I. Greeting: 1:1-2 Behind the Text There are three names that are often associated with the apostle Peter: Simon, Peter, and Cephas. Simon was undoubtedly the Jewish name that was given him to this apostle by his parents at his birth. The name Peter /or Cephas was the nickname which Jesus gave him to Simon at Caesarea Philippi, when Simon made the significant confession that Jesus was the Christ, the long-awaited Messiah (see Matt 16:13-16; Mark 8:27-30; Luke 9:18-20; cf.see John 1:42). Both the names Peter and Cephas mean “rock;”, but the name Peter Peter is derived,is derived from the Greek word for “rock” (Petros), whereas ; while the name Cephas, is the is a transliteration ofesion of the Aramaic. word for “rock.” Both names mean “rock.” In the the Pauline Epistles, the earliest NT writings of the NT which are represented by the Pauline Epistles, Paul never refers to Peter as Simon. A and, except for two references in Galatians 2:7-8, he always refers to him asSimon Peter by the name Cephas (Gal 1:18; 2:9, 11, 14; 1 Cor 1:12; 3:22; 9:5; 15:5). The only other appearance of the name Cephas in the NT is found in John 1:42, whmentions ere all three names of the apostle are given: “Jesus looked at him and said, ‘You are Simon son of John. You will be called Cephas’ (which, when translated, is Peter).” As the church became increasingly Greek-speakingWith time, the Aramaic name Cephas was displaced by the Greek name Peter,. A as is evidenced by the fact that all four of the Gospels refer to him as eitheruse the name Peter (or Simon Peter) as the preferred nomenclature for this apostle. The use of The fact that the name Peter to is used to identifyiesy the author of this letter (instead of Simon or Cephas) is most probably reflectsa result of the Gentile background of itsthe recipients of the letter as well as the popularization of the Greek name Peter for this apostle. In the Text ■ 1 Peter begins his letter in the basic pattern that was customary of all ancient Greek letters: “A to B, greetings.” In this instance, the name Peter is given to identifying the author is followed by a along with the short descripiction of his office: an apostle of Jesus Christ. TLiterally, the word apostle means “one who is sent forth.” In its generic sense, it identifies one who is possesses the idea of a “messenger” or an “envoy.” of another. In the NT, however,though, the word always signifies that the person “is sent, and sent with full authority” (Rengstorf 1964a, 421). TWhile there is some variation among the different NT writers in the specific connotation that the word apostle carries. , But one the common feature is that basis of the usage of the word always indicates that the person designated as an apostle whas a witnessed of the resurrected Jesus and whas been commissioned by hHim personally (Bromiley 1985, 70). First Peter does not explain the call and function of an apostle, as Paul’s writings often do. Nonetheless, it is self-evident that Peter would easily qualify as an apostle, regardless of the precise definition that is attributed to this word. As the foremost disciple of Jesus during hisJesus’ earthly ministry, Peter was not only sent out with the other disciples with the authority to preach and heal during Jesus’ ministry (cf.see Mark 6:7; Matt 10:1; Luke 9:1-2), but he was also one of the first witnesses of the risenresurrected Christ, personally commissioned bywhom Jesus also personally commissioned to spread the gospel (cf.see John 21:15-19; Matt 28:16-20). Unlike Paul, who often finds it necessary to defend his apostleship, Peter portrays displays no defensiveness in his use of the term to describe himself or his office. HisPeter’s authority as an apostle was never challenged. The qualifying phrase of Jesus Christ makes it very clear that the authority that Peter held was derived from and commissioned by Jesus Christ himself. Davids asserts that Peter viewed himself as “a messenger of Christ sent into the world with authority to carry out the will of the one who sent him” (Davids 1990, 45-46). While there areThe NT identifies several offices or ministry functions of ministry that are identified within the church, such as —for instance, prophet, teacher, evangelist, etc. (cf.see 1 Cor 12:28-30; Eph 4:11). But —it is striking to observe that only the office of apostle is followed by the genitive phrase of Jesus Christ. As “an apostle of Jesus Christ,”, Peter simply but powerfully expresses the true nature of his authority. Peter’s His authority is not an inherent authority, but a “borrowed” authority—; his authority is derived from Jesus Christ himself. Peter’s self-identification of himself with the phraseas an apostle of Jesus Christ is very similar to the way twhat Paul often used identified himself in the salutation of his letters (i. In nine of the thirteen Pauline epistles). , Paul identifies himself as “an apostle of Christ Jesus.” In all nine instances, however, Paul, however, characteristically provideds some kind of justification for his self-designation. F as apostle; for instance, in 1 Cor 1:1 he explains that he is an apostle “by the will of God” in 1 Corinthians 1:1 (cf.see also the opening verses of Romans, 2 Corinthians, Galatians, Ephesians, Colossians, 1-2 Timothy, and Titus). Only in 1 Peter does the designation “an apostle of Jesus Christ” stand by itself without any further elaboration. As Michaels observes, “Simon’s identity as ‘Peter’ was inextricably bound up with his identity as “apostle of Jesus Christ,” so that together the two terms reinforce each other” (1988, 5). INonetheless, it is noteworthy, however, that Peter places the weight of the authority of his letter