4. Closing Greetings (5:12–14)
4. CLOSING GREETINGS (5:12–14)
COMMENTARY
1. SALUTATION: PETER THE APOSTLE TO SOJOURNERS IN GOD’S ETERNAL CARE (1:1–2)
1. The author identifies himself as Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ. The word ‘apostle’ (apostolos) was used occasionally before the New Testament and had the general meaning ‘messenger’. But according to the gospels Jesus gave this term a richer meaning by designating twelve of his disciples as ‘apostles’ (Luke 6:13). After Pentecost, those who had been Jesus’ disciples (‘students’) began to function as his apostles (Acts 1:25).
The supreme importance of the apostles is suggested by the fact that the phrase ‘of Jesus Christ’ is attached to no other New Testament office: we do not read of ‘teachers of Jesus Christ’ or ‘prophets of Jesus Christ’ or ‘evangelists of Jesus Christ’, only of ‘apostles of Jesus Christ’. Those who held this office had authority at least equal to the Old Testament prophets, for the apostles could speak and write God’s very words (Acts 5:3–4; Rom. 2:16; 1 Cor. 2:13; 14:37; 2 Cor. 13:3; Gal. 1:8–9; 1 Thess. 2:13; 4:8, 15; 2 Thess. 3:6, 14; 2 Pet. 3:2) and thus could write the words which became New Testament Scripture (1 Cor. 14:37; 2 Pet. 3:16, cf. Rev. 22:18–19; 1 Thess. 5:27; 2 Thess. 3:14).
The opening phrase reminds the readers, then, that Peter is writing in his role as an apostle of Jesus Christ: the words are also God’s words, and we should receive them as that.
The next phrase, To the exiles of the Dispersion, represents a compact Greek phrase which quite literally says, ‘to chosen sojourners of the Dispersion’. (RSV includes the word ‘chosen’ in v. 2.)
The term ‘exile’, parepidēmoi, always refers to a temporary resident in a foreign place. Abraham called himself ‘an alien and sojourner (parepidēmoi)’ among the Hittites (Gen. 23:4, LXX). Heb. 11:13 says that all the heroes of faith from Abel to Abraham acknowledged that they were ‘aliens and sojourners (parepidēmoi) on the earth’. The related verb is used to report a decree from the king of Egypt ordering that visitors should not sojourn (parepidēmeō) more than twenty days in Alexandria, because many were becoming enamoured of luxurious life in the prosperous city and neglecting essential agricultural work in the rural areas (Epistle of Aristeas, 110; cf. 1 Clement 1:2).
These examples show that ‘exiles’ (RSV) is not the best rendering, for no connotation of forced dwelling away from one’s homeland is found in the word. Likewise, the rendering ‘strangers’ (AV; NIV has ‘strangers in the world’) wrongly suggests that they were not known well by their neighbours, something which was untrue of Abraham, for example (Gen. 23:4–5), or of other Old Testament saints (Heb. 11:13). Better is the phrase ‘those who reside as aliens’ (NASB), which, though lengthy, captures the idea of temporary residence away from one’s homeland, as does the somewhat archaic word ‘sojourners’.
Nowhere else in ancient Jewish or Christian literature does a writer qualify ‘sojourners’ with the adjective ‘elect’ (eklektos), as Peter does here (translated ‘chosen’ in RSV, and moved to v. 2). The word in the New Testament (twenty-two times) always refers to persons chosen by God from a group of others who are not chosen, and chosen for inclusion among God’s people, as recipients of great privilege and blessing (Matt. 20:16; 24:31; Rom. 8:33; etc.). Many of Peter’s readers would hear in the term echoes of its use in the LXX to refer to God’s ‘chosen’ people, Israel (Ps. 89:3 (LXX 88:4); 105 (LXX 104):6, 43; 106(LXX 105):5; Isa. 42:1; 43:20; 45:4; 65:9, 15, 22 (LXX 23), and would conclude that Peter thought of them as having a privileged status before God at least equal to that enjoyed by the chosen people whom God protected, preserved and blessed in the Old Testament (cf. 1 Pet. 2:4–10).
