4 And coming to Him as to a living stone, rejected by men, but choice and precious in the sight of God, 5 you also, as living stones, are being built up as a spiritual house for a holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ. 6 For [this] is contained in Scripture:

“BEHOLD I LAY IN ZION A CHOICE STONE, A PRECIOUS CORNER [stone], AND HE WHO BELIEVES IN HIM SHALL NOT BE DISAPPOINTED.” 7 This precious value, then, is for you who believe. But for those who disbelieve, “THE STONE WHICH THE BUILDERS REJECTED, THIS BECAME THE VERY CORNER [stone],” 8 and, “A STONE OF STUMBLING AND A ROCK OF OFFENSE”; for they stumble because they are disobedient to the word, and to this [doom] they were also appointed. 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; 10 for you once were NOT A PEOPLE, but now you are THE PEOPLE OF GOD; you had NOT RECEIVED MERCY, but now you have RECEIVED MERCY.

Introduction

The first time Peter and Jesus met, Jesus said something very unusual which He did with no one else:

40 One of the two who heard John [speak], and followed Him, was Andrew, Simon Peter’s brother. 41 He found first his own brother Simon, and said to him, “We have found the Messiah” (which translated means Christ). 42 He brought him to Jesus. Jesus looked at him, and said, “You are Simon the son of John; you shall be called Cephas” (which is translated Peter) (John 1:40-42).

Peter could hardly have missed the significance of this. Certainly he remembered from the Old Testament that God had changed Abram’s name to Abraham and the name of his wife Sarai to Sarah. This signified that although this couple had been childless for many years, they were to become parents, indeed the parents of a multitude (Abraham means “father of a multitude”). He also probably remembered when God changed Jacob’s name to Israel as an indication that he was to be the patriarch of the nation Israel through his sons. Now, Jesus, the Son of God, had changed Simon’s name to Peter, a name which means “rock.”

Later, after his great confession, Jesus again referred to Simon as Peter (Petros) and said on this rock (petra) he would build His church:

13 Now when Jesus came into the district of Caesarea Philippi, He [began] asking His disciples, saying, “Who do people say that the Son of Man is?” 14 And they said, “Some [say] John the Baptist; and others, Elijah; but still others, Jeremiah, or one of the prophets.” 15 He said to them, “But who do you say that I am?”

16 And Simon Peter answered and said, “Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God.”

17 And Jesus answered and said to him, “Blessed are you, Simon Barjona, because flesh and blood did not reveal [this] to you, but My Father who is in heaven.

18 “And I also say to you that you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build My church; and the gates of Hades shall not overpower it.

19 “I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; and whatever you shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.”

20 Then He warned the disciples that they should tell no one that He was the Christ (Matthew 16:13-20).

We can hardly approach the “rock” portion of 1 Peter 2 independently of what has preceded it. Our text in this lesson is crucial for several reasons.

First, 1 Peter 2:4-10 is Peter’s own commentary on the meaning of our Lord’s words to him in Matthew 16. Roman Catholicism understands our Lord’s words here very differently than evangelical Protestants. Consider the Catholic view of our Lord’s words in Matthew 16:

“This passage (especially 16:17-19) proves that Peter was the first pope. ‘The pope is crowned with a triple crown, as king of heaven, of earth, and of hell.’ He wields ‘the two swords, the spiritual and the temporal.’ ‘The Catholic Church teaches that our Lord conferred on St. Peter the first place of honor and jurisdiction in the government of his whole church, and that same authority has always resided in the popes, or bishops of Rome, as being the successors of St. Peter. Consequently, to be true followers of Christ all Christians, both among the clergy and laity, must be in communion with the See of Rome, where Peter rules in the person of his successor.’”³⁹

One of these views must be wrong. Peter’s own words indicate the teaching of Rome is in error. We shall see that our text teaches a very different view of the church (ecclesiology) than does Roman Catholicism. Our text teaches the view we need to understand and practice.

Second, the “rock” theme is introduced very early in the Bible and plays a prominent role in the Scriptures. The earliest reference to God as our “Rock” occurs in the Book of Genesis in the blessings pronounced by Jacob:

22 “Joseph is a fruitful bough, a fruitful bough by a spring; [its] branches run over a wall. 23 The archers bitterly attacked him, and shot [at him] and harassed him; 24 but his bow remained firm, and his arms were agile, from the hands of the Mighty One of Jacob (from there is the Shepherd, the Stone of Israel)” (Genesis 49:22).

At the exodus of the nation Israel from her Egyptian bondage, the “rock” became a source of life-giving water for God’s people:

“Behold, I will stand before you there on the rock at Horeb; and you shall strike the rock, and water will come out of it, that the people may drink.” And Moses did so in the sight of the elders of Israel (Exodus 17:6; see also Numbers 20:8-12).

Paul’s commentary in the New Testament on this “rock” from which the water flowed is almost astounding:

1 For I do not want you to be unaware, brethren, that our fathers were all under the cloud, and all passed through the sea; 2 and all were baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea; 3 and all ate the same spiritual food; 4 and all drank the same spiritual drink, for they were drinking from a spiritual rock which followed them; and the rock was Christ (1 Corinthians 10:1-4).

In the Book of Deuteronomy, God is repeatedly called “the Rock:”

4 “The Rock! His work is perfect, for all His ways are just; a God of faithfulness and without injustice, righteous and upright is He.

15 “But Jeshurun grew fat and kicked—you are grown fat, thick, and sleek—then he forsook God who made him, and scorned the Rock of his salvation.

18 “You neglected the Rock who begot you, and forgot the God who gave you birth.”

30 “How could one chase a thousand, and two put ten thousand to flight, unless their Rock had sold them, and the LORD had given them up? 31 Indeed their rock is not like our Rock, even our enemies themselves judge this.”

37 “And He will say, ‘Where are their gods, The rock in which they sought refuge?’” (Deuteronomy 32:4, 15, 18, 30, 37).

The “rock” imagery is sprinkled throughout the Psalms:

2 The LORD is my rock and my fortress and my deliverer, My God, my rock, in whom I take refuge; My shield and the horn of my salvation, my stronghold. (Psalm 18:2; see 18:31, 46; 31:2-3; 42:9; 61:2; 62:2, 6, 7; 71:3; 78:35; 89:26; 92:15; 95:1; 118:22; 144:1).

The “rock” symbolism continues in the prophets (see Isaiah 8:14; 17:10; 26:4; 28:16; 30:29; 31:9; 33:16; 44:8; 51:1). Daniel’s “rock” is especially fascinating:

34 “You continued looking until a stone was cut out without hands, and it struck the statue on its feet of iron and clay, and crushed them. 35 Then the iron, the clay, the bronze, the silver and the gold were crushed all at the same time, and became like chaff from the summer threshing floors; and the wind carried them away so that not a trace of them was found. But the stone that struck the statue became a great mountain and filled the whole earth” (Daniel 2:34-35).

45 “Inasmuch as you saw that a stone was cut out of the mountain without hands and that it crushed the iron, the bronze, the clay, the silver, and the gold, the great God has made known to the king what will take place in the future; so the dream is true, and its interpretation is trustworthy” (Daniel 2:45).

In the New Testament, the Lord Jesus identified Himself as the rejected “rock” in fulfillment of Psalm 118:22:

41 They said to Him, “He will bring those wretches to a wretched end, and will rent out the vineyard to other vine-growers, who will pay him the proceeds at the [proper] seasons.” 42 Jesus said to them, “Did you never read in the Scriptures, ‘THE STONE WHICH THE BUILDERS REJECTED, THIS BECAME THE CHIEF CORNER[stone]; THIS CAME ABOUT FROM THE LORD, AND IT IS MARVELOUS IN OUR EYES’? 43 Therefore I say to you, the kingdom of God will be taken away from you, and be given to a nation producing the fruit of it. 44 And he who falls on this stone will be broken to pieces; but on whomever it falls, it will scatter him like dust.” 45 And when the chief priests and the Pharisees heard His parables, they understood that He was speaking about them. 46 And when they sought to seize Him, they feared the multitudes, because they held Him to be a prophet (Matthew 21:41-45).

