I PETER 1:2-4

  1 Peter 2:11-3:17

“Submission” is the major theme of this section, as evidenced by occurrence of this word at 2:13,18 and 3:1. The body of this section contains advice addressed to different facets of the Christian community, the so-called Household Codes. The intent of this section is to make it clear that “there is to be no exception to the Christian rule of submission.”

Structure of I Peter 2:11-3:17

1. Abstain from fleshly desires (2:11)

2. Suffering for doing good (2:12)

3. Accepting authority (2:13-3:7)

a. Be subject to every human institution (2:13-17)

b. Servants, submit to your masters (2:18-25)

                                    b'. Wives, be submissive to your husbands (3:1-6)

a'. Husbands, honor your wives (3:7)

1'. Turn away from evil (3:8-12)

        2'. Suffering for doing good (3:13-17)

Section 1' elaborates on the “desires of the flesh” mentioned in Section 1. The common theme of units 2 and 2' is the maligning of Christians by unbelievers. The key word “conduct” appears in these two symmetrical sections (2:12 and 3:16) as well as at the approximate center of IIA (at 3:1 and 2). Unit 3a is bounded by the parallel injunctions to “submit to everyone” (2:13) and “honor everyone” (2:17). Justification for pairing 3a and 3a' comes from the similar admonitions in 2:17 and 3:7 that the Christian is to “honor” others. Units 3b and 3b' are both addressed to generally oppressed members of society; both discuss the importance of believers’ conduct in the sight of God; fear is an underlying theme in each; and both cite notable examples of exemplary behavior as models (Christ and Sarah, respectively).

Some general principles relating to 2:13-3:7:

1. Submission is mutual.

2. Submission does not imply inferiority.

3. The main reason for submission is to maintain a good Christian witness to outsiders.

Outline of I Peter 2:11-3:12 by Norman Ericson

from The Literature and Meaning of Scripture (Inch and Bullock ed.)

Beloved,

1. Abstain from the passions of the flesh (negative command)

        II. Maintain good conduct among the Gentiles (positive command)

       REASON: so that they will see your deeds and glorify God (2:11-12; similar to 1:14-15)

                III. Be subject to every human institution

                    REASON: for the Lord's sake (2:13; similar to Ephesians 5: out of reverence for Christ)

                A. Citizens, by submitting to the emperor and even the governors

                    REASON: to silence the ignorance of foolish men (2:13-15)

                B. Servants, by submitting to your masters, even those who are overbearing and harsh

                    REASON: to be approved by God and follow Christ's example (2:18-25)

                C. Wives, by submitting to your husbands even if they are unbelievers

                    REASON: in order to win them to Christ and be children of Sarah (3:1-6)

                D. Husbands, by being considerate to your wives even though they are the weaker sex

                    REASONS: because they are joint heirs and so that your prayers will not be hindered (3:7)

                E. All believers, by living in harmony and love with one another, even those who do evil toward you or revile you

                    REASON: so that you may obtain a blessing (3:8-9)

He that would love life and see good days,

I. should keep from evil (negative command)

    II. and do right by seeking peace (positive command)

1 Peter 3:18-4:1)

This short section can be broken up into two parallel cycles with the same basic elements, which, however, do not appear in exactly the same order except for the first and last:

1. “Christ suffered... in the flesh” (3:18a; 4:4a)

2. “alive in the spirit” (3:18b; 4:6b)

3. proclamation to the dead (3:19-20; 4:6a)

4. believers as a new creation (3:21; 4:1b-5,7-11a)

5. Christ's glorification (3:22; 4:11b)

This parallel construction strongly suggests that the reference to preaching to the spirits in prison of 3:19 is equivalent to the preaching to the dead in 4:6.

1 Peter 4:12-5:11

This section begins with “Beloved” and finishes with “Amen,” The body itself roughly falls into an ABA pattern:

1. General admonitions (4:12-19)

2. Specific instructions regarding elders (5:1-5a)

1'. General admonitions (5:5b-11)

Davids explains the presence of subsection 2 between two units on suffering as “a logically necessary explanation of the intra-church solidarity that is required in the face of persecution.” Two of the major “suffering” sections in 1 Peter appear in units 1 and 1', as does the theme of submitting to God’s hand in discipline. Unit 1 ends as 1' begins, with a quotation from Proverbs.

I Peter 3:1 I witnessed a good example of this while growing up. My mother always took my brother and me on church Sunday mornings while my Dad stayed home and read the paper in his work clothes. I never heard her complain to my Father once about his lack of interest. After years of this pattern, one Sunday he suddenly came into the living room all dressed up, and from then on he attended church with us, eventually becoming an elder.

I Peter 3:3-4 Unfortunately, I also witnessed a negative example of this situation when I was teaching the adult Sunday school class in a very small church in the Northeast. The wife of a visiting minister came in loaded with jewelry and rings on every finger. That alone would not have been a distraction, but unfortunately it was an indication of a deeper problem. I happened to be teaching this very passage, but I could hardly get a word in edgewise. She went on and on about how horrible it was that women don't know their proper place and how they tended to monopolize discussions at church. She never seemed to see the irony in her statements.

In regard to proper dress, we should always be more concerned about the inside than the outside. The underlying principle is more important than a specific outward appearance since the ways of living out those principles may vary with time and location.

 

1 Peter 3:5 Note that it doesn't say "hoped in their husbands."

 

I Peter 3:6 I once heard it said that fear (lack of security) is great problem for women and Satan's 

greatest tool against them. Just as husbands can help satisfy that need, wives can help their husbands 

satisfy their need for significance. But ultimately, all human beings need both in their lives and only 

God can provide both in abundance.