upon Jesus, and not upon himself. He is the authorized agent and messenger of Jesus Christ. A and, as such, this letter carries a message and an authority that supersedes the mere words or message of the man named Peter. R; rather, they portray the message and authority of Jesus Christ himself. Accordingly, no greater defense or convocation for authority is deemed necessary to acquire the attention and acquiescence of the readersPeter’s audience beyond other than the simple designation that the letter is from Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ. In contrast to the concise depiction of the author, the identification of the audience is expanded in a rather lengthy description. Obviously, then, the identity of the recipients of this letter was of greater concern to the author than the author’shis own identity. Peter calls them God’s elect, strangers in the world, scattered throughout several Roman provinces in Asia Minor. [Begin ExcursusSidebar] Election The idea underlying the phrase God’s elect (eklektos) bears further discussion. H has t Too often been mistakenly taken to mean, the notion of “privilege without responsibility.” seems to be imposed upon the idea of election. TBut this is certainly not the way in which the word is intended or used by the bBiblical authorswriters. The Bible does not normally use “election” in an individualistic sense. In the OT, “only rarely does the divine choice refer to individuals (apart from kings)” (Bromiley 1985, 516). The term elect (or chosen) was the depiction most regularly used by the Jewish people of Israel to express their conviction that they were God’s special people whom hHe had singled out from among all the nations (cf.see Deut 4:37; 7:6; 14:2; Ps 55:6; Isa 45:4; )(Kelly 1969, 40). Furthermore, the idea of , election does not necessarily imply “the rejection of what is not chosen, but giving favor to the chosen subject, keeping in view a relationship to be established between the one choosing and the object chosen” (Zodhiates 1992, 544). The Hebrew adjective that is translated inby the LXX with eklektos indicates that the purpose of the choice is determined by some kind of commission (e.g., 2 Sam 21:6; Ps 105:43; Isa 42:1; 65:22=LXX 65:23). , “and that”S such election can only meaningfully retain its validity in the fulfillment of that service” (Verbrugge 2000, 174). Thus, the underlying idea of election in the OT expresses both a privilege and a responsibility. To be sure, there is a tension that can exist between the idea of election as a prerogative and election as responsibility, as can be seen in the writings of Amos and Jeremiah (cf.see Amos 7:10ff.; Jer 7:26; 28; 37-38). But the prophetsic message is insistent in its declaration that responsibility always accompanies election. Ultimately, election as responsibility develops into the concept of election as mission. Quell writes, “This development of the belief in election into the concept of witness to the truth of God is to be regarded as the consummation of the OT message of salvation” (Quell 1967, 168). Thus, the Jewish people arenation of Israel is “God’s elect,”, but they are elected for a special purpose; namely, to be witnesses to the nations that God Yahweh is God (cf.see Isa 42:1; 43:10). It isS significantly, to recognize that in the OT, divine election was understood to be a unique characteristic of the people of Israel. TWhile there was often tension between the true prophets of God and “false prophets” about the character and responsibility (if any) of election. But, there was basic agreement that divine election was reserved for Israelthe Jewish people alone. In the NT the Jewish privilege of divine election is opened up to include all faithful persons (i.e., the church) who have placed their faith in Jesus Christ (cf.see Mark 13:20; Luke 18:7; 1 Cor 1:27-30; James 2:5; 2 John 1). Barclay writes, “All the privileges which had once belonged to Israel now belonged to the Christian Church” (1960, 196). Nowhere else in the Bible is this idea so strongly expressed as in 1 Peter. Peter transfers to the Gentile believers “the hallowed language appropriate to God’s own people” (Kelly 1969, 40). The faithful recipients of Peter’s letter are referred to as God’s elect (1:1), who are “chosen, destined, and sanctified (1:1-2) in a work of Father, Spirit, and Christ” (Bromiley 1985, 522).; Tthey are linked to the “choice Stone” (i.e., Christ) as a chosen community (2:4-5); and they are called a “chosen people” (genos eklekton). The broadened application of the notion of God’s elect in the NT to include the church is characterized by three qualifications, which are summarized by Bromiley (1985, 522-523) in the following way: a. The NT gives a new turn to the concept as it finds the basis of election in Christ and has in view a worldwide community, not just a single nation. b. It discerns in election the eternal foundation of salvation but without eliminating the responsibility to act in a manner befitting this privilege. c. Far from viewing election as preferential treatment, the NT it relates it strictly to mission in the service of the divine purposes for the universeteleology. [End ExcursusSidebar] With tThe three expressions— God’s elect (eklektos), strangers in the world (parepidēmos), and scattered (diaspora)—, Peter employs language that is are typically reserved exclusively for the people of Israel. But Peter unhesitatingly assigns the Gentile believers the same divine privileges and prerogatives as the people of Israel enjoyed. H, whereby he tacitly affirms that the Christian believers have succeeded to the same privileged status. This It is not to say that the