Paul chose to turn to the “rock” prophecies of Isaiah in chapters 8 and 28 rather than Psalm 118:

30 What shall we say then? That Gentiles, who did not pursue righteousness, attained righteousness, even the righteousness which is by faith; 31 but Israel, pursuing a law of righteousness, did not arrive at [that] law. 32 Why? Because [they did] not [pursue it] by faith, but as though [it were] by works. They stumbled over the stumbling stone, 33 just as it is written, “BEHOLD, I LAY IN ZION A STONE OF STUMBLING AND A ROCK OF OFFENSE, AND HE WHO BELIEVES IN HIM WILL NOT BE DISAPPOINTED” (Romans 9:30-33).

In his defense before the Sanhedrin, Peter turned to Psalm 118 to show that their rejection of the Lord Jesus fulfilled the Scriptures:

8 Then Peter, filled with the Holy Spirit, said to them, “Rulers and elders of the people, 9 if we are on trial today for a benefit done to a sick man, as to how this man has been made well, 10 let it be known to all of you, and to all the people of Israel, that by the name of Jesus Christ the Nazarene, whom you crucified, whom God raised from the dead—by this [name] this man stands here before you in good health. 11 He is the STONE WHICH WAS REJECTED by you, THE BUILDERS, [but] WHICH BECAME THE VERY CORNER [stone.] 12 And there is salvation in no one else; for there is no other name under heaven that has been given among men, by which we must be saved” (Acts 4:8-12).

While Jesus focused on Psalm 118 and Paul on Isaiah 8 and 28, Peter alone draws upon all three texts in 1 Peter 2 to demonstrate how the Lord Jesus Christ is the sole basis for the eternal deliverance or the destruction of men.

The third reason our passage is crucial is because it defines our relationships. Most importantly, it explains our relationship to God and then to His church through the person of Jesus Christ, the “Rock.” Furthermore, this text explains why men disdain God, reject Jesus Christ, and resist and persecute Christians. They stumble over the same “Rock” which saved us. It also defines our relationship to the nation Israel.

Fourth, after spelling out the privileges God has poured out upon us in 1 Peter 2:4-10, Peter goes on to spell out the responsibility these privileges bring. Peter tells us God’s purpose in saving us and in causing us to become “living stones,” a part of his people and of his temple, His dwelling place among men.

Finally, this text motivates our service to God and men because we are the recipients of great and marvelous privileges, all on the basis of divine grace as a result of His great mercy.

Our Text in Context

Our passage is a turning point in Peter’s first epistle. Peter began by assuring us of our hope, our confidence in those blessings which will be ours at the second coming of our Lord. At verse 14 Peter begins to speak of our present conduct based upon our future hope (see verse 13). Our life should be characterized by obedience (1:14, 22), holiness (1:14-16), godly fear (1:17-21), and love for the brethren (1:22–2:3). From verse 11 of chapter 2 onward in Peter’s epistle, the emphasis is upon our conduct in a heathen world. This conduct, as always in Scripture, is based upon our calling which Peter defines in verses 4-10 of chapter 2.

In 1:22-25, Peter introduced the concept of our new birth through the seed of the Word. In 2:1-3, Peter has moved on to the concept of growth, once again brought about by the Word. Now in 2:4-10 Peter moves from the individual dimensions to the corporate dimensions of our spiritual walk. He takes up the subject of growth, but now we are growing up together, as a building. With this he spells out our calling, our purpose. Our relationship to God, to the “Rock,” and to others is determined by our response to the Word (2:8).

The Structure of Our Text

The text, broadly outlined, divides into three sections, each with its own emphasis but all interrelated.

(1) Verses 4-6 The Christian’s relationship to the “Rock”

(2) Verses 7- 8 The unbeliever’s relationship to the “Rock”

(3) Verses 9-10 The Christian’s relationship to Israel

Believers and the “Rock”
(2:4-6)

4 And coming to Him as to a living stone, rejected by men, but choice and precious in the sight of God, 5 you also, as living stones, are being built up⁴⁰ as a spiritual house for a holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ. 6 For [this] is contained in Scripture: “BEHOLD I LAY IN ZION A CHOICE STONE, A PRECIOUS CORNER [stone], AND HE WHO BELIEVES IN HIM SHALL NOT BE DISAPPOINTED.”

In verse 4, Peter calls our attention to the Lord Jesus Christ, whom he refers to as a “living stone,” precious in the sight of God but rejected by men. In verse 5, Peter points out the believer’s relationship to Christ. If He is the “living stone,” we are also “living stones,”⁴¹ stones which are being built into a dwelling place of God from which priestly ministry is conducted and spiritual sacrifices are offered. In verse 6, Peter gives the Scriptural foundation for his teaching in verses 4 and 5.

It comes as no surprise that Peter would call the Lord Jesus a “living stone.” The Old Testament spoke of the Savior to come as a “stone” (see Daniel 2:34-45). Peter had heard the Lord Jesus refer to Himself as the “Rock” spoken of in Psalm 118:22 (Matthew 21:42). That He is referred to as a “living” stone is no great surprise either. Often, the no-gods—the idols of the heathen—were made of stone. The Old Testament prophets mocked them as lifeless objects which their worshippers had to carry about (see Deuteronomy 4:28; 28:36, 64; 29:17; 2 Kings 19:18; Isaiah 40;18-22; 44:6-23; Daniel 5:4, 23; Acts 17:29). But the Lord Jesus is alive! He has been raised from the dead, proof that He is precious in the Father’s sight. As Peter has already said, we have a “living hope” based on our trust in a living Lord whom God raised from the dead (1 Peter 1:3).

Peter contrasts God’s estimation of the Lord Jesus with that of men.⁴² In the sight of the Father, He is precious, God’s chosen One. Because of this, the blood which He shed for our sins was precious (1:19). Unbelievers view Him just the opposite way. To them, He is worthless and useless, to be rejected. It is little wonder that God’s values and man’s values are so different:

And He said to them, “You are those who justify yourselves in the sight of men, but God knows your hearts; for that which is highly esteemed among men is detestable in the sight of God” (Luke 16:15).

If the things men highly esteem are detestable to God, is it any wonder that the One who is precious⁴³ in His sight is detestable in the sight of men?

Because the Lord Jesus is the “living stone,” those who put their trust in Him also become “living stones.”⁴⁴ These “stones” share in the life of their Lord. They also share in the ministry of our Lord. Through Him, we “as living stones” become a holy priesthood, offering up spiritual sacrifices⁴⁵ to the Father which are acceptable because of Him. Peter’s words are very similar in symbol and meaning to those of the apostle Paul:

19 So then you are no longer strangers and aliens, but you are fellow citizens with the saints, and are of God’s household, 20 having been built upon the foundation of the apostles and prophets, Christ Jesus Himself being the corner [stone], 21 in whom the whole building, being fitted together is growing into a holy temple in the Lord; 22 in whom you also are being built together into a dwelling of God in the Spirit. (Ephesians 2:19-22).