The phrase ‘chosen sojourners’ thus becomes a two-word sermon to Peter’s readers: they are ‘sojourners’, not in an earthly sense (for many no doubt had lived in one city their whole lives), but spiritually: their true homeland is heaven (cf. Phil. 3:20) and any earthly residence therefore temporary. Yet they are ‘chosen’ sojourners, ones whom the King of the universe has chosen to be his own people, to benefit from his protection, and to inhabit his heavenly kingdom.
The Dispersion (diaspora) was a term used by Greek-speaking Jews to refer to Jewish people ‘scattered’ throughout the nations, ‘dispersed’ from their homeland, Israel (see John 7:35). Here and in James 1:1, ‘Dispersion’ refers to Christians, but this does not imply that Peter was writing only to Jewish Christians (see Introduction on ‘Destination and readers’). Rather, the term here has a new spiritual sense, referring to Christians ‘dispersed’ throughout the world and living away from their heavenly homeland (yet hoping some day to reach it). The word thus reinforces the meaning of ‘sojourners’ and adds the idea that they are part of a ‘worldwide’ scattering of Christians.
The readers lived in Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia, five names describing four Roman provinces south of the Black Sea, in what today is called Asia Minor, mostly in modern Turkey (see map on p. 19). (‘Asia’ then often meant not the continent of Asia, but a single province just east of the Aegean Sea.) While three of the names (Galatia, Cappadocia, and Asia) refer to individual Roman provinces, ‘Pontus’ and ‘Bithynia’ were two regions that comprised a single province called ‘Bithynia and Pontus’. Their separation into first and last positions on Peter’s list is best explained by Hort’s suggestion that the list describes the route to be followed by the bearer of Peter’s letter (probably Silvanus, 1 Pet. 5:12; see Introduction, pp. 23f.). Hort’s theory has been corrected with respect to its details by Colin Hemer (see Introduction, pp. 38f.), who argues convincingly for the following route: the bearer of the letter would land at a port of Pontus (Hemer argues that only Amisus, modern Samsun, would have provided a feasible route inland from the coast), travel to Galatia (stopping at Amasia in eastern Galatia), then through Zela to Caesarea in Cappadocia, then westward on the great trade route which traversed south Galatia (passing through the Pauline churches of Iconium and Pisidian Antioch), then to Laodicea in Asia, then perhaps into other churches of Asia (Colossae?, even Ephesus?), and finally through the major churches of Bithynia (Nicea, Nicomedia, and Chalcedon). From Chalcedon or Byzantium on the Bosporus he could board a ship returning directly to Rome. Thus, all the major centres of Christian influence in Asia Minor would be reached.
2. The word chosen has been discussed in connection with verse 1, where it appears in the Greek text modifying ‘so-journers’ (RSV ‘exiles’).
And destined is the RSV rendering of kata prognōsin, more literally translated, ‘according to the foreknowledge’ (NASB, NIV, AV). The related verb ‘foreknow’ can refer not just to God’s knowing a fact (e.g. that Peter’s readers would be chosen sojourners in Asia Minor), but to his knowing people with a personal, loving, fatherly knowledge (Rom. 8:29; 11:2; 1 Pet. 1:20; cf. ‘know’ in John 10:14; 1 Cor. 8:3; 2 Tim. 2:19). Thus ‘according to the foreknowledge’ suggests ‘according to God’s fatherly care for you before the world was made’.
But what is ‘according to the foreknowledge of God the Father’? The AV, NIV, and NASB make the phrase modify ‘chosen’ by giving ‘chosen’ a verbal sense. But in the Greek text ‘chosen’ is merely an adjective (‘chosen sojourners’), and is nine words distant from this phrase. Since verse 1 contains no verb, it is most natural to let ‘according to the foreknowledge of God the Father’ modify the whole situation of the readers described in the first verse: they are ‘chosen sojourners of the Dispersion in Pontus, Galatia, etc., according to the foreknowledge of God the father’. This implies that their status as sojourners, their privileges as God’s chosen people, even their hostile environment in Pontus, Galatia, etc., were all known by God before the world began, all came about in accordance with his foreknowledge, and thus (we may conclude) all were in accordance with his fatherly love for his own people. Such foreknowledge is laden with comfort for Peter’s readers.