Christian believers have displaced or replaced Israel as the “true” people of God, as some scholars seem to suggest (cf.see Ball 1966, 249). Rather, the identity of God’s chosen people has now been extended to include Christian believers, regardless of their ethnic heritage. It is striking to observe the close association of tThe words God’s elect and strangers in the world are closely associatedin this in this passage. The terms appear to portray a polarized contrast in both relationship and status. “One expresses a relationship to God, the other a relationship to human society. One denotes a privileged group (before God), the other a disadvantaged group (in society)” (Michaels 1988, 6). Within this context, thePeter’s description of his Gentile Christianthe audience as God’s elect must have struck an encouraging chord in their hearts of the readers. To these believers, who were scattered like strangers in exiles, were, in fact, Peter affirms that they are God’s favored, select people. Various scholars have commented upon the relationship betweenT the words God’s elect (eklektos) and strangers in the world (parepidēmos). Both terms can function as either an adjectives or a nouns. Thus, the recipients of the letter could be described as “the chosen sojourners” or “the sojourning elect.” AOr, as nouns, the terms can be translated as “the elect [who are also] sojourners.” This latter sense seems to be the most probable, since it allows so that both terms to stand as parallel descripictions of the readers: they are God’s elect and they are sojourners. Parepidēmos, translated The word strangers in the world or sojourners (parepidēmos) depicts Peter’s audience as those who are “staying for a while in a strange or foreign place, sojourning, residing temporarily” (Bauer BDAG 2000, 775)1957, 631). Used rarely in the Bible (NT: 1 Peter 1:1; 2:11; Heb 11:13; LXX: Gen 23:4; Ps 38:13), the term “connotes one who is merely passing through a territory, with no intention of permanent residence” (Kelly 1969, 41). While sSome scholars assert that the reference to strangers is essentially simply meant as a sociologically, identifying marker of the fact that the audience as havinghad left their homelands to live in Asia Minor (see Elliott 1981). M, most scholars, however, seem to believe that this reference infers that the readers are figurative or spiritual sojourners in the world. That is, they arebeing separated from their “eternal home” in heaven. Selwyn (1947, 118) writes, “The idea of Christians as sojourners in the world came to be felt as so expressive of their condition that paroikia . . .(translated as strangers in 1 Peter 2:11) became a common term for a Christian community in a place; hence our word ‘parish’.” Thus, the depiction of the recipients of the letter as strangers underscoreshighlights the idea that the readers are temporary residents of this world who “have a deeper attachment and a higher allegiance in another sphere. It is the counterpart of the thought that everything in this life is transitory” (Beare 1961, 49). In this sense, the description of the readers as God’s elect leads to their condition as strangers in the world. They are strangers, not so much because they are far from home, but because their faith and status before God as his select people have “estranged” them from the people among whom they reside. Paul Achtemeier proposes another alternative that deserves consideration: Used of Christians, it describes the fact that because of their unwillingness to adopt the mores of their surrounding society, they can expect the disdainful treatment often accorded exiles (e.g., 1 Pet 4:3–4). It refers for that reason less to the notion of Christians disdaining the temporal because of their longing for their eternal, heavenly home, with its implications of withdrawal from secular society, than to the notion that despite such treatment, they must nevertheless continue to practice their faith in the midst of those who abuse them (e.g., 2:12; 3:9, 15b–16; 4:19). (1996, 81)
[Begin Sidebar] Epistle to Diognetus The idea that Christians are temporary residents of this world is eloquently reflected in an anonymous letter to Diognetus, which is dated to the Second Century A.D. The author writes, “For the Christians are distinguished from other men neither by country, nor language, nor the customs which they observe.... But, inhabiting Greek as well as barbarian cities, according as the lot of each of them has determined, and following the customs of the natives in respect to clothing, food, and the rest of their ordinary conduct, they display to us their wonderful and confessedly striking method of life. They dwell in their own countries, but simply as sojourners. As citizens, they share in all things with others, and yet endure all things as if foreigners. Every foreign land is to them as their native country, and every land of their birth as a land of strangers.... They are in the flesh, but they do not live after the flesh. They pass their days on earth, but they are citizens of heaven” (5). [End Sidebar] Peter’s identifiescation of his audience ais a threefold depiction of people who are elect, strangers, and also scattered (diaspora). The word dDiaspora, like the term eklektos (elect), is a term that is typically reserved for the Jewish people. It is used twelve times in the LXXSeptuagint, and only twiceo other times in the NT outside of 1 Peter (John 7:35 and James 1:1). The word diaspora is usually used to refer to the scattering of the Jews among the Gentiles as a form of punishment from God (e.g., Deut 28:25; Jer 13:13-14; 34:17-22; Dan 12:2). In 1 Peter the notion of punishment