This “living stone,” precious in the sight of the Father, is the corner stone of the spiritual house of which we become a part. Peter now turns to Isaiah 28:16 to show that his words are based upon the Old Testament promise of the Messiah to come. Peter called the “living stone” “elect”⁴⁶ and “precious.” All the terms found in verse 4, “choice,” “precious,” and “stone,” are found again in the citation of Isaiah 28:11 in verse 6. While the concept of Christ as the corner stone is implied in verse 5, it is stated in verse 6.⁴⁷

The last statement in verse 6 plays an important role in our text.⁴⁸ It emphasizes the blessing which comes to those who trust in Jesus of Nazareth as God’s precious stone. It also implies that those who reject Him will be disappointed, or even better, “put to shame” (see the marginal note in the NASB). The force of these words can best be understood in the light of the context in which they were originally written:

“Isaiah speaks the word of the Lord against the princes of Jerusalem who foolishly suppose that their city is secure against the threat of invasion. They speak as though they had a treaty with death and hell so that the lethal waters of the abyss could never sweep over them. God declares that their pride is no refuge, their covenant with death no security. Only one edifice can stand against the storm of destruction: God’s building, established upon one sure foundation stone. It is this figure that Jesus used when he said to Peter that the gates of hell could not prevail against his church.”⁴⁹

Would the people of God put their trust in alliances with heathen nations rather than in the living God who was their “Rock?” Then they will be put to shame. But if they place their trust in the “Rock” of God’s choosing, they will find blessing. They will not be put to shame.

Men today have the same choice to make as the people of Jerusalem so long ago. They must either place their trust in God, or they must trust in men. Those who reject God will be put to shame, and those who trust in Him whom He has chosen (the “Rock”) will not be put to shame.

Unbelievers and “the Rock”
(2:7-8)

7 This precious value,⁵⁰ then, is for you who believe. But for those who disbelieve, “THE STONE WHICH THE BUILDERS REJECTED, THIS BECAME THE VERY CORNER[stone],”⁵¹

8 and, “A STONE OF STUMBLING AND A ROCK OF OFFENSE”; for they stumble because they are disobedient to the word, and to this [doom] they were also appointed.

Those who trust in the “living stone” will not be put to shame (verse 6). Now in verse 7 Peter indicates that while there is “honor” for those who believe, there is dishonor for those who do not. The rejection of Christ by unbelievers and their resulting doom is but the fulfillment of the divine plan (“and to this [doom] they were also appointed,” verse 8) and thus the fulfillment of biblical prophecy.

Peter joins two Old Testament prophecies about Christ as the rejected “Rock.” The first is from Psalm 118:22; the second from Isaiah 8:14. Those who disbelieve (verse 7) and are “disobedient to the Word” (verse 8) reject the precious “Rock” to their own doom. The rejected “Rock” is the “Rock” whom the Father regards as precious, whom He has raised from the dead to be our “living stone.” This “Rock,” whom unbelievers reject, has thus been made the chief “corner stone.”

For believers, Jesus is the precious “stone” through whom they have been saved and upon whom they are built up into a dwelling place of God. Because of Him, they will never be put to shame. But for unbelievers, just the opposite is true. This “Rock” is no corner stone but a stumbling stone over whom men stumble and fall for eternity. So it was destined to be.

Verse 8 describes man’s doom from two perspectives: (1) the responsibility of man and (2) the sovereignty of God. Man stumbles to his own destruction because he has disregarded and disobeyed the Word of God, which bears witness to the person and work of Jesus of Nazareth as the promised “stone.” This is all a part of the divine plan. Man’s unbelief did not catch God by surprise; rather, it is the fulfillment of the eternal decree.

Believers and Their Relationship to Israel
(2:9-10)

9 But you are A CHOSEN RACE, A royal PRIESTHOOD,⁵² 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;⁵³ 10 for you once were NOT A PEOPLE, but now you are THE PEOPLE OF GOD; you had NOT RECEIVED MERCY, but now you have RECEIVED MERCY.

Notice several things about these verses. First, here, as elsewhere in our text, the emphasis does not fall on individual believers and their individual blessings and responsibilities, but upon the corporate body of Christ, “the people of God.” Each expression, “a chosen race,” “a royal priesthood,” “a holy nation,” “a people for God’s own possession,” and “the people of God” is a corporate concept. When an individual comes to salvation by a personal trust in Jesus Christ, he or she becomes a part of a people, a body of believers. As a part of this body, he or she has both a privileged position and a task to which they are called.

Second, the expressions used to describe the New Testament church in verses 5, 9, and 10 are quotations from the Old Testament. Specifically, the corporate descriptions of the church are descriptions of the nation Israel. Consider these Old Testament texts:

5 “‘Now then, if you will indeed obey My voice and keep My covenant, then you shall be My own possession among all the peoples, for all the earth is Mine; 6 and you shall be to Me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation.’ These are the words that you shall speak to the sons of Israel.’” 7 So Moses came and called the elders of the people, and set before them all these words which the LORD had commanded him (Exodus 19:5-7, emphasis mine).

19 “Behold, I will do something new, now it will spring forth; will you not be aware of it? I will even make a roadway in the wilderness, rivers in the desert. 20 The beasts of the field will glorify Me; the jackals and the ostriches; because I have given waters in the wilderness and rivers in the desert, to give drink to My chosen people. 21 the people whom I formed for Myself, will declare My praise” (Isaiah 43:19-21, emphasis mine).

9 And the LORD said, “Name him Lo-ammi, for you are not My people and I am not your God.” 10 Yet the number of the sons of Israel will be like the sand of the sea, which cannot be measured or numbered; and it will come about that, in the place where it is said to them, “You are not My people,” it will be said to them, “[You are] the sons of the living God.” 11 And the sons of Judah and the sons of Israel will be gathered together, and they will appoint for themselves one leader, and they will go up from the land, for great will be the day of Jezreel” (Hosea 1:9-11, emphasis mine).

21 “And it will come about in that day that I will respond,” declares the LORD. I will respond to the heavens, and they will respond to the earth, 22 And the earth will respond to the grain, to the new wine, and to the oil, and they will respond to Jezreel. 23 And I will sow her for Myself in the land. I will also have compassion on her who had not obtained compassion, And I will say to those who were not My people, ‘You are My people!’ and they will say, ‘[Thou art] my God!’” (Hosea 2:21-23, emphasis mine).

The nation Israel was chosen and set apart by God, not because of their goodness or merit but simply as the recipients of divine mercy (see Deuteronomy 7:6-8; 8:11-20). Because of her sin and rebellion against God, the prophet Hosea declared this people, who were once known as the “people of God,” no longer His people. In yet a future day, after they have repented and returned to Him, they will once again be His people.

So, as Hosea promised Israel, although they were not the people of God, He would once again make them His people. Peter applies this same principle to the Gentiles. If those who are “not God’s people” (namely disobedient Israelites) can become “God’s people,” then surely disobedient Gentiles (also “not God’s people”) can become God’s people.

These words are intended to produce in the Gentiles the proper response to divine grace. They are intended to produce a spirit of humility and gratitude. Just as Israel dare not take pride in her unbelieving past or take credit for her election and calling, along with all of its privileges, neither do Gentiles dare take credit for their salvation. Salvation is all of grace, all of mercy. Neither Jews nor Gentiles dare boast in themselves, but only in God (see Romans 3:27-30; 1 Corinthians 1:26-31; Ephesians 2:8-9).

Furthermore, these Old Testament quotations are applied to the Gentile saints to remind them of the obligations which stem from their high calling. As the Scriptures teach, to whom much is given, much is required (Luke 12:48). God chose the nation Israel and delivered them from their bondage for a purpose, and that purpose is given in the texts Peter cites.

9 That you may proclaim the excellencies of Him who has called you out of darkness into His marvelous light (verse 9).

While trusting in the “Rock” is for the good of the believer, the emphasis falls not on our blessings but on God’s glory and our duty to proclaim His excellencies. Our text is not self-centered, but God-centered. We are His possession. The Lord Jesus is the One who is precious in the Father’s sight. We are saved by His mercy and grace. We are chosen and called to proclaim His wonders. Our salvation, as well as the doom of those who reject the “Stone,” is by divine decree. To God be the glory, great things He has done!