 

I Peter 3:5-6 There is sometimes a great misuse of the OT example given here. It has been taught in 

the church that a husband is the Lord of the wife just as Jesus is the Lord of the husband. This usually 

includes the idea of a wife's absolute obedience to her husband. Keep in mind, however, that (1) Sarah 

“hoped in God,” (b) “Lord” may imply respect but in the Hebrew it is a simple word for husband, and 

(3) in Genesis 21:12 God actually tells Abraham to obey Sarah.

 

1 Peter 3:7 The phrase “live considerately” is well defined by several writers:

Keith Miller: It might mean taking out the trash even though it is “woman's work.”

Billy Graham: Being as courteous to your wife as when you were dating.

Peter: He was accompanied by his wife in his travels (I Corinthians 9:5). He brought Jesus to his sick 

mother-in-law (Matthew 8:14).

weaker = delicate, or more precious according to some. Others feel it may refer to relative weakness 

physically, economically and in terms of education (as present during the time of writing).

“prayers hindered” – This is similar to the saying in Matthew 5:23-24 about forgiving and asking 

forgiveness before one's offerings and prayers. James Boice: “Simply put, this means that God will not 

even hear the prayers of a man who is too ignorant to know how to treat his wife, or too foolish to 

value her as the greatest gift God has for him on earth.”

 

I Peter 3:18b-20

Luther: “This is a strange text and certainly a more obscure passage than any other passage in the NT. I still do not know for sure what the apostle means.”

View 1: Christ announced his victory to imprisoned evil spiritual beings (fallen angels) referred to in Genesis 6. Preach can mean proclaim or even denounce, without an idea of possible repentance. Peter does not use the common Greek word from which we get “evangelism,” employed by him elsewhere four times. In favor of this view is that “spirit” never refers to a dead human being in the Bible without clearly identifying it as such. In I Enoch, the fallen angels are said to be in prison. This is not the same as Hell at all, but a special holding tank. Thus, Jesus pronounces the final judgment on them.

Variation on this theme: The spirits are the Nephalim.

View 2: It refers to the pre-incarnate Jesus preaching (in his spirit through Noah) to those who would later die in the flood. Prison = flesh.

Anti: Doesn't quite fit with the immediate context of Christ's death and resurrection.

View 3: It refers to Christ after his death preaching to spirits of human beings who died in the flood (examples of a particularly evil generation), (a) with a possible chance of repentance or (b) just to announce judgment on them.

Anti: Why preach only to them? (a) Second chances are not mentioned anywhere else in Bible.

I Peter 4:6

View 1: It refers to those dead in their sins who accepted the word while they were physically alive. Now they are alive in the spirit even though they may have died physically. Not related to I Peter 3.

View 2: Refers to all who are spiritually dead. Not related to I Peter 3.

Anti: “Dead” in the rest of the passage refers to the physically dead. And preached is in the past, one-time, tense.

View 3: Refers to all the dead up to that time (or at least to the righteous dead) so that they had a second chance. Might be related to the event in I Peter 3.

Anti: Second chances are not mentioned elsewhere.

I Peter 4:11b The doxology appearing unexpectedly in this verse has caused much speculation over the years regarding the composition of the book. Some have proposed that two original letters represented by 1:1-4:1 plus a conclusion and 4:12-5:14, respectively, were combined at a later date with appropriate additions. But as demonstrated by the literary structure of I Peter, the book as a whole is marvelously constructed as a symmetrical unity.

I Peter 4:12-19 The teachings on suffering are now resumed from 1:6-7. General principles were dealt with in the earlier passage. Now there is a call to response to actual persecution. One commentator calls this a “re-imaging” of pain so that we can view it from a new perspective.

I Peter 4:12 There is a possible reference to the burning of Rome and subsequent burning of Christians 

as torches by Nero in 64 AD.

I Peter 4:13 “Participate” comes from the noun koinonia (fellowship, communion).

I Peter 4:14 There are several textual and interpretation problems with this verse. KJV has the phrase 

“on their part he is evil spoken of, but on your part he is glorified,” which is not found in the earlier 

manuscripts.

This verse recalls Jesus' promise in Matthew 5:11-12. There is also a reference here to all three persons 

of the Trinity.

There are two OT references here:

A. The Shekinah Glory (pillar of cloud and fire, smoke in the tabernacle, etc.) is a present reality in the 

life of persecuted Christians (see the example of Stephen).

B. The wording is inspired by Isaiah 11:2 in which the language first applied to the suffering Servant of 

God, and then to Christ, and now to the believer himself since the spirit of Christ dwells in a believer 

who suffers like Christ.

Teachers similar to those who espouse the health-and-wealth gospel today may be countered in this 

passage.

I Peter 4:15 The last in this list of sins is the obscure word allo-tri-epis-kopos, perhaps coined by 

Peter. It comes from two root words meaning “belonging to another” and “overseer.” It has been 

variously translated as a concealer of stolen goods, a sorcerer, a spy, an informer, a revolutionist, or one 

who meddles in things that do not concern him. There is an irony in including this last common sin 

among the criminal charges that precede it; it gets our attention. If the word refers to a busybody, then 

it may refer to new Christians trying to change the behavior of non-Christian acquaintances.

Persecutions are no excuse for retaliation in kind.

I Peter 4:16 “Christian” only appears two other times in the NT, both in Acts. It was either (1) a term 

of contempt used by others (That would fit the historical context of persecution for the Name.) or (2) 

“ian” was a common ending added to a family name when a person was adopted into a Roman family 

and therefore taken on voluntarily by believers.

Peter perhaps recalled his own denial of the name of Christ in the middle of persecution.

I Peter 4:17 “Strange and “surprised” come from the same Greek root.

“Fiery” may be taken literally to refer to Nero setting Christians on fire, but more likely it is 

metaphorical, referring to the refining of metals. Alternatively, it may be a reference to the destruction 

of Jerusalem by Rome in 70 AD.