from God is completely absent. Rather, Peter uses this term to describe all Christians who, like the Jews in exile, lived as strangers in their surrounding culture. As “scattered exiles,”, thoughhowever, members of the diaspora possessed the accompanying hope that “they will [would] eventually come to their true home, the heavenly Jerusalem” (cf.see Eph 2:19; Phil 3:20; Heb 11:13; 13:14, etc.; Best 1971, 70). Thus, the term scattered is closely associated with the preceding term strangers,. Bbut the focus of each word can be differentiated from the other: “the one word looks to the land in which the recipients were strangers, the other to the land which is their true home” (Bromiley 1985, 157). The juxtaposition of these three words—elect, strangers, and scattered—to to describeinge Peter’s audience is rather striking. Nowhere else in Christian or Jewish literature aredoes a writer connect the descriptions strangers, elect, and scattered.connected. Unlike Tthe Jewish people during the Eexiles lived in Babylon who could literally be described as “strangers” living in a foreigners, land and who had been “scattered” in a country that was not their own. But, Peter’s the predominant audience of Peter’s letter consisted primarily of former pagans who, after their conversion, continued to live in their home land and country in which they had been raised. Thus, these three terms find their significance not in the literal, sense that the readers were scattered strangers in an unknown land, but in a metaphorical sense. Namely, as Christian believers, these former onetime pagans were no longer quite at home in their birth places where they had always lived. In this sense, it is very plausible thatPerhaps Peter understood their new status as “scattered” and “strangers” to be directly related to the reality of their election. Thus, “to be chosen is to be exiled from those around you who have not been chosen in the same way and for the same destiny” (Bartlett 1998, 247). As God’s elect, Christian believers are estranged from their former way of life and allegiances. Although they are no longer at home in this world, they find their election and status in a permanent heavenly home (cf.see Eph 2:19; Phil 3:20; Heb 11:13-16). In a very poignant way, Michaels (1988, 9) describes 1 Peter as “an epistle from the homeless to the homeless.” Regardless of their geographical location, Christian believers are without an earthly home as their election sets them apart in this world. The letter known to us as 1 Peter is specifically addressed to believers who live in Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia. Pontus is a Greek word meaning “sea.”; Iit often refers to the Black Sea. In the NT, Pontus usually refers to a province of Asia Minor that runs along the south shore of the Black Sea from Bithynia to Armenia. Inhabitants from Pontus are mentioned by Luke as being present at the Day of Pentecost when the Holy Spirit was poured out upon the believers (Acts 2:9). [Begin Sidebar] Map of Asia Minor [NPH artists need to insert here a simplified map something like this one from http://www.bible-history.com/maps/maps/asia_nt.jpg.
[End Sidebar] Galatia is a territory located in north central Asia Minor, which was dominated by the Gauls. The Gauls were a Celtic tribe from western Europe that migrated to Asia Minor during known for their war craft and cunning, from the third to the first century B.C. Thus, Galatia can refer to the Celticboth a territory to the north orand a the Roman province, which included non-Gauls living further south. This has led to much discussion and disagreement among scholars concerning the actual identity of the “Galatians” addressed in to whom Paul’s wrote his epistle. In 1 Peter, “Galatia” is undoubtedly a refersence to the province of Galatia. Cappadocia is an isolated interior region of eastern Asia Minor lying north of the Taurus Mountains, east of Lake Tatta, south of Pontus, and west of the Euphrates River. While Roman influence in Cappadocia was strong in the second and first centuries BC, it did not becaome a Roman province early in the first centuryuntil the proclamation of Tiberius in A.D 17. Acts 2:9 mentions the presence of Jewish pilgrims at the first Christian Pentecost from Cappadocia and Asia. Asia is a term that sometimes refers to the old Persian Empire. But by In NT times, however, the term Asia usually indicateds the Seleucid kingdoms, whose rulers were called “the kings of Asia” (1 Macc 8:6). TWhen the last Seleucid ruler Attalus III died (133 BC), he willed his kingdom to Rome, which. Rome called this new province “Asia.” Asia was quickly evangelized by early the Christian missionaries (see Acts 19—20)., and Paul’s Letter to the Galatians was addressed to many of the churches in that region of Asia. Bithynia is a Roman province in northwest Asia Minor. Bithynia is bordered to the east by Pontus and to the north by the Black Sea. In 64 BC Bithynia and Pontus were joined together by Pompey into a large “double” province. The NT does not record any Christian missionary activity in Bithynia, despite although Paul’s efforts and his companions “tried to enter Bithynia, but the Spirit of Jesus would not allow them to” (Acts 16:7). The order in which these regions are mentioned has been the source of much speculation, especially since Pontus and Bithynia were considered to be a single Roman province since 64 B.C. Most scholars believe that the regions are listed according to the travel itinerary of the one who would deliver the letter (see Introduction). ■ 2 Peter continues his complimentary identification of his readers in v 2 by emphasizing with the usage of three prepositional phrases emphasizing how the readers have become what they are. Each of these prepositional phrases includes the work and agency of a different person within of the triune Godhead: God the Father, the Spirit, and Jesus Christ. Howe observes, ““The Trinitarian framework here is obvious. The providential plan of God the Father, the setting apart or sanctifying work of the Spirit, and the death of Jesus Christ (represented by the sprinkling of the blood) are equally descriptive of God’s provision for believers as ‘chosen sojourners.’ The three phrases are closely related, following as they do in tight-knit sequence” (2000b, 191). Literally, vVerse 2 begins with the prepositional phrase according to the foreknowledge of God the Father. The Greek construction makes it possible thatfor all three of the prepositional descriptions in v 2 to relate to the elect in v 1, the apostle in v 1, or perhaps even both. Since the apostolicity status of Peter is not in question in this letter, it seems more natural that the triad of prepositional phrases relates to the readers (the elect) rather than Peter the apostle. This solution is even more probable due to the fact thatbecause the reality of divine election offor scattered and alienated Christians speaks to the very issue that this letter is addressing. Peter provides encouragesment to the his readers with this three-fold reminder of God’s salvific activity in their lives. First, Peter reminds them that they have been chosen according to the foreknowledge of God the Father. In the NT, the noun foreknowledge (prognōsis) is only found only here and in Acts 2:23. Acts reports, where Peter’s Pentecost sermon explains Christ’s death in his Pentecost sermon as being according to the “foreknowledge of God.” In both casespassages, God’s foreknowledge does not only refer toemphasize God’s ability to know something in advance, but also to the fact that what occurs happens “according to” (kata) the boundaries of his plan. The idea that this foreknowledge does not implyies the effortless certainty of salvation for the readers or a lack of personal responsibility on their part is denied throughout the letter. On the contrary, Peter quickly reminds his readers in the latter part of v 2 that God’s provision for them leads them tohas the purpose of enabling their obedience to Jesus Christ. Furthermore, “nothing is said about the certainty that they will be brought from their present exile to the New Jerusalem” (Best 1971, 71). As a matter of fact, Peter’s comments in 4:15-19 and 5:9-12 imply that their ultimate salvation of the readers is yet to be decided byprovisional upon their response to their trials and present predicament. And yet Peter encourages his audiencethem by reminding them that they have been chosen according to the foreknowledge of God the Father. There are three important truths that are presented to the readers in this first prepositional clause:. First, their salvation has been made possible by the readers are reminded of the divine initiative in their salvation. In the dark days of suffering and persecution, it is a source of great encouragement to realize that one’s salvation originates beyond the plan or will of a human mind or organization. It begins in to the eternal plan and will of God himself. Cranfield writes, “The Church is not just a human organization—though of course it is that. Its origin lies, not in the will of the flesh, in the idealism of men, in human aspirations and plans, but in the eternal purpose of God. . . To remember this has always a steadying and strengthening effect” (see Cranfield 1960, 30). Peter reminds his readers that their salvation is founded upon the eternal plan and foreknowledge of God the Father. God is consistently portrayed in the Bible as the Author of the plan of salvation. It was always God’s plan, even “before the foundation of the world” (Eph 1:4; 2 Thess 2:13-14), to extend salvation to humanity through the provisions of Christ’s death and resurrection and the Holy Spirit’s conviction and cleansing. Second, the reference to the foreknowledge of God reminds Peter’sthe readers that their present predicament is not by accident or divine oversight. Here the thought is closely related to Peter’s description of them in v 1; it is because they were “chosen by God” that they are now “scattered strangers” throughout Asia Minor. Pontus, Galatia and the other regions. This implies that their status as scattered strangers in the world and even their existence within the present hostile environment were known by God before the foundation of the world; all of this came about in accordance with the foreknowledge of God. Peter reminds them that tTheir struggles and trials are not contingencies that have surprised or stymied God and his plan. On the contrary, the difficulties and sufferingwhat they were facing fit within the foreknowledge and eternal purposes of God. Third, the readers are reminded that the God whose foreknowledge embraces their current troubles is described as their Father. Some have questioned whether God is depicted here as the Father of Jesus or as the Father of the believers. There is Nno doubt that God is portrayed as the Father of Jesus in the Trinitarian formula of v 2 (cf.see Michaels 1988, 11). B, but the reference to God who has given usas the source of the new birth in v 3, indicates that God is not only the Father of Jesus but also the Father of Christian believers. As their Father, God is intimately and caringly involved in their lives. Peter reminds his readers that divine foreknowledge includes God’s favorable regard for his people as a part of his deliberate plan and purpose. In