Conclusion

This text concludes the first section of Peter’s epistle, and what a grand finale it is! On the one hand, Peter contrasts what his readers once were with what they are now. On the other hand, he contrasts their present privileges with that of those who have stumbled over Christ, the “living Stone.” In so doing, Peter has now laid the foundation for our understanding of why unbelievers are so intensely hostile toward those of us who profess Christ as “the Rock.” This passage not only spells out our privileges and responsibilities by virtue of our identity with Christ, “the Rock,” it also explains our persecution. Our rejection is not to be personal, but representative because of our identity with Christ. As Michaels puts it, “The theological contrast between these two groups [believers and unbelievers], with its consequent social tensions, will absorb Peter’s interest through the remainder of this epistle.”⁵⁴

Peter’s words demonstrate a continuity between the Old Testament and the New, a continuity sometimes denied or minimized. The privileged position of New Testament saints is spoken of in the same terms as employed in the Old Testament. The church of God is described in terms that were, and will again be, applied to Israel. These terms bring to mind both the privileges of our calling and our purpose. Our calling is by His grace and mercy, to His glory. We have been brought into a relationship with Him so that we may worship and praise Him.

Peter’s words suggest that God has privileged Gentile believers to experience all the blessings promised to an Israelite. We are what the Jews could have been and what they will someday be. But yet another truth must not be overlooked. All Israel failed to be, which we now are, we are in Christ. All of the terms Peter has used that once applied to Israel, and now apply to us, also apply to our Lord. Indeed, only through our Lord are these privileges ours (or will they be Israel’s).

Israel was called by God to be a “spiritual house,” a “holy priesthood,” a “chosen race,” “royal priesthood,” and a “holy nation.” Israel failed at all of these because they tried to do so on their own rather than by trusting in the “Stone” who was to come. Our Lord alone is holy. It is He alone who became a “royal (king) priest.” He is the great High Priest. It is He who was God’s faithful “Son” and “Servant” when Israel failed. It is He who was the dwelling place of God, for in Him God tabernacled among us (John 1:14). We dare not boast or think ourselves better than the Jews, for neither they nor we enter into these privileges other than “in Christ.” He is the means of our blessings. He alone is worthy to be praised.

In contemporary terms, this passage from the pen of Peter spells out our identity. Here we learn who we are and what God has purposed for us to do. It is the basis for the teachings which follow concerning our conduct. Our calling is the basis for our conduct (Ephesians 4:1).

Some say our value is evidenced by the price which our Lord paid to save us. Neither this text nor any other text I know of in the Bible says that God saved us because He thought we were precious. He saved us in spite of the fact that we were sinful, defiled, and useless, and only because He regarded His Son as precious. Let us not come to this passage to find ourselves, to estimate our worth, but let us come to it overwhelmed by His worth and God’s grace in saving us through His precious blood.

Let us learn from Peter that we dare not accept the value structure of this world. The world does not esteem the Lord Jesus Christ. The world does not see Him as precious. God views Him as precious though the world thinks Him worthless. We would be far better to accept God’s evaluation than man’s. And if the world could so badly appraise the worth of our Lord, why do we look to the world for approval and a sense of self-worth? We can only learn what is truly precious from God, not from our unsaved peers.

Peter’s teaching in our text most certainly requires us to reject Roman Catholic teaching on the position of Peter. Who would know better than Peter himself about his position? Peter does not wave Matthew 16 before us and demand that we believe the church is built on him. He tells us emphatically that the church is built upon the precious stone, our Lord Jesus Christ. He claims no special relationship with God nor does he claim to be a mediator between God and man; instead Peter teaches that the whole church has a priestly calling and ministry, and he in no way sets himself apart from or above others. Whatever privileges Peter experienced in his relationship to Christ and His church, his teaching here implies that they are ours as well.⁵⁵ He had a unique role as an apostle but not a unique relationship to Christ or to his church. If we would learn the meaning of our Lord’s words in Matthew 16 concerning Peter, let us learn from Peter himself.

We dare not leave this text without a reminder that each individual’s response to the Lord Jesus Christ seals their eternal destiny. If you receive Him as the “precious Stone,” you will obtain the forgiveness of your sins and receive the privileges which become the possession of God’s people. If you reject Him as God’s only means of salvation, you do so to your own eternal doom. Your eternity is determined by your response to who Jesus is.

Let us close by remembering these words spoken by our Lord Jesus Christ Himself:

6 Jesus said to him, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father, but through Me” (John 14:6).

24 “Therefore everyone who hears these words of Mine, and acts upon them, may be compared to a wise man, who built his house upon the rock. 25 And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and burst against that house; and yet it did not fall, for it had been founded upon the rock. 26 And everyone who hears these words of Mine, and does not act upon them, will be like a foolish man, who built his house upon the sand. 27 And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and burst against that house; and it fell, and great was its fall” (Matthew 7:24-27).

39 William Hendriksen, The Gospel of Matthew (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1973), p. 645.

40 As the marginal note in the NASB indicates, it is possible to render this term as an imperative as well as in the indicative mood. It would seem as though the indicative mood (“are being built up”) best suits the context.

41 The Greek word rendered “stone” is LITHOS not PETROS or PETRA, as we might expect. This is for several reasons. A LITHOS is a stone which has been shaped and prepared; a PETROS is not. LITHOS is the word used in the texts Peter is citing. Finally, Peter would have deliberately avoided using the term PETROS if possible to avoid any confusion with himself based on a misunderstanding of Matthew 16. The term PETRA is found once in 1 Peter 2:4-10--in verse 8, and there it is the “rock of offense.”

42 In the Book of Acts, Peter frequently draws attention to the theme that Jesus is rejected by men but chosen by God (2:22-36; 3:13-15; 4:10-11; 10:39-42).

43 There are those who seek to find their value (self-esteem, if you would) in the fact that God chose them. No biblical text ever indicates that God sent His Son to die for us because we were so precious or because there was something of value in us. To the contrary (see Romans 3:9-18), Peter speaks only of Christ as precious. If we look for value, we must look to Him and not to ourselves.

44 Peter calls us “living stones;” Paul speaks also of our privilege of presenting ourselves to God as “living sacrifices” (Romans 12:1).

45 See also Romans 12:1; 15:16; Philippians 4:18; Hebrews 13:16.

46 Both the KJV and the NIV translate verse 4 to read “chosen” rather than “choice” as in the NASB. The marginal note in the NASB informs us that the term literally means “chosen” or “elect.” The same Greek word is used in verse 6 and is rendered “elect” by the KJV and “chosen” by the NIV. The NASB is at least consistent with the rendering “choice.”

47 Some have chosen to understand this “stone” as the “capstone” rather than the corner tone, but the context seems to demand that we understand Peter to be speaking of our Lord as the cornerstone.

48 The last part of this verse, “He who believes in Him shall not be disappointed,” corresponds to Psalm 34:5b, “And their faces shall never be ashamed.”

49 Edmund Clowney, The Message of 1 Peter (Downers Grove: Inter-Varsity Press), 1988. The Bible Speaks Today Series. P. 83.

50 The rendering “precious value” in the NASB is unfortunate. It is a different (but related) term than that rendered “precious” in verses 4 and 6. In the KJV, of the 45 times this term occurs in the New Testament, it is rendered “precious” only once--here in 1 Peter 2:7. It is rendered “honor” 35 times. The “honor” which is granted believers in Christ is the opposite of the dishonor mentioned at the end of verse 6. It seems most likely, then, that the connection is between verses 6 and 7, between shame (or being “disappointed”) and being honored.