The same content in verse 1, namely, the entire present status of the readers, is further modified by two more prepositional phrases, sanctified by the Spirit, and for obedience to Jesus Christ and for sprinkling with his blood. Just as God’s foreknowledge refers to past time, ‘sanctification by the Spirit’ speaks of a present influence and ‘for the purpose of obedience … and … sprinkling’ looks forward to a continuing future activity or goal.
Furthermore, the verse mentions the three persons of the Trinity: God the Father … the Spirit … Jesus Christ. Peter specifies distinct actions by the different persons in the Trinity yet sees them uniting to bring about a common goal, the eternal, full salvation of these ‘chosen sojourners’.
The sanctifying work of the Holy Spirit, the work whereby he gradually works in Christians to free them more and more from remaining sin and to make them increasingly like Christ in holiness, faith, and love, is in view in the phrase and sanctified by the Spirit. But this RSV translation puts the activity too exclusively in the past: there is no past tense verb in the phrase, which literally says, ‘in sanctification of (the) Spirit’.
The NIV and NASB, having focused too narrowly on the adjective ‘chosen’ as the reference point for ‘according to the foreknowledge of God the Father’, now must continue the same pattern, giving the puzzling result, ‘chosen … by the sanctifying work of the Spirit’. This makes little if any sense, for (1) it is hard to imagine how an activity (sanctifying work) could perform a personal action (choosing), and (2) God’s choosing, according to Scripture, is in eternity past, whereas the Spirit’s sanctifying work, according to the rest of Scripture, is something present: but how can something in eternity past (God’s choosing) be done ‘by’ something that begins only in the present (the Spirit’s sanctifying work)? (Kelly, p. 43, has to import an entirely new idea into the text: ‘This predestining choice … has been made operative by the sanctifying … action of the Spirit.’)
It is much easier, again, to see the phrase ‘in sanctification of the Spirit’ as referring to the entire present status of Peter’s readers. This allows en to have its common sense ‘in’: Peter is saying that his readers’ whole existence as ‘chosen sojourners of the Dispersion …’ is being lived ‘in’ the realm of the sanctifying work of the Spirit. The unseen, unheard activity of God’s Holy Spirit surrounds them almost like a spiritual atmosphere ‘in’ which they live and breathe, turning every circumstance, every sorrow, every hardship into a tool for his patient sanctifying work (cf. John 15:2; Rom. 8:28; 2 Cor. 4:16–18; Heb. 12:10–11; Jas 1:2–4; 1 Pet. 4:14).
For obedience to Jesus Christ indicates God’s purpose in the readers’ present existence as ‘chosen sojourners’ in their native lands: their lives ought to be leading ‘toward’ (eis) increasing obedience to Christ (cf. Eph. 2:10; 1 Thess. 4:3; John 14:15). What the Father plans and the Spirit empowers, Christ thus receives, as exalted Saviour and ruling Lord.
Some argue that obedience (hypakoē) here means initial (saving) obedience to the gospel, but Peter elsewhere uses hypakoē to refer to the daily obedience of believers (1:14 and probably 1:22; also see hypakouō in 3:6), as do Paul (Rom. 5:19; 6:16; 2 Cor. 7:15; 10:5–6; Phlm. 21) and Hebrews (5:8). No clear examples of hypakoē meaning ‘initial saving response to the gospel’ are found (for Rom. 1:5 and 15:18 are ambiguous).
Peter’s readers of course realized that their obedience in this life was always incomplete, that even the most mature Christians were painfully aware of remaining sin, and that God’s purpose, ‘obedience to Jesus Christ’, would never be completely fulfilled in this life. So Peter adds that their lives are also leading toward (eis) sprinkling with his blood.