the midst of their own suffering, they readers are reminded of God’s gracious power as well as his, which is inherent to the notion of foreknowledge, and they are also reminded of God’s loving, fatherly concern for them in their well-being amid difficult circumstances. While tThe first prepositional phrase underscores the divine plan by which the believers became “elect strangers.,” Tthe second prepositional phrase in v 2 emphasizes the means by which God carries out his work in the lives of the believers. Their readers’ salvation and election take place through the sanctifying work of the Spirit. The truth that Peter conveys in this second phrase is that God’s purpose of making them believers his chosen people is accomplished through the sanctifying work (hagiasmos) of the Holy Spirit in their lives. The Greek word hagiasmos carries a double connotation of both consecration (i.e.that is, “set apart”) and cleansing. Some have suggested thatemphasize the notion of being “set apart” by the Holy Spirit ais the primary sense in this context (e.g., Hiebert 1984c, 39). B, but it is difficult to separate the two ideas. The Spirit does not only separates set apart the believers for God’s use, but He also transforms their livesfe of the believer morally. Here and in succeeding verses (1:15-16), “Peter declares holiness of heart and life to be God’s criterion for His people” (Ball 1966, 250). It is clear from the context and the Greek construction that the sanctifying work is performed through the agency of the Holy Spirit (a subjective the genitive is subjective). That It is, the Spirit who sanctifies the believers. But implicit within this sanctification requiresis the human cooperation with the Spirit’s work. Michaels (1988, 11) explains that sanctification here “is, on the one hand, a divine act (cf. 1 Cor 1:30), practically synonymous with the call itself, and, on the other, a moral implication of that call and (in part at least) a human responsibility.” Peter The encouragesment that Peter extends to his distressed readers with the reminderis that the Spirit has not only consecrated and set them apart as God’s chosen people. By this means they, whereby the readers have been forgiven of their past sins and transgressions. B, but the Spirit is continuing in his sanctifying work, of cleansing their lives and making them holy. In the third prepositional phrase, the purpose of God’s foreknowledge and the Spirit’s sanctifying work is revealed. That is,; namely, the purpose (eis, for) of God and the Spirit’s activities are for obedience and sprinkling with the blood of Jesus Christ. Some translators have suggested that the genitive of Jesus Christ should be connected to the concept of obedience as well as the concept of sprinkling. Thus, they translate this phrase as “obedience to Jesus Christ and sprinkling with his blood.” ButThe problem with this translation is that it forces of Jesus Christ to be translated as an objective genitive with “obedience” and as a subjective genitive with “sprinkling of the blood.” The more natural sense is to connect “Jesus Christ” to sprinkling and not to obedience. In the first element of this third prepositional phrase, Peter first reminds his readers of their own role in their election and sanctification: obedience (hypakoē). Obedience is an important notion for Peter in throughout this letter. In chapter 1 alone, the notion of obedience surfaces three separate times (in vv 2, 14, 22). The word hHypakoē “conveys the picture of listening and submitting to that which is heard” (Hiebert 1984c, 39). The textVerse 2 does not specify to whom or what obedience is required. B, but the reference to “obeying the truth” in 1:22 is significant.implies that “obedience to the truth” is the basic idea intended. Obedience as “obeying the truth” invites believers to submit to the saving grace of God and the sanctifying work of the Spirit made possible by Christ’s death. That is, they are to obey God because of all he has done to save them. This truth is the saving grace of God’s election and the Spirit’s sanctifying work within the lives of the believers which was made possible through the sprinkling of Christ’s blood. God’s salvationalific activities require a response of obedience. However, this oObedience to the truth is not merely a call reference to give some kind of mental assent to what God says. I; rather, it calls for conformity of one’s refers to “the obedience of one who conforms his “conduct to God’s commands” (Thayer 2005, 637). When The believers respond with obedience to God’s initiative, actions: they turn away from their former way of life, which was opposed to the will and purpose of God. T, and they submit themselves to the eternal purpose and plan of God through faith in Jesus Christ. SuchThis obedience is depicted not only by a change of attitude toward God. It is, but also by a complete change of action and behavior. This entire change is made possible by the triune God: the Fatheractivities of God’s foreknowledge, the Spirit’s sanctifying work, and the SonChrist’s blood atoning death. ement; bBut the possibility only becomes a reality only as through the believer’s acceptance and obeydience to God’s savinglvific plan. The second element of the third prepositional phrase speaks of sprinkling with the blood of Jesus Christ. Some commentators have triedattempt to connect the idea of “sprinkling” with the sacrament of baptism (Goppelt 1978, 86; cf.see Kelly 1969, 43)., Bbut the imagery here, like so many of the others indescriptions of these introductory verses, is derived from the OT. In Exodus 24, the covenant between God and his people is confirmed. After Moses