51 Jesus applied the words of this Psalm (118:22-23) to Himself in Matthew 21:42. Peter also applied this to the Jewish leaders in Acts 4:11. In Romans 9:32-33, Paul applied Isaiah 8:14 and 28:16 to all Israel. Now, Peter applies it to all mankind--Gentiles in particular.

52 “Our popular idea of a priest is of a person with the right to offer sacrifice on behalf of others. The basic meaning in the Bible is a person who serves God and has the right of access to him. That is why he is able to bring sacrifices on behalf of people who do not have access to God.” I. Howard Marshall, 1 Peter (Downers Grove: InterVarsity Press), 1991. The IVP New Testament Commentary Series. Pp. 74-75.

“The descriptive adjective royal, however, adds the dimension of kingdom and king. In the kingdom of priests (compare Exod. 19:6), there is a king. In fact, the Messiah is both priest and king as Zechariah prophesied: ‘He will be clothed with majesty and will sit and rule on his throne. And he will be a priest on his throne’ (6:13; also see Heb. 7:14-17; Rev. 1:5-6). Whereas Zechariah prophetically portrays the Messiah as the royal priest, Peter reveals that believers are priests in a royal priesthood.” Simon J. Kistemaker, Peter and Jude (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House), 1987. New Testament Commentary Series. P. 92.

53 “Conversion from paganism to Christianity was commonly viewed by the early Christians as a passage from darkness to light (cf., e.g., Acts 26:18; 2 Cor 4:6; Col 1:12-13; . . . ), so that believers in Christ viewed themselves in some instances as ‘light’ (Eph 5:8-14) or at least as already living in the light (1 Thes. 5:4-5; 1 John 1:5-7; 2:9-11).” J. Ramsey Michaels, 1 Peter (Waco, Texas: Word Books, Publisher), 1988. Word Biblical Commentary Series, p. 111.

54 Michaels, p. 113.

55 Note that while our Lord’s words to Peter in Matthew 16 are spoken to him alone, the same words are but two chapters later spoken to the church at large:

“I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; and whatever you shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you shall loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven” (Matthew 16:19).

“Truly I say to you, whatever you shall bind on earth shall be bound in heaven; and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven” (Matthew 18:18).

13 Submit yourselves for the Lord’s sake to every human institution, whether to a king as the one in authority, 14 or to governors as sent by him for the punishment of evildoers and the praise of those who do right.

15 For such is the will of God that by doing right you may silence the ignorance of foolish men.

16 [Act] as free men, and do not use your freedom as a covering for evil, but [use it] as bondslaves of God. 17 Honor all men; love the brotherhood, fear God, honor the king.

Introduction

For centuries, the Christian’s relationship to civil government has been a matter of critical importance. In the Old Testament, the nation of Israel spent 400 years under Egyptian rule (see Genesis 15:12-16; Exodus 12:40-41). Later God gave the Jews over to Gentile rule as a consequence of their rebellion against Him (see Deuteronomy 28:64-68; Nehemiah 9:26-37; Daniel 9:4-19). The prophet Jeremiah spoke to the people of Israel, directing them to submit to Nebuchadnezzar and to Babylonian rule. They were to serve the king of Babylon and live. The false prophets, however, promised the people that God would quickly deliver them from their bondage (see Jeremiah 27). As a result, over a period of time through a sequence of rebellions and defeats at the hands of the Babylonians, almost the entire population of those dwelling in Jerusalem and the territory of Judah were taken as captives to Babylon (see 2 kings 24-25; 2 Chronicles 36). This same spirit of rebellion against foreign domination, even though divinely imposed, was evident in the Jews of Jesus’ day. Contrast their words with those of Nehemiah:

36 “Behold, we are slaves today, and as to the land which Thou didst give to our fathers to eat of its fruit and its bounty, behold, we are slaves on it” (Nehemiah 9:36).

31 Jesus therefore was saying to those Jews who had believed Him, “If you abide in My word, [then] you are truly disciples of Mine; 32 and you shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.” 33 They answered Him, “We are Abraham’s offspring, and have never yet been enslaved to anyone; how is it that You say, ‘You shall become free’?” (John 8:31-33).

In the New Testament, the Jews were once again subject to foreign rule though they refused to acknowledge their sin or their subjection. This rebellious attitude posed a danger for the Jews of Jerusalem and a danger for New Testament churches such as those to whom Peter had written. As Peter has indicated, Christianity is the fulfillment of God’s Old Testament promises (1 Peter 1:10-12). When unbelieving Jews tried to legally disown Christianity, Gallio, a Roman proconsul of Achaia, rejected their claims, which set a legal precedent and gave `Christianity the same rights and protection as Judaism (Acts 18:12-17).

The problem was that Rome had become increasingly displeased with Jews and Judaism (see Acts 18:2, 14-17), and the Jews were persistently resisting Roman control. This led to the destruction of Jerusalem by Titus just as our Lord forewarned (see Matthew 24:1-2; Luke 19:41-44). Since Rome viewed Judaism and Christianity as closely related, the church might be falsely accused of opposing Rome. Church history provides much evidence that Rome did eventually begin to accuse the church of crimes against the state. Peter’s words in our text are meant to avoid any unnecessary charges against the church and to arm the church with attitudes and actions which would show these charges to be false.

Many of the same dangers present at the time of Peter’s writing exist today in a slightly different form. Increasingly, Christians are looked upon with suspicion as those opposed to civil authority. David Koresh and his followers in Waco, Texas, may seem to be totally “unchristian” to evangelical believers, but there are those outside the faith who see little difference between them and evangelical Christianity. This is partly due to some Christians who are becoming increasingly militant and apparently more willing to break the laws of our land. An abortionist is murdered by a man whom some would view as little different from many other anti-abortionists. If the evangelical pro-life movement is willing to break laws in order to save the lives of the unborn, which laws are they not willing to break? Are they willing to kill in order to save lives? Some would like to think so. And some would like others to think so.

We see then just how vitally important the Christian’s relationship to civil government is. We are “aliens and strangers” on this earth; our citizenship is in heaven. But this does not mean we are somehow less obligated to obey the laws of the land. Unlike those who exploded a bomb in the New York World Trade Center, we dare not view our foreign citizenship as a license to break the laws of the land in which we live. Peter’s words are not easy to swallow, and they may be less than easy to obey. Peter will inform us that we have the same obligation to obey our government as do unbelievers living in this nation, but the Christian has an even higher obligation than unbelievers.

The Context of Our Text

Already in chapter 2, Peter has laid the foundation for the instructions he now gives concerning our conduct. Our relationship to Christ determines our identity. By faith in Him as the “living Stone,” we become living stones built up into a dwelling place of God where He abides, where priestly ministry is performed, and spiritual sacrifices are offered up. In Christ, we have become “a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people who belong to God, so that we may proclaim the excellencies of the One who called us from darkness into His marvelous light” (2:9). Our task is not only to be God’s possession but His dwelling place and a demonstration of His nature.

Verses 11 and 12 spell out in general terms the way we should fulfill our calling. We are to abstain from fleshly lusts which are “foreign” to our calling and destiny. We are to conduct ourselves in a godly fashion, so that while men may accuse us falsely for doing good in this life, they will give praise to God for these same deeds when they stand before Him at Christ’s return.

Beginning at verse 13, Peter becomes more specific about the ways in which we abstain from fleshly lusts and exhibit excellent behavior before men. Submission to others is the first specific manifestation of godly conduct. Since Peter is writing to the saints about Christian suffering, he addresses submission in the context of suffering. He writes about submission to those who may be the cause of our suffering. In 2:13-17, he speaks of submission to civil authorities and in 2:18-25 of the submission of slaves to cruel masters. In 3:1-6, he writes to wives who may be married to unbelieving, even unkind husbands. Finally in verse 7 of chapter 3, he speaks to husbands about submission.