The Jews were accustomed to being a persecuted minority, but Gentile converts might have been 

especially surprised that they were suffering for religious reasons. Right now evangelical Christians 

command general respect among the political powers in America, but we shouldn't be surprised if that 

changes sometime in the future.

Peter utilizes a form of rabbinical reasoning called “light and heavy.” The idea here comes from the OT 

although no one specific passage is actually quoted. For example, consider Jeremiah 25:29. The 

implication is that one reason for suffering to come upon Christians is not to punish them but as 

discipline to refine away their sin.

Note that it doesn't say “disbelieve” but “disobey.” It is mainly an issue of will and behavior, not belief.

I Peter 4:18 This quotation is taken from the Greek Septuagint of Proverbs 11:31. Read the English 

translation of the Hebrew text found there to see the difference.

“Scarcely saved” or “hard to be saved” means that it is a hardship (accompanied by pain and loss in 

this life), not that it is a difficult feat to be mastered or earned by works.

I Peter 4:19 “Do good” may primarily apply here to a proper behavior toward those who are 

responsible for our persecution. In other words, don't retaliate but love your enemies – the second 

command in this passage.

“Entrust your soul” is the same language used by Christ on the cross: “Father, into your hands I 

commit my spirit.” “Creator” is used here to remind us of God's power over circumstances.

Summary of 4:12-19

The Meaning of Suffering:

1. It is a test to prove the reality of our faith.

2. It is a sharing of Christ's suffering.

3. It brings glory to God.

4. It is a reminder to Christians that God is beginning his judgment with them, but they can look

 beyond the suffering to the promised glory.

Our Proper Response to Suffering:

1. rejoicing (vv. 12-15)

2. praise (vv. 16-18)

3. commitment (an active word that results in right behavior) and steadfastness (v. 19)

Reasons for Rejoicing in Suffering:

1. We will share in glory “in so far” (to the same degree) as we suffer.

2. We obtain the presence of the Glory of God.

3. We can contrast our ultimate fate with that of the non-suffering non-believer in eternity.

There are numerous reasons for suffering given in the Bible. Like Job, we may never know exactly 

why on this earth. We need to have faith that whatever the cause of our particular suffering, it is 

according to God's will and therefore has a meaning.

 

I PETER 2: "ROCK" IMAGERY

Verse 2-- Unlike the Book of Hebrews which criticized the Christians for not progressing beyond milk to the meat of the spiritual life, Peter is talking to new Christians here who are just starting their spiritual journey. Any other translations for “spiritual” milk? It is not the usual Greek word for spiritual. It is only used one other time in the NT and literally meant reasonable or rational.

Verse 3-- Psalm 34 “taste and see that the LORD is good.”

Verses 4-5 and 9-10-- These are images of the church as a whole, the corporate body of Christ. These bracket the OT quotations involving the image of Christ as the rock.

Here it is is helpful to remind ourselves of the author of the letter: Peter. Jesus renamed Simon as 

“rock” after his great confession. In turn, Peter turns around and states that the only true rock of the 

church is Jesus.

The old quiz show Twenty Questions would always start out by asking if an unknown object was animal, mineral or vegetable. (The second most common question was: Is it bigger than a breadbox? Today that question would be incomprehensible to most people.) Most of the time, the Bible deals with animal (including human) and vegetable matter, but today we will concentrate on the third category.

I Peter 2:4-8 contains several examples of rock or stone being used as an image. That sort of imagery would have made a lot of sense to the Jews since they didn't have to go far to encounter rocks in their environment. But the problem with deciphering what a biblical image or figure of speech means is to determine what specific property of the image is being referred to in each case. And where rocks or stones are involved, a great many properties spring to mind and several different classes of figurative language are employed.

As two examples, consider some cases where stones are used in a hyperbolic (literary exaggeration) sense:

Luke 19:40: Jesus says that if the people had not proclaimed him king, the very rocks would have done so.

Luke 3:8: This verse talks about the possibility of God raising up children of Abraham from stones.

Although we know that nothing is impossible with God, Jesus is more probably using hyperbole in these passages to stress the points he is making. The property of rocks that is of interest in these two cases is the fact that they are inert and lifeless, in order to stress the difficulty of bringing them to life. What about the other properties of rocks that are alluded to in the Bible, many referring to Jesus himself?

Instrument of destruction

Luke 20:18: Here stones are pictured as strong, hard and unyielding. Therefore they would have made readily available instruments of destruction. In this verse, it is probably not obvious to us today, but the reference was probably to the practice of stoning. That form of execution was not carried out in the manner we think but consisted of first pushing a person off a cliff to be dashed to death on the rocks below. Only if they survived the fall would the people then finish the job by throwing stones at them. This was the sort of death the crowd had in mind for Jesus when they drove him to the edge of a cliff.

In this particular passage there is a probable illusion to Daniel 2:34-35,44 – a vision in which a rock rolls downhill and destroys the compound statue made of different materials. The Messiah is predicted to overthrow all earthly kingdoms up to that time and replace them with God's Kingdom. Christ is similarly the rock/mountain mentioned in the Luke passage. This usage is similar to the fact that God the Father is also referred to as the Rock in II Samuel 22:3-4. But in that OT passage, He represents the strength and protection that rock outcroppings and mountains provide to shelter against the elements.

Source of Nourishment

I Corinthians 10:1-4 is a very intriguing, expressing an idea which seems to come out of the clear blue. Actually, Paul's thought pattern here was common to the rabbinical teaching of the time and arose from a consideration of Exodus 17 (the spring of Rephidim) in combination with Numbers 20 (water coming from a rock at Kadesh). The reasoning went that it must have been the same rock that provided the people in the wilderness with needed water at both locations. Therefore that rock must have followed them throughout their journeys. Paul uses this moving rock as a type of Jesus, who provides us with spiritual food and drink. This same generally imagery appears in John 6:53-54 and John 7:37-39 as well as being used by Jesus in talking to the Samaritan woman.