reads from the Book of the Covenant, the people respond, “We will do everything the Lord has said; we will obey” (Exod 24:7). In response, Moses takes half of the blood of the sacrifice and sprinkles it on the altar. Then he, and sprinkles the other half of the blood is sprinkled on the people. Then Moses explainssays, “This is the blood of the covenant that the Lord has made with you in accordance with all these words” (Exod 24:8). Even though Peter does not make any specifically reference to “covenant” in these verses. But, the close parallels with the covenant account in Exodus 24 strongly suggestsmakes it apparent that Peter has the covenant in mind. Whereas the old covenant was ratified by the sprinkling of the blood of bulls, the new covenant is ratified by the sprinkling of the blood of Jesus. In the latter case, of course, the sprinkling is metaphorical. The saving benefits of Christ’s violent death are freely offered to all who will receive them. Whereas the old covenant was ratified by the sprinkling of the blood of bulls upon the people collectively, the new covenant is ratified by the sprinkling of the blood of Jesus upon the people individually. In a very poignant way Peter once again borrows language and imagery that were once reserved for the Jewish people alone and he freely applies them to the Gentile believers. Peter leaves no doubt that the Gentile believers are included within God’s chosen people. Thise last phrase displays a striking interplay between the human responsibility for obedience and the divine provision for enabling thisement through Jesus Christ. Peter makes it Cclearly, that obedience is an inherent and required part of humanthe people’s salvation. Michaels writes, “To “‘obey”’ was to accept the gospel and become part of a new community under a new covenant; to be sprinkled with Jesus’ blood was to be cleansed from one’s former way of living and released from spiritual slavery by the power of his death” (1988, 12-13). Moffatt confirms similarly insists that “to belong to God is to obey Jesus Christ” (1928, 91). Obedience is essential in the Christian faith. The true Christian is revealed not through the philosophical declaration of trust and ultimate security, but by one’s willingness to follow and obey the Savior’s call and commands. Peter’s The emphasis on obedience, however, is balanced by the assurance of divine, atoning enablement through Jesus Christ. Various Some scholars have observed that the word order—first obedience and then sprinkling—suggests the continuing availability of Christ’s atonement for sin. Thus, for obedience and the sprinkling with the blood of Jesus Christ means “that God’s plan for them is not obedience marred by unforgiven sin but obedience whose failings are cleansed by the blood of Christ” (Grudem 1988, 54). The letter’s salutation finally appears in the finallast clause of v 2: Grace and peace be yours in abundance. All of Paul’s letters include grace and peace as a part of his greeting. The typical Greek greeting for most ancient letters was the word chairein, which means “hail,” “welcome,” or simply “greetings” (Liddell and Scott; cf.see Acts 15:23; 23:26; James 1:1). Like Paul, Peter substitutes the word charis (“grace”), which is derived from the same root as the word chairein (“greetings”). Through this word play, Peter does not only extends greetings to his readers, but more importantly, he extends God’s grace. In the NT grace signifies the undeserved, loving favor of God for sinners that is supremely revealed through Jesus Christ. The word peace (eirēnē) is derived from the customary Hebrew greeting shalom. The word shalom is much richer in its content than the English or Greek words for peace. Both the word Whereas peace and(or eirēnē) conveyemits the essential notion of tranquility due to the absence of war and dissension. , sShalom, however, conveys the “sense of well-being and salvation” (Foerster 1964, 411). Peter’sThis greeting from Peter includes the full range of the blessings of God. Grace is used in the NT refers tofor all of God’s blessings presented to the believers through Christ. , and pPeace is used in the OT refers tofor all of the general blessings of God to his people Israel. Thus, in this Christian greeting functions as a, Peter prayers that grace and peace, both of which are conceived as gifts of God, may be the possession of his readers in abundance (plēthyntheiē). Peter prays that God’s gifts may be theirs “in ever greater measure” (BDAG 2000, 826 s.v. plēthynō).
From the Text While it is true that tThe NT does not teach a specific doctrine of the Trinity; this is a development that took centuries to reach ecumenical consensus. Nonetheless, the foundation of the Trinitarian theology is strongly embedded in the language and thought range of the NT writers. This is clearly illustrateddemonstrated in the introductory section of 1First Peter., where Peter reflects upon his readers’ salvation, which is assured by the foreknowledge of God the Father, through the sanctifying work of the Holy Spirit, and the atoning death sprinkling with the blood of Jesus Christ. Hunter (1957, 90) writes, “This is as yet “‘the trinity of experience,”’ out of which sprang the later dogma. The early Christians found by experience that they could not express all that they meant by the word “‘God”’ till they had said, “‘Father, Son, and Spirit.”’ Christians were then, as they still are, people who are seeking, finding, and doing the Father’s will with the companionship of his Son by the strength and guidance of the Spirit.” There are certainly other passages in the NT which seem to anticipate the later dogma doctrine of the Trinity (e.g., Matt 28:19; 2 Cor 13:14; Eph 4:4-6; Jude 20-21). B, but 1 Peter 1:2 is unique in that the three persons of the Godhead are not only mentioned, but but each one of them is recognized as playingwith an equally important role within the salvation of believers. It is noteworthy how Peter freely applieds terms and descriptions to Gentile Christians that were typically reserved for Israel / the Jewish people alone. Not only diddoes Peter describe them as God’s elect and scattered (diaspora) people, but he also borrows language and imagery from God’s covenant with the Jewish people in Exodus in order to describe the reality of their relationship with God (sprinkling with the blood of Jesus Christ). Nonetheless, iIf Peter perceives the Gentile Christians as replacing Israel as God’s chosen people, he gives no indication of it. Rather, without any explanation or reserve, he simply equates the experience of the Christian believers with their Jewish counterparts “as if they were a strange new kind of Jew” (Michaels 1988, 13). For disenfranchised and pressured Christians of every ethnic group in any era, this is an inspiring message of encouragement. The history of God’s salvific saving activities on behalf of his chosen people is the history heritage of every Christian believer through faith in Jesus Christ. Peter writes to Christian believers who are scattered strangers in the world. The call and reality of this kind of existence seems to go back to Jesus’ prayer that his followers would not be of the world even though they are in the world. But what does it really mean to be “resident aliens” in the world? There are many forms of application that this concept can take within different cultural, social, and chronological eras. For many believers in North America and in the Western world, who enjoy where there is a greater amount of religious freedom, Peter’s words call for those who profess to be Christians are imbued with an imperative character in which Christians are urged to live in a uniquely Christian way. For instance, Hauerwas and Willimon urge American Christians to live as “resident aliens” who “make a difference because they see something that cannot otherwise be seen without Christ” (1989, 24). While this type of “countercultural” guidance is certainly commendable, the intention of Peter and his letter lies in a rather different arena of the Christian experience. For the original readers of this epistle, Peter’s words were not prescriptive, but descriptive. Their faith in Jesus Christ had already resulted in an estrangement from the society and culture in which they lived, an estrangement which too often led to public and programmatic persecution. For embattled and oppressed believers of every era, Peter’s letter does not carry so much a challenge to “make a difference” in their world as it carries a message of encouragement and hope in the face of persistent opposition. Peter refers specifically to the sanctifying work of the Spirit in the lives of all believers. Faor too many believers imagine that the notion of sanctification is reserved for an elite minority of Christian disciples, the so-called exceptional “saint.”. But Peter does not see it this way. He consideredRather, sanctification is a normal part of the believer’s’ experience, which goes hand in hand with God’s eternal plan for their salvation and the blood atoning deathement of Jesus Christ for sinners. The word that Peter uses for sanctification here (hagiasmos) “refers not only to the activity of the Holy Spirit in setting man apart unto salvation and transferring him into the ranks of the redeemed, but also to enabling him to be holy even as God is holy” (Zodhiates 1992, 70). It has always been God’s purpose, through Jesus Christ, not only to redeem sinful humanity, but also to transform the lives of sinful people into his image. This is the sanctifying work of the Holy Spirit. The Spirit sets the believers apart for God and He he also cleanses and purifies the believer’s’ livesfe into conformity to God’s purpose and will. This sanctification is both the result and the process of the Holy Spirit’s activity. “It is not an absolute perfection which precludes the possibility of improvement, but it is the restoration of the divine image to the soul of man so that both his character and service are acceptable to God” (Nicholson 1967, 265). Thus, the believers areis set apart by the work of the Holy Spirit and the believers are is also made holy by the work of the Spirit. The moral cleansing and ethical character of the believer’s’ livesfe are two inherent elements of the same sanctifying work of the Spirit. Sanctification is a work that the Spirit does in the lives of believersto a person’s life, cleansing them whereby a believer’s heart is cleansed from moral evil. But , and it is also a work that the Spirit does through a person’s human livesfe, whereby a believers areis made holy and obedient to the will of God in theirone’s daily walk. Believers should resist a reading of the Bible or a theology that insinuates that a person is “saved in principle but not in fact” (Wynkoop 1972, 56). This is why John Wesley insisted that sanctification is found in the intersection of being “renewed in the image of God ‘in righteousness and holiness’” as well as “loving God with all our heart, and mind, and soul” (1966, 41). The economy of God’s plan of salvation through the blood of Jesus Christ is realized not only through the Spirit’s work of setting the believers apart for heaven, but also through the Spirit’s work of making the believers holy here on earth, which is demonstrated by theirone’s obedience to God here and now.