Probing the Passage

Verses 13 and 14

13 Submit yourselves for the Lord’s sake to every human institution, whether to a king as the one in authority, 14 or to governors as sent by him for the punishment of evildoers and the praise of those who do right.

The command is given to submit ourselves to every human institution.⁶⁴ The word “submit” is almost always taught and understood in terms of authority. Submission is the proper response of the Christian to those in a position of authority over us. In secular thinking, this may be as far as submission will go, but this is not so in the Bible. In addition to being a matter of authority, submission is also a matter of priority.

Allow me to explain. In addition to requiring us to submit to those in authority, the Scriptures also call for submission to those who are our peers:

21 And be subject to one another in the fear of Christ (Ephesians 5:21).

In the context of his teaching on submission, Peter calls upon the saints to “honor all men.” I believe this is a manifestation of submission. Peter commands the saints to submit to the king as the one “in authority” (verse 13). The Greek term rendered “in authority” is the same term Paul employed in Philippians 2:3:

1 If therefore there is any encouragement in Christ, if there is any consolation of love, if there is any fellowship of the Spirit, if any affection and compassion, 2 make my joy complete by being of the same mind, maintaining the same love, united in spirit, intent on one purpose. 3 Do nothing from selfishness or empty conceit, but with humility of mind let each of you regard one another as more important than himself; 4 do not [merely] look out for your own personal interests, but also for the interests of others. 5 Have this attitude in yourselves which was also in Christ Jesus (Philippians 2:1-5).

While God has sovereignly ordained governmental officials to hold positions of authority over us, we are also to regard our fellow-believers as having a higher claim on us than our own selfish desires. Therefore, submission is not only a matter of authority but also a matter of priority.

So far, in verses 13 and 14, submission is viewed in the context of authority, and those to whom we are to submit are civil authorities. Submission is not only to be granted to the king, the ultimate authority, but to all of his agents. As I understand Peter, this not only means men in prominent positions of power such as governors but those who act on their behalf, the civil servants who carry out the functions of government on our level. Peter expects us to respond to these agents of authority as though they were the supreme human authority whom they represent.

The purpose of government and those who govern is completely consistent with Peter’s call for excellent conduct and submission to civil authorities: “the punishment of evildoers and the praise of those who do right.” While the form of government may differ, the task is the same. Even a pagan and corrupt government is better than none at all. As bad as communism may seem to us, the people of Yugoslavia were better off under communism than the people of Bosnia are today.

Governments punish evil-doers, and they also praise those who do good. As President, George Bush initiated the “thousand points of light” program to honor those making a special contribution to our society. Even in ancient times, heathen rulers recognized their responsibility to do the same. When the Persian king Ahasuerus could not sleep, he gave the order for the chronicles of his kingdom to be read to him, no doubt hoping he would be put to sleep by them. When the account was read of Mordecai’s disclosure of a plot to abduct the king, Ahazuerus immediately asked, “What honor or dignity has been bestowed on Mordecai for this?” (Esther 6:3). When told that nothing had been done to honor Mordecai, he made things right the next day. This heathen king understood the need to honor those who do well in his kingdom.

Government’s obligation is to praise the righteous and punish the wicked. Peter’s command to submit to civil authorities does not include a promise that we will always be praised by earthly authorities for the good things we have done. He does, however, infer that praise is certain for the Christian. We are not to live righteously primarily to obtain the praise of men. We are to live righteously in order to bring praise to God and to await His praise. And so Peter instructs us to submit ourselves “for the Lord’s sake” (verse 13). Submission is to be “as to the Lord” (Ephesians 5:22), “in the Lord” (Ephesians 6:1), and “for the Lord’s sake” (1 Peter 2:13). Our submission to civil authorities should be carried out as obedience to our Lord (see Romans 13:1-7). This is to be done in His strength and to His glory (see 1 Corinthians 10:31). If we submit in this way, we will receive praise from Him whom we serve, to whom we are ultimately in submission.

Verse 15

15 For such is the will of God that by doing right you may silence the ignorance of foolish men.

Submission is doing what is right. Submission is doing the will of God. Submission by doing right is the way that we may, in the will of God, see the ignorance of foolish men silenced.

The ignorance of foolish men is that ignorance related to man’s condition in unbelief⁶⁵ (see 1 Peter 1:14). Man’s ignorance of God and His ways often results in foolish accusations against believers. They may see our good deeds as evil and accuse us for doing good (see 2:12). Because government’s task is to reward men for doing well and to punish them for evil, civil authorities must also determine whether our actions are good or evil. Often this is carried out through the court system. Sometimes it is done directly by the king.

Because Daniel was faithful by diligently carrying out his duties in serving King Darius, God blessed his work. As Daniel was promoted by the king, his peers began to resent him, seeking to find some area of failure or wrong-doing in his life. They concluded they would only be able to accuse him in connection with his faith (Daniel 6:24-27). When the king was tricked into passing a law which was certain to make Daniel a law-breaker, the king reluctantly cast Daniel into the den of lions hoping that his God might save him. And his God did save him! The king joyfully received Daniel back alive and hastened to “silence” Daniel’s false accusers:

24 The king then gave orders, and they brought those men who had maliciously accused Daniel, and they cast them, their children, and their wives into the lions’ den; and they had not reached the bottom of the den before the lions overpowered them and crushed all their bones. 25 Then Darius the king wrote to all the peoples, nations, and [men of every] language who were living in all the land: “May your peace abound! 26 I make a decree that in all the dominion of my kingdom men are to fear and tremble before the God of Daniel; for He is the living God and enduring forever, and His kingdom is one which will not be destroyed, and His dominion [will be] forever. 27 He delivers and rescues and performs signs and wonders in heaven and on earth, who has [also] delivered Daniel from the power of the lions” (Daniel 6:24-27).

Our Lord was vindicated by Pilate although Pilate was pressured into executing this One whom he had just declared innocent:

14 “You brought this man to me as one who incites the people to rebellion, and behold, having examined Him before you, I have found no guilt in this man regarding the charges which you make against Him” (Luke 23:14).

Paul was likewise vindicated by Roman officials:

30 And the king arose and the governor and Bernice, and those who were sitting with them, 31 and when they had drawn aside, they [began] talking to one another, saying, “This man is not doing anything worthy of death or imprisonment.” 32 And Agrippa said to Festus, “This man might have been set free if he had not appealed to Caesar” (Acts 26:30-32; see 23:29).

Submission to civil authorities facilitates the task God has given to those who govern—to punish the wicked and reward the righteous—and expose and silence false charges against the righteous.

Verses 16 and 17

16 Act as free men, and do not use your freedom as a covering for evil, but use it as bondslaves of God. 17 Honor all men; love the brotherhood, fear God, honor the king.⁶⁶

Recently, I saw this bumper sticker on the back of a pick-up: “Obey God’s Laws, not man’s.”

This has a kind of pious ring to it—at first glance. But a serious problem exists in the thinking which underlies this proposition. The error is in assuming a significant conflict between man’s laws and God’s laws. Paul did not think so; neither did Peter. The biblical perspective is this: “Obey man’s laws as God’s law” (see Romans 13:1-7). Being citizens of the heavenly kingdom does not exempt us from our obligation to the laws of the land in which we live. Being “free” in Christ is not freedom from obedience to civil authorities.

To what “freedom” then is Peter referring in verse 16? Many think it is our freedom in Christ (see Luke 4:18; John 8:32, 36; Acts 13:39; Romans 6:7, 18, 22; 7:3; 8:2; 1 Corinthians 9:1, 19; 10:29; Galatians 5:1, 13). This “freedom” may be included in what Peter is talking about, but I believe he is also talking about one’s freedom as a citizen, as opposed to being a slave (see 1 Corinthians 7:21-22; 12:13; Galatians 3:28; Ephesians 6:8; Colossians 3:11). Peter addresses slaves in 1 Peter 2:18. In verse 16, he is speaking to free citizens, urging them to use their freedom for the progress of the gospel and the glory of God rather than for selfish ambitions. Everything legal is not necessarily moral or godly or profitable to others (see 1 Corinthians 6:12).

