Instructions for All - 3:8-12

IV. ENCOURAGEMENT TO THOSE WHO SUFFER FOR DOING GOOD - 3:13-4:11

A. Do Not Be Frightened - 3:13-17

B. Christ Also Suffered - And Was Exalted - 3:18-22

C. Live for the Will of God - 4:1-6

D. Love and Serve Each Other - 4:7-11

V. MORE EXHORTATIONS TO BE STEADFAST IN THE FACE OF SUFFERING - 4:12-5:11

A. Rejoice When You Suffer for Christ - 4:12-19

B. Show Humility in Your Relationships, Especially You Who Shepherd - 5:1-5

C. A Summarizing Call to Suffer for Christ - 5:6-11

VI. CONCLUDING REMARKS - 5:12-14

-College Press New Testament Commentary: with the NIV