Foundation Rock

Reliability and firmness are the properties of rock in this case. The most prominent example of this imagery is Jesus' parable of the two men who built houses, one on solid rock and the other on sand. This gave rise to the hymn lyric “all else is shifting sand.” Only Jesus is the same yesterday, today and tomorrow.

Thus, we are told explicitly in I Corinthians 2:10-11 that we the believers are God's temple (verse 16) built upon Christ as the foundation of our life.

For the next example of this type of usage, we must first look at some definitions. After Peter's great confession in Matthew 16, Jesus utilizes a pun on his name. He says, “You are Petros (name given to him earlier by Jesus himself according to Mark and John), and upon this Petra I will build my church. There are two usual interpretations of this statement:

1. Peter is the rock upon which the church is built. Since the conversation took place in Aramaic originally, Cephas was the word used in both instances. The first time it was translated into Greek as Petros since that is a masculine noun. However, the second occurrences was translated Petra (feminine) since that is the more common word for rock.

Even if that were true, keep in mind that Peter is referred to in each case but (a) there is no mention of his successors and (b) it may only be true in the limited sense that Peter is the first confessing Christian. See what Peter himself says in I Peter 2:4-5. Christians, like himself, are only following the example of Christ, who is The Rock.

2. Because of the above, Protestants generally feel that Christ, or faith in Christ as the Son of God, is the rock. Petros is merely a piece of the Petra. Even St. Augustine held to this view.

Cornerstone or Keystone

It is not clear which of the two translations is best for the Greek word involved. However, in each case the ultimate image is the same – a stone that is placed in a vital spot of a building. That could be either the large cornerstone that is part of the foundation and binds together two rows of the building or it could mean the capstone, or keystone, of an arch.

One OT reference in which a keystone is mentioned is Zechariah 4:7-10, a passage which was interpreted later by the Jews in a messianic sense. However, most NT references refer back to one of two additional OT texts:

1. Psalm 118:21-22: In this case the Psalmist was probably utilizing a proverb meaning that what was once considered useless and rejected has now become important. He may have been referring to himself in this psalm. The most famous historical illustration of this principle is the story of Michelangelo choosing a piece of marble so flawed that no other sculptor wanted to use it. From it he carved “David.”

This psalm figures in two NT passages, both of which refer to the stone as Jesus and cite His death on the cross as an example of His rejection by the people: Matthew 21:42 and Acts 4:10-12.

2. Isaiah 28:16: This passage, in its historical context, refers to the fact that Jewish leaders had made an alliance with Egypt hoping to be protected against the Assyrians. Isaiah tells them that their true strength and foundation is faith in God.

The NT allusions to this verse appear in two places. In Ephesians 2:19-22, Jesus is pictured as the cornerstone of the household of God, the church. In our subject passage, I Peter 2:4-6, there is an interesting addition in that the cornerstone is living, unlike other stones. And if we are in Him, we will also live.

Unproductive Ground

Rocky soil is not able to support life, as Jesus taught in his parable of the soils. The same is true for those who have turned their hearts to stone and rejected God's word.

Stone of Stumbling

I have had my fair share of tripping over something on the ground that I didn't see, and this happening must have been much more frequent in the days when paved streets and walkways were few and far between. Isaiah 8:11-15 utilized this image to convey the fact that God was a sanctuary to him, but to the rest of Israel He was a snare, a trap, and a rock of stumbling (or offense). The Greek word translated in these various ways is skandalon, from which we get the word “scandal.” Christ is the scandalous fact of history.

This idea is developed by NT writers in two passages:

1. I Peter 2:8-10: Peter concludes his “rock” passage that began in verse 4 by showing the contrast between the disobedient, ethnic Israel who rejected Jesus and the new, spiritual Israel who accepted him.

2. Similarly, Paul in Romans 9:30-33 refers to the Isaiah passage as predicting the fact that the Jews would, on a whole, reject Jesus as their Christ. And in particular the fact that they rejected righteousness based on faith in favor of the law and works.

Conclusion

Christ polarizes opinions, and by using the image of a rock both possibilities are illustrated. John Oswalt (The Book of Isaiah:1-39, p. 234) has perhaps expressed it best:

“The attitude we take toward God will determine what aspect of him we will experience. To those who sanctify him, who give him a place of importance in their lives...he becomes a sanctuary, a place of refuge and peace. But to those who will not give him such a place in their lives, he becomes a stone to trip over. He does not change; only our attitude determines how we experience him...Those who will not make a place for him will keep colliding with him and tripping over him, for he is there, whether they acknowledge him or not. Because this is fact of which their hypothesis does not take account, their experiment will keep failing and he will be the cause of it, not because of some vindictive streak in him, but simply because he is and they are trying to live as if he were not.”

I Peter 2:21 This is not the same as asking ourselves “What would Jesus do?” We are to imitate him in suffering and dying to ourselves.

 I Peter 2:25 Whereas Jesus calls Peter the shepherd, Peter calls Jesus the only shepherd (Just like his calling Christ the rock earlier on).

 

I Peter 1

Below is the standard format of ancient Greek and Roman letters, showing how this lines up with I Peter.

1. OPENING GREETINGS (1-2a)

2. PRAYER (1:2b)

3. THANKSGIVING (1:3-12)

4. SPECIAL CONTENTS

5. PERSONAL GREETINGS (5:11-14a)/ DOXOLOGY and/or BENEDICTION

Two problems to deal with in this letter. The first is whether this is one or two letters. The problem with I Peter is that it has two identical doxologies-- look at 4:11 and 5:11. The next problem relates to authorship. Both issues can be addressed by looking at the structure of the book.