Paul often surrendered some of his freedoms for the good of others and the advance of the gospel. He was free to marry, but he chose not to do so (1 Corinthians 9:5; 7:8). He was free to be supported in his ministry, but he often chose not to be (see 1 Corinthians 9:1-18). His liberties were not exercised at the expense of others; they were employed in ministry to others. Paul’s submission to others caused him to view and use his liberties in a very different way. Peter calls on us here to do likewise.

What are some of the freedoms we may use as slaves of Christ, or abuse as slaves of our flesh? We have the liberties of our American citizenship and the rights we are granted by our Constitution and the Bill of Rights. We should use these submissively to the benefit of others. There is the freedom of our personal liberties in Christ, within the confines of God’s Word and our personal convictions. These should be employed as slaves of Christ and as the servants of others. There is the “freedom” of retirement. Do we use this for fulfilling our own selfish desires or for serving Christ and others? For some, there is the freedom to remain single. While Paul advocates remaining single so that we may more devotedly serve our Lord (1 Corinthians 7:25-35), most of those who remain single today do so to devote themselves to the pleasures of single life (I am not quite sure what these are, especially if we limit them to what God permits).

I believe Peter is teaching that submission is not just for those who cannot avoid it, for citizens under the rule of government and slaves under the authority of their masters. Peter is teaching us that submission should be our mindset even when we are “free.” We are, first and foremost, servants of Christ. Submission is to be the dominant theme in our lives—submission to Christ, submission to governmental authorities, and even submission to our peers and subordinates. This becomes much clearer in verse 17.

Verse 17

Verse 17 greatly expands Peter’s teaching on submission. It covers the whole forest, from the king as the supreme human authority to those on the lowest levels of power or position. It also includes God as the ultimate and final authority over all creation. It covers both believers and unbelievers. And in the process, it shows certain crucial distinctions Christians must recognize and observe in their submission to others.

I am not altogether happy with the translation of verse 17 in the New International Version:

Show proper respect to everyone: Love the brotherhood of believers, fear God, honor the king (emphasis mine).

In the original text, it is the same term which is rendered “show proper respect” and “honor” in the same verse. This is not only unusual, it is misleading. The concept of “honor” is a fundamental and foundational part of submission. Peter is teaching that just as we must submit to those over us by honoring them, so we must submit to those under us with the same outlook.

Peter has not left the subject of submission here but rather has chosen to expand it dramatically. Now, submission involves not only submission to kings but to all men. Further, submission involves not just respect for higher authorities, but respect for all men because they are God’s creation.⁶⁷

What do we honor in all men similar to the way we honor the king? The king is divinely appointed by God; thus, his authority and position are to be respected because God gave it to him (Romans 13:1). All men are created by God with a certain reflection (although distorted) of His image (see Genesis 1:26). To honor men is to honor the God who made them and to honor the dignity they have as God’s creatures:

3 When I consider Thy heavens, the work of Thy fingers, The moon and the stars, which Thou hast ordained; 4 What is man, that Thou dost take thought of him? And the son of man, that Thou dost care for him? 5 Yet Thou hast made him a little lower than God, And dost crown him with glory and majesty! (Psalms 8:3-5).⁶⁸

Thus we have the command of our Lord through Peter to honor⁶⁹ all men.

All men are to be given honor. We are to recognize that they have been created by God and are to be treated as His creatures. To honor men is to respect their dignity and even their individuality (for each is uniquely created by God—see Psalm 139).

We may define what it means to “honor” men in terms of what it means to “dishonor” men. Consider these texts which speak of dishonoring men:

21 “You have heard that the ancients were told, ‘YOU SHALL NOT COMMIT MURDER’ and ‘Whoever commits murder shall be liable to the court.’ 22 But I say to you that everyone who is angry with his brother shall be guilty before the court; and whoever shall say to his brother, ‘Raca,’ shall be guilty before the supreme court; and whoever shall say, ‘You fool,’ shall be guilty [enough to go] into the fiery hell (Matthew 5:21-22, emphasis mine).

1 My brethren, do not hold your faith in our glorious Lord Jesus Christ with [an attitude of] personal favoritism. 2 For if a man comes into your assembly with a gold ring and dressed in fine clothes, and there also comes in a poor man in dirty clothes, 3 and you pay special attention to the one who is wearing the fine clothes, and say, “You sit here in a good place,” and you say to the poor man, “You stand over there, or sit down by my footstool,” 4 have you not made distinctions among yourselves, and become judges with evil motives? 5 Listen, my beloved brethren: did not God choose the poor of this world [to be] rich in faith and heirs of the kingdom which He promised to those who love Him? 6 But you have dishonored the poor man. Is it not the rich who oppress you and personally drag you into court? 7 Do they not blaspheme the fair name by which you have been called? 8 If, however, you are fulfilling the royal law, according to the Scripture, “YOU SHALL LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOR AS YOURSELF,” you are doing well. 9 But if you show partiality, you are committing sin [and] are convicted by the law as transgressors (James 2:1-9).

We dishonor men by thinking of them or calling them fools, those whom the world would be better off without. God made them. They have value and a contribution to make to this world. We dare not think of them as a detriment or we dishonor the One who created them. We also dishonor men by discriminating against them, giving preferential treatment to those who appear to be of higher value while demeaning those who seem to have little value—little to offer us, little to contribute. Discrimination dishonors men. Honoring men requires that we not judge them on the basis of appearances. It means that we dare not treat some men with dignity and others without dignity.

I see several areas where the application of this command is apparent on the surface. Racial discrimination is wrong, because it honors some men and dishonors others. The prison system often dehumanizes men and women and robs them and their families of all dignity. Strip searches of male inmates by female guards, for example, dehumanizes men. Often we fail to treat the elderly with dignity, especially in some institutions which are responsible to care for them. The poor are often humiliated and stripped of dignity by the way in which our welfare and public services are provided. To treat men as less than human is to put people in a category under us. Submitting to others begins by regarding them as having a dignity and honor which sets them above us and makes us their servants.

The arrangement of the instructions in verse 17 is meant to be instructive:

• Honor all men; … love the brotherhood,
• fear God, … honor the king

In addition to the arrangement, the terms “honor,” “love,” and “fear” are carefully chosen and distinguished.

Submission has a universal dimension which includes all mankind, without exception. All men are to be honored. The brotherhood of believers is to be loved. There is a greater degree of intimacy and contact, and relationship, between one believer and other saints. Thus, in Scripture, the believer has a higher level of obligation to believers than to unbelievers:

So then, while we have opportunity, let us do good to all men, and especially to those who are of the household of the faith (Galatians 6:10).

The king is to receive honor as the ultimate human authority over men. He is to be honored as a man, the “head man” we might say. But there is a limit to the “honor” he receives. He is only to be honored as a man and never to be worshipped as a god. For allowing others to worship him as such, Herod was put to death by God (Acts 12:20-23). And so Peter distinguishes between the “honor” the king is to be given and the “fear” God alone is to receive from the saints.⁷⁰

Conclusion

In many ways, Peter is teaching the same things Paul teaches elsewhere (see Romans 13:1-7; Titus 3:1-2). There are some unique areas of emphasis we would do well to focus on in concluding our study. To begin, I call to your attention some significant things Peter does not say in this passage.