Sprinkled blood in the Old Testament was a visual reminder to God and to his people that a life had been given, a sacrifice had been paid. But in most Old Testament sacrifices the blood was sprinkled on the altar or on the mercy seat (Lev. 4:17; 5:9; 16:14, 15, 19; Num. 19:4). In only three cases was blood ceremonially sprinkled on the people themselves: (1) in the covenant initiation ceremony at Mt. Sinai when Moses sprinkled half the blood from the sacrificial oxen on all the people (Exod. 24:5–8; Heb. 9:19; and perhaps Isa. 52:15 [Aquila, cf. Theodotian]); (2) in the ceremony of ordination for Aaron and his sons as priests (Exod. 29:21; probably also Heb. 10:22); and (3) in the purification ceremony for a leper who had been healed from leprosy (Lev. 14:6–7).
If 1 Peter 1:2 has the first in view, it means that God’s purpose for the readers is that they be initiated into God’s covenant and become his people, by being figuratively ‘sprinkled’ with the blood of Christ. The ‘sprinkling’ would thus refer to the beginning of the Christian life. But the fact that Peter lists this sprinkling after ‘sanctification by the Spirit’ and after ‘obedience to Jesus Christ’ makes this option unlikely, as does the term eis (‘for, leading toward’) in ‘for … sprinkling’.
If the second ceremony, the ordination of priests, is in mind, it means that God’s purpose for Peter’s readers is that they should figuratively be ordained as priests by ‘sprinkling’ with the blood of Christ. But Peter already sees them as priests by virtue of their membership in the New Covenant (‘you are … a royal priesthood’, 2:9), as does Hebrews 10:22 (where the perfect tense verbs ‘sprinkled’ and ‘washed’ indicate completed events in the past), so this background is unlikely.
The third possibility, the sprinkling with blood for purification from leprosy, seems more appropriate. This passage (Lev. 14:6–7) is less obscure than we may think, for the ceremony was used for any kind of skin disease (Lev. 14:54–57) serious enough to exclude the sick person from the community: that person was to live alone and shout, ‘Unclean, unclean’ (Lev. 13:45–46). Thus, Leviticus 14:6–7 is an excellent passage to represent cleansing from any defilement that would disrupt fellowship with God and his people. David apparently alludes to it in Psalm 51:7: ‘Purge me with hyssop, and I shall be clean’ (the LXX says, ‘sprinkle me with hyssop’, using rhantizō, related to Peter’s noun rhantismos, ‘sprinkling’), here referring not to the physical defilement of leprosy but the spiritual defilement of sin. In both cases, fellowship was disrupted but membership among the covenant people of God was retained.
This ‘sprinkling with blood’ fits 1 Peter 1:2. Although God intended these ‘chosen sojourners’ to live ‘for obedience to Jesus Christ’, they were frequently ‘defiled’ by sin. Peter reminds them that their future includes continual sprinkling with the blood of Christ, that is, continual restoration of fellowship with God and his people through the sacrificial blood of Christ figuratively sprinkled over them, a continual reminder to God that their sins are forgiven and that they are welcome in God’s presence and among his people (cf. 1 John 1:7 for the idea of continual application of the blood of Christ in the Christian life).
For obedience to Jesus Christ and for sprinkling with his blood thus 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; it means ‘for continual daily obedience and forgiveness’. F. H. Chase says Peter describes here ‘a life lived in accordance with the Divine will and pattern … and continually cleansed from the defilement of sin by the application of the quickening blood of Christ’. Here is simultaneous exhortation and comfort to bear in mind continually.
May grace and peace be multiplied to you is an expanded form of Paul’s frequent ‘Grace to you and peace’ (Rom. 1:7; 1 Cor. 1:3; 2 Cor. 1:2; Gal. 1:3; Eph. 1:2; Phil. 1:2; Col. 1:2; 1 Thess. 1:1; 2 Thess. 1:2; Titus 1:4; Phlm. 3). Peter also couples the Old Testament blessing of God’s peace with the New Testament blessing of grace (charis), God’s freely given, undeserved favour toward his people. Peter asks that it would be multiplied to them; that all their moments would be filled with God’s undeserved spiritual blessings.