Authorship

I Peter 1:1a It claims to be written by Simon Peter the apostle, which is the traditional view. Unfortunately, there is a major problem in accepting this view so I want to deal with it at some length first. Many students of this letter have questioned whether someone with the apostle Peter’s background could have produced this beautifully organized composition in polished Greek. By contrast, II Peter IS written in rather poor Greek, more like we would expect from a Galilean fisherman.

The standard liberal view is that some unknown author wrote this letter and then attached Peter's name to it; they call it a “pious forgery.” We need to lay this to rest before continuing, because there is no need wasting our time studying this letter if it was basically written by a liar.

Evidence of Peter as author  We have the advantage of possessing several examples of Peter's speeches found in the first half of the Book of Acts (Day of Pentacost in Acts 2, when he healed the lame man and defended himself in front of the Jewish authorities in Acts 3-4, his preaching after the escape from prison in Acts 5, and during the events surrounding the conversion of the Gentile Cornelius in Acts 10.) So we can compare them to this epistle. We will only look at Chapter 1 of this letter for possible correspondences.

Common themes important to Peter:

1:3, 21 mentions “resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead.” Peter' speech at Pentacost: Acts 2:24; 4:10

1:5,7,13 Jesus will be revealed again in the last days: Acts 3:20-21

1:8 the fact that only some people were chosen as witnesses to Christ: Acts 10:39-41.

1:10 prophets prophesy about salvation to come later: Acts 3:24; 10:43

1:11, 21 Christ's died but was raised by God in glory: Acts 3:15; 5:30-31

1:10-12 talks about the OT predictions that Jesus would suffer and die: Acts 2:23-31; 3:18

1:13 grace from Christ: Acts 3:19

1:14-16 appeals to audience to turn from their former ways: Acts 3:26

1:17 God or Jesus (appointed by God) to be judge of all: Acts 10:42 

 

Peter's Speeches and I Peter

I Peter 1                                             Acts 3                             Acts 10

1:14 prior ignorance.                         v. 17

v. 14: repent, turn                              v. 26

vv. 14-16: Gentiles can be holy                                                vv. 28-29

v. 17: God the Judge                                                                  v. 42

v. 17: impartial God, fear of God                                             vv. 34-35

v. 18: “silver and gold”                     v. 6

v. 20: Christ made manifest              v. 40

v. 21: God raised Christ v. 15           v. 40

v. 21: faith in God through Christ     v. 16

v. 25: word preached, good news      vv. 36-37

Many results of salvation are given in I Peter 1:13-25, as well as Acts 3 and 10. As an exercise, list as many as you can find.

Specific Greek vocabulary used:

Just in verses 14-18, there are five words or phrases that appear (almost exclusively) in speeches of Peter in Acts:

1:14 ignorance Only 4x in NT, also Acts 3:17

1:17 “Call on” Only 7x in NT. Others associated with Peter in Acts 2:21 and 9:41

1:17 “respecter of persons,” also Acts 10:34 (only one other in NT)

1:18 “ancestors or fathers,” also in Acts 3:13; 3:22; 3:25; 5:30

1:18 Contrast between true riches and “silver or gold.” Acts 3:6 Peter heals the lame man.

Were there any particular spiritual attributes that caused him to be chosen as one of the Twelve in the

 first place? Although we can probably come up with a few, the bottom line is probably that Christ

 chose him instead not for what he was, but what he could become. In this respect, Peter is probably a 

better role model for us than Paul. Paul just needed to be pointed in a slightly different direction in 

order to become an effective witness. Peter, on the other hand, exhibited all the worst traits most of us 

show. But God miraculously turned him into a mature Christian whose life and writings provide a 

valuable lesson for us today.

 

There is still the issue of the Greek style of the letter. There is third alternative, however: that Peter wrote this letter with the help of a co-author or “amanuensis.” In NT times an amanuensis might be a mere secretary taking down Peter's words verbatim or more akin to an executive assistant who was given some leeway in the phrasing of the author's basic thoughts.

The Structure of 1 Peter

Introduction (1:1-2)

I. The Mercy and Salvation Shown to Man by God (1:3-2:10)

A. Believers’ Status before God: As Individuals (1:3-12)

B. Our Behavior in Light of this Status (1:13-25)

A’. Believers’ Status Before God: As a Body (2:1-10)

-----------------------

II. The Glorification of God by Believers’ Behavior (2:11-5:11)

A. Submission to Human Institutions (2:11-3:12)

B. Christ as Lord and Example to Believers (3:13-4:11) DOXOLOGY

A’. Submission to Persecution and to God’s Institutions (4:12-5:11) DOXOLOGY

Conclusion (5:12-14)

Each individual section is also arranged symmetrically.

The “two letter” theory is doubtful because last section is needed for the symmetry that you find in all 

the books of the Bible. Also, the main theme of the letter is suffering, and the root word pascho 

(suffer/suffering) appears exactly twelve times in the epistle only if you count the several uses in the 

last chapter. There is a purpose for the extra doxology, as we will see in a minute.

The particular arrangement of sections you see above only appears in two other NT writings, I and II 

Thessalonians.

a. Like I Peter, all three letters are basically eight-part compositions with an introduction, conclusion and two parallel ABA structures.

b. In each of the three epistles one or more of the standard elements of a ancient epistle appear 

in unexpected settings to help define how the book is put together. Thus, the Thessalonian 

letters utilize two thanksgivings and two prayers to make up the four “A” elements of their 

structures. In I Peter, on the other hand, the unusual appearance of an extra doxology at 4:11 

identifies where Section IIB ends.

 

Why should these three particular letters be written in the same distinctive style? Look at the first verse 

in either I or II Thessalonians. The authors are given as Paul, Silvanus (i.e. Silas), and Timothy. Paul 

often as a courtesy mentions his fellow workers with him at the start of his letters, but then in the body 

of the letter he reverts to the first person (I, me, my). However, throughout most of the Thessalonian 

letters he writes in the second person (we), leading some scholars to suspect that Silvanus and/or 

Timothy were actual co-authors of the letters. 

 

What does all this have to do with I Peter? Look at I Peter 5:12: “With the help of Silvanus... I have 

written to your briefly.” This may bother some people since Silas was not an apostle, but remember 

that neither were Mark or Luke, and Peter was the guiding light behind the letter.

Recipients

A detailed discussion of this issue is found in I Peter: Original Audience.

There are two opposing views among Christian theologians regarding the status of the Jewish people today in God's eyes, and you can find support for both views in Scripture. One is that the Jews are still God's chosen people and that the largely Gentile church is a mere parenthesis in God's overall plan for the Jewish people (Dispensational View – Scofield, Ryrie). The other view (Successionist) is that the Church, both Jewish and Gentile believers in Christ, has entirely replaced the ethnic Jews as God's chosen people. These passages in I Peter seem to support the Successionist point of view, but the truth may lie somewhere in between these two extremes, as some have proposed.

I Peter 2b This is one of the clearest formulations of the Trinity in the NT. Note that each member of the Godhead has a different function: The Father chose us by his foreknowledge, the Holy Spirit sanctifies, and Christ is an example for us to live a life full of obedience. This represents the past, present and future aspects of salvation.

I Peter 1:3-12

The most obvious reason that these nine verses should be read together is that they constitute one single sentence in the Greek. Talk about run-on sentences!!

Peter begins his letter, as Paul usually does, with a theological section before discussing the consequences of that theology on our lives individually and as a corporate body. Sometimes we want to cut to the chase and focus on application without first setting the stage by reminding ourselves where we stand in relation to God because of Christ's sacrifice. Almost all the references to Christ in this epistle are in relation to his suffering.

The body of this unit is also arranged as an ABA structure. The central theme of suffering and joy is presented in 1:6-8 (note how it starts and ends with joy/rejoice). Before and after these verses are heavily packed theological statements describing our standing before God. For example, look at the descriptions of a Christian's blessings in vv. 3-5: new birth, living hope, imperishable inheritance, shielded by God's power until the day of salvation. This is the necessary theological background that recipients of letter (and we today) need to be reminded of before going into the meat of the book which will revisit the subject of sufferings in our present life. We may have to endure suffering, but look at the hope we have in Christ.

1 Peter 1:13-25

Beginning with “Therefore,” this section builds on many of the theological concepts of the previous section, and starts to bring them into the realm of practical behavior. This unit is characterized by an string of command verbs (each one could be discussed at length, but just look at them as a whole and mark for future study on your own: The first command in verse 13 “prepare your minds for action” reads literally in the Greek, “Gird up the loins of your mind.” Jews celebrated the Passover by girding up their loins (i.e., pulling up and tying their outer garment), showing that they were ready to depart Egypt for the promised land at a moment's notice. Christians should be prepared to depart this world at any moment in the same manner. 

Then, be self- controlled (v. 13), set your hope on grace (both daily grace and the grace that will occur at Christ's Second Coming (v. 13), do not conform to evil desires (like Paul's command not to be conformed to this world) (v. 14), be holy (v. 15), and live in reverent fear (v. 17). One ancient translation of v. 17 reads: “If you say, Our Father...” perhaps in reference to the Lord's Prayer.

Verse 18 presents an image of slaves buying their freedom (pertinent to a Gentile audience) while v. 19 uses the image of a lamb sacrificed on the altar for sins (more meaningful to a Jewish audience). John 1:20-21 gives the alpha and omega of God's actions in Christ incorporated by believers in the twin ideas of faith and hope. The third member of the triad, love, appears in vv. 22-25.

Peter follows these commands with another string of verbs to remind his audience of what they have already done or had done to them by God: you were redeemed from your futile ways (v. 18), received the revelation of Christ (v. 20), you have come to believe God (v. 21), your faith and hope are set on God (v. 21), purified yourself (v. 22), have obeyed the truth (v. 22), you have genuine love from the heart (v. 22), have been born again (v. 23). This last statement takes us all the way back to the first verse in the body of the letter (He has given us new birth: 1:3). This is one of the reasons that some scholars think this letter is somehow connected with a baptism, perhaps a baptismal sermon by Peter which he later incorporated into a letter. Whether or not that is true, it is certainly worth emphasizing with Peter that in Christ we have been born anew and are a new creation.

This idea leads naturally to the final theme in the chapter: God's word and what it accomplishes. In vv. 24-25, Peter quotes from Isaiah 40:6-8 “For 'all men are like grass and all their glory is like the wildflower; the grass withers and the flower falls, but the word of the Lord stands forever.' and this is the word that was preached to you.” We know from Genesis that the whole world was created by God's word. But that is a creation that is cursed and perishing. Now we are reminded that it is this same word that makes each of us a new creation, but one that will not perish with the old creation, but live forever.

 

I PETER: ORIGINAL AUDIENCE

John Wenham, in his book The Enigma of Evil, has a chapter on the subject of Hell. One section of his discussion is entitled “Traditional Orthodoxy Not to be Surrendered Lightly.” He basically states, and I agree with him, that traditional Christian beliefs on a particular subject may possibly have errors in them that have crept in over the years. However, the reasons behind those beliefs should be studied very seriously before abandoning them in favor of the latest trend. The onus should be on those who go against the consensus option to present overwhelming arguments to counter what the majority of Christians believe. Although his statements apply mainly to doctrinal issues, not specific exegetical issues such as the subject at hand, I think his general approach is a sound one.

Of the eighteen commentaries in my library (and they include liberal and conservative authors from about every major denomination) which address this issue, all agree that I Peter is addressed to an all-Gentile or majority-Gentile audience. So I will try to summarize some of their arguments and include a few of my own.

To start with, it must be admitted that about the only thing harder to determine than the exact authorship and date of a biblical book is its intended audience, which often has to be guessed at based on subtle clues within the body of the letter. The situation of I Peter presents an interesting problem in which historical background, early church tradition, nature of the language used (literal or figurative), word studies, and the mode of the NT's use of OT scripture all come into play.

I Peter 1:1

“Exiles of the Dispersion” This sort of language (also found in 1:17 and 2:11) originally applied to the scattering of the people of Israel. That is not in question. However, in NT writings it could also refer to all believers being strangers and foreigners on this earth looking for a heavenly home (Hebrews 11:13-16; 13:14). Some have cite as a parallel the opening of the Epistle of James to prove that literal language is also being used in I Peter 1:1. Interestingly, R.V.G. Tasker (Tyndale Commentaries, James) actually uses the reverse logic, which is also possible. He believes that the Epistle of James was written to all Christians, not just Jewish ones, by appealing to the analogous language of I Peter 1:1, which almost everyone agrees is a metaphorical reference to all Christians.

Even assuming for the moment that James was writing to ethnic Jews (and most commentators agree to that fact), that does not prove that Peter utilized similar phrases in the same manner. One telling factor to note is that the historical situation in the church had changed drastically between the time James was writing (probably well before the Council of Jerusalem in 49 AD when the question of even allowing Gentiles into fellowship without prior circumcision was up for discussion) and the situation in 62-68 AD when I Peter was written (after Paul had completed all of his missionary journeys). The fairly consistent pattern in Acts is that Paul first preaches to a small group of Jews or at a synagogue in a new town; a few Jews are receptive to the message along with Gentile God-fearers; most of the Jews in the town are not convinced or openly antagonistic so Paul turns exclusively to the Gentiles, who rapidly constitute the majority in the fledgling churches in the Roman world. Especially see Paul turning his back on the Jews in order to concentrate on the Gentiles in Acts 13:46, 18:6 and 28:28.

One friend of mine stated, “I’m pretty sure that some of the people living where the dispersed Jewish Christians lived (the pagans or non-believers) heard the Gospel and became Christians, but I am confident that Peter, Paul, and Barnabas were fulfilling God’s plan to bring the dispersed back into the fold.” It would be more consistent with the historical account at the time of I Peter's writing to say, “I'm pretty sure that some of the Jews dispersed in pagan lands became Christians along with the converted Gentiles.” Even early on in church history (49 AD), the Jerusalem church could write a letter to Gentile Christians living in Antioch, Syria and Cilicia (Acts 15:23).

I agree that Peter, Paul and Barnabas were indirectly fulfilling God's plan to bring a remnant of the dispersed back into the fold, but not in the manner suggested. Paul specifically outlines his plan in Romans 9-11. It is best summarized in Romans 11:13: “Now I am speaking to you Gentiles. Inasmuch then as I am an apostle to the Gentiles, I glorify my ministry in order to make my own people jealous, and thus save some of them.” Note Paul's self-identification as “an apostle to the Gentiles,” which also occurs in Acts 9:15 and 22:21. This is quite different from the implication I was given in my friend's comment: “We hear these people called the ten 'lost' tribes of Israel, but God had not forgotten them and was, in the first century period of the 'ekklesia,' fulfilling His promise to bring them back into the fold. This was the primary mission given to Paul and Barnabas.”

There is also the confusing appeal to Ephesians 2:12, which seems to rely on the very mistaken notion that it was written to a Jewish audience. As far as I am aware, Paul does not directly address Jewish Christians in any of his letters (in keeping with his role as apostle to the Gentiles). So the common language in Ephesians and I Peter actually helps prove that I Peter is also written to a predominantly Gentile audience. Paul is teaching, as almost all scholars believe, that the Gentiles were once excluded from status as God's people, but that is no longer the case.

And a further appeal to Hebrews 8:8-10 is more than a little strange. After quoting these words from Jeremiah 31, the author of Hebrews goes on to interpret these verses as showing that Jesus has fulfilled this prophecy already and that the reconstituted people of God are all those who believe, whether Jewish or Gentile by background. This teaching is, of course, consistent with all that Paul has to say on the subject when he stresses, among other things, that being a true child of Abraham has nothing to do with one's lineage.

All this aside, what is the probability that Peter would be writing to an all- or mainly-Gentile audience instead of his fellow Jews? In favor of the concept are the following facts: (a) Peter brags in Acts 15:7 that he was the instrument God chose to first bring the Gospel message to the Gentiles; (b) he was the primary champion of adding Gentiles to the Church without first requiring them to be circumcised; (c) most of his ministry after being chased out of Jerusalem took place in primarily Gentile territory (Galatians 2:11, I Corinthians 1:12, and I Peter 5:13 (Babylon almost certainly stands for Rome in this last reference, as in Revelation and according to early church tradition); (d) the letter closes by addressing “all of you who are in Christ”; and (e) II Peter is widely addressed to “those who have received a faith as precious as ours.” Considering the late date of Peter's writing, this last point indicates a mainly Gentile audience.

I Peter 1:14

“former ignorance” – Ignorance is used elsewhere in the NT to refer to Gentiles (Acts 17:23,30). The idea is also expressed by the word “darkness” as in Ephesians 5:8.

“desires” – It is terms like this as well as the more obvious descriptions of the audience's former life in 2:11-12,16,25; 3:10-12; 4:2-5 that provide the strongest evidence in most commentators' minds that the letter is addressed to former non-believing Gentiles. The sort of past immoral behavior being described does not fit at all for Jews, who were admired by many pagans for their upright behavior. To describe his past audience's history as a bunch of renegade Jews who freely indulged in pagan hedonism is simply beyond belief (see note on 2:12 below for the meaning of the word “Gentiles” in this context).

I Peter 2:10

However, Peter quotes Hosea in those verses indicating that the dispersed ten tribes were 'no longer a people.'” While Hosea was originally referring to the dispersed tribes, the NT (as it does with practically all “fulfilled” OT prophecies) uses OT verses typically, analogously and/or metaphorically to apply to Christ and/or the Church, in this case referring specifically to former non-believing Gentiles. Just look at how Paul uses this same Hosea passage in Romans 9:24-25 to prove this point. Paul specifically states that it applies to the Church, containing both Jews and Gentiles. One needs to carefully study the way NT authors (re)interpret OT passages in order to appreciate how different it is from the rather wooden, literal manner in which dispensationalists (in particular) utilize OT prophecy to refer only to the Jewish people. Some good reference books like J. Barton Payne's Encyclopedia of Biblical Prophecy or Beale and Carson's Commentary on the New Testament Use of the Old Testament will give a better appreciation of how nuanced and non-obvious the NT approach actually is.

Appeal to Jesus' words in John 10:16 about “other sheep” is not particularly persuasive either since, again, almost all commentators explain this as a clear reference to the Gentiles. Paul picks up on this language when he talks on several occasions about the mystery now revealed of God making one people out of two, referring to the Church being formed from believing Jews and Gentiles.

I Peter 2:12

This verse doesn't provide nearly as persuasive an argument as it first appears. In the NT, the term “Gentiles” is also used to describe those who are not Christians (I Corinthians 5:1, 12:2; Matthew 6:7; Acts 4:25). The word “dogs,” originally applied to ethnic Gentiles, also refers to non-Christians in Philippians 3:2 and Revelation 22:15.

1 Pet. 2:9 “But you are a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people for God's own possession, that you may proclaim the excellencies of Him who has called you out of darkness into His marvelous light.

Again, “darkness” most appropriately describes the situation of the Gentiles, not the Jews who, as Paul states in Romans, had every advantage and were uniquely in the light of God's truth. Although there are not any direct quotes from the OT here, the language used is from Exodus, Deuteronomy and other passages where it originally applied to the Jewish people. That is not in dispute. The question is, “How is Peter using this language in his present context?” To say that these phrases can only apply to the Jewish people is to ignore some key texts.

Revelation 5:9-10 “...by your blood you ransomed for God saints from every tribe and language and people and nation; you have made them to be a kingdom and priests serving our God...”

Acts 15:14 “My brothers, listen to me. Simeon has related how God first looked favorably on the Gentiles, to take from among them a people for his name.”

Revelation 1:5b-6 “To him who loves us and freed us from our sins by his blood, and made us to be a kingdom, priests serving his God and Father...”

II Corinthians 6:14:16 “Do not be mismatched with unbelievers. For what partnership is there between righteousness and lawlessness?...For we are the temple of the living God; as God said, 'I will live in them and walk among them, and I will be their God, and they shall be my people.'”

Titus 2:14 “He it is who gave himself for us that he might redeem us from all iniquity and purify for himself a people of his own who are zealous for good deeds.”

The first two examples specifically refer to Gentiles, and the others address situations in predominantly Gentile churches.

“Chosen” (or elect) in the OT always refers to the Jewish people but can also refer in the NT to Christians. A quick look at a concordance for the NT occurrences of this word, especially in the addresses of epistles to predominantly Gentile churches will show that the onus is definitely on those who feel the usage is different in this particular case.

Romans 15:8

“For I say that Christ has become a servant to the circumcision on behalf of the truth of God to confirm the promises given to the fathers.”

Oddly, some people quote this verse as demonstrating that that I Peter is addressed to a Jewish audience. However, as long as it is, it can actually be used to prove that Gentiles are the intended recipients. The above is only a partial quote. The rest of it goes, “and in order that the Gentiles might glorify God for his mercy. As it is written, 'Therefore I will confess you among the Gentiles, and sing praises to your name'; and again he says, 'Rejoice, O Gentiles, with his people; and again, “Praise the Lord, all you Gentiles, and let all the peoples praise him' and again Isaiah says, 'The root of Jesse shall come, the one who rises to rule the Gentiles; in him the Gentiles shall hope.'”

Yes, Jesus as well as Peter and Paul did come to fulfill the promise given to Israel. However, this was not to be accomplished by physically reuniting the twelve tribes of Israel on earth, but through the fact that all mankind, Jew and Gentile, would come to God and be united as one people glorifying His name through Christ's redeeming actions. This is the mystery hidden through the ages that Paul talks about. See the very thorough study by Beale and Gladd entitled Hidden But Now Revealed.

Finally, there is the overarching issue in exegesis regarding the nature of the language used, whether literal or figurative. I have been arguing a mainly figurative interpretation of several of the key passages, but is that probable? There are several tests in general to distinguish between the two types of language, but in this case the only one that might be of use is to consider the context of the overall genre. Poetry, parables, and most prophetic literature are loaded with similes and metaphors, etc. History and law books in the Bible are mainly literal. 

Epistles, unfortunately, fall half-way in between. Therefore one has to look at the particular epistle for examples of definitely figurative language in other passages. In the case of I Peter (and even more so in II Peter) it is obvious that the author enjoys using picturesque language including quotations from OT poetry (1:24-25; 2:6-8; 2:10; 2:22; 3:10-12; 4:18 and 5:5b) and similes (1:14; 1:18; 1:19; 2:2; 2:5; 2:16; 2:25; 5:8). Obvious metaphorical language is also present in such phrases as “sprinkled with his blood,” “new birth,” tested by fire,” “the time of your exile,” a lamb without defect or blemish,” “spiritual milk,” living stones,” spiritual house,” “shepherd and guardian of your souls,” etc. Notice that most of these examples come from the first half of the epistle, where the problematic language regarding the probable audience appears.