(1) Peter gives us no exceptions concerning submission to authority. Peter mentions no exceptions or instances in which one might be required not to submit to civil authorities. Amazingly, while Paul could claim that he never violated a Roman or Jewish law (Acts 25:8), Peter is the one who broke the law. Twice he escaped from jail (Acts 5:17-21; 12:1-17), and twice he informed the Jewish ruling body, the Sanhedrin, that he and the apostles could not obey their commands:

18 And when they had summoned them, they commanded them not to speak or teach at all in the name of Jesus. 19 But Peter and John answered and said to them, “Whether it is right in the sight of God to give heed to you rather than to God, you be the judge; 20 for we cannot stop speaking what we have seen and heard” (Acts 4:18-20).

27 And when they had brought them, they stood them before the Council. And the high priest questioned them, 28 saying, “We gave you strict orders not to continue teaching in this name, and behold, you have filled Jerusalem with your teaching, and intend to bring this man’s blood upon us.” 29 But Peter and the apostles answered and said, “We must obey God rather than men” (Acts 5:27-29).

How then do we square Peter’s practice with his teaching? We must first recognize that these two “escapes” were not made by overpowering the guards or sawing through the prison bars with a concealed file. In both instances, an angel released Peter (and John), and in the second incident through most of the escape, Peter thought he was dreaming. In addition, the angel who set Peter and John free gave them a specific command about where they were to go and what they were to do. To obey the command of the Sanhedrin would require Peter and John to disobey the angel and God who spoke through the angel. Peter saw that his choice was one of obeying God or men, and there was little doubt as to whom he would obey.

Having said this, it should also be suggested that even when we are forced to disobey a governmental authority, we should not cease to be in submission to them. While this sounds strange, it is important. When Daniel and his three friends disobeyed in Babylon, they still treated their governing authorities with respect. Their disobedience was not general but specific. They refused to obey only that law or command which would have forced them to disobey God. The same can be said of Peter and John. The only examples we have in Scripture of civil disobedience are those where obedience to God is directly forbidden by a human command.

Some of the civil disobedience practiced in our country and defended by citing the precedent of Daniel and Peter misses this point badly. The assumption seems to be that a Christian can disobey any law with which he or she disagrees. The Bible speaks of the disobedience of those laws and commands which directly contradict God’s commands or laws. Cruelty, and even unjust suffering at the hand of civil authorities, are not cited as a legitimate basis for civil disobedience by Christians. Today Christians who are (rightly) distressed over laws which permit (not command) others (not us) to do wrong (abortion) feel justified to selectively violate other laws. This goes beyond any biblical example of legitimate civil disobedience. It also makes the blowing up of abortion clinics or the murder of abortionists a more extreme disobedience of the same kind. The difference between the civil disobedience of some anti-abortion protesters and others who would kill or injure abortionists appears to many to be just a matter of degree and not of kind.

In our text, Peter gives no reasons for civil disobedience, not because there are none, but because he does not want the exception to become the rule. Jesus did not wish to engage in dialogue over the various legitimate reasons for divorce because even the most legalistic Pharisees of His day were too lax on this matter. He did not want the exception to overshadow the rule (see Matthew 19:3-12).

One more point should be made about civil disobedience. It is not civil disobedience to expect and even require that government officials abide by the laws they are appointed to uphold. At His arrest and during the trial which resulted in His death, our Lord pointed out that these men were acting outside the boundaries of the law they were appointed to uphold (Luke 22:49-53; John 18:19-24). Paul refused to allow the Roman officials to quietly release him after they had broken the law by illegally beating him (Acts 16:35-4). Those who are appointed to uphold the law must also abide by it. Christian submission to civil authorities does not necessarily prevent us from requiring authorities to act lawfully.

(2) No qualifications are made as to the kind of government to which we are to submit. We would most certainly prefer to submit to a democratic government, but Peter gives no qualifications of this kind. Whether the government be totalitarian or democratic, the Christian’s obligation to submit to it is the same.

(3) Peter does not make the performance of government officials the basis for whether we submit to civil authorities. Peter makes it clear that government’s responsibility is to punish those who do evil and to praise those who do good. He does not tell us that we must submit only to those who, in our opinion, are performing well at their task. Peter tells us what God expects of governing authorities, not as a standard for what we should expect or demand, but as the basis for our respect. We are to respect civil authorities because of the dignity of the task God has given them, not because of their success at carrying out these duties. How often Christians excuse their disobedience because their superiors do not meet their expectations. These authorities (including elders, see Hebrews 13:17), will give account to God for their faithfulness in carrying out their task. We will give account for our obedience to God’s command to submit to them, whether they are worthy of it or not.

Having considered what Peter does not say on submission, let us move on to what he emphatically says.

(1) Peter’s teaching provides a different perspective of government. Christians today are becoming more and more suspicious of government as it seems to encroach on our religious freedoms. When Christians (or conservatives) are dominant in government, Christians breathe easily, but when “liberals” or “secular humanists” take control, we suddenly look at government differently. Let us remember that the government of Peter’s day was Rome, and the emperor at the end of Peter’s life was Nero. And yet Peter speaks of government not as our persecutor but as our protector. He speaks not of civil disobedience but of submission. He does not speak of government as our accuser but as the instrument through which false accusations are silenced. Let us look at government and respond to it as God has intended it to be, not as we fear it will be.

We should remember that while the Roman government played a crucial role in the execution of our Lord, it was also the Roman government which protected Paul and the preaching of the gospel. The decision of Gallio in Acts 18 resulted in the protection of Paul throughout his missionary journeys. Sometimes Paul preached the gospel while in chains and often at the side of a Roman soldier, but Roman authorities protected Paul from the wrath of Jewish and Gentile unbelievers.

(2) Peter’s teaching concerning submission to civil authority is based upon the very crucial premise of the sovereignty of God. Government is divinely ordained and exists only by the will of God. Its authority comes from God (see John 19:10-11). It achieves God’s purposes even when it fails to carry out its divinely given task. When God allows government to persecute Christians for well-doing rather than to praise them, even then His purposes are being accomplished. This was the early church’s comfort which must also be ours.

23 And when they had been released, they went to their own [companions,] and reported all that the chief priests and the elders had said to them. 24 And when they heard [this,] they lifted their voices to God with one accord and said, “O Lord, it is Thou who DIDST MAKE THE HEAVEN AND THE EARTH AND THE SEA, AND ALL THAT IS IN THEM, 25 who by the Holy Spirit, [through] the mouth of our father David Thy servant, didst say, ‘WHY DID THE GENTILES RAGE, AND THE PEOPLES DEVISE FUTILE THINGS? 26 THE KINGS OF THE EARTH TOOK THEIR STAND, AND THE RULERS WERE GATHERED TOGETHER AGAINST THE LORD, AND AGAINST HIS CHRIST.’ 27 “For truly in this city there were gathered together against Thy holy servant Jesus, whom Thou didst anoint, both Herod and Pontius Pilate, along with the Gentiles and the peoples of Israel, 28 to do whatever Thy hand and Thy purpose predestined to occur” (Acts 4:23-28).

When the governing authorities incarcerated Peter in a way that would have hindered the accomplishment of God’s predetermined plan, an angel of the Lord arranged for Peter’s escape. And when Herod sought to kill Peter, the church did not arrange protest marches; they prayed. The result was that Herod was put to death not by the hands of an angry mob but by the hand of God—and not because anyone protested against him, but because men praised him as god (see Acts 12).

(3) Peter’s teaching provides a different basis for submission. Peter instructs the saints to submit to governing authorities not because they are always right, or fair, or because doing so will always keep us from persecution. We are to obey for the Lord’s sake, in obedience to Him, and for His glory. Praise for well-doing may or may not come from earthly rulers, but it will come from God at the return of our Lord.

(4) Peter greatly expands our concept and practice of submission. The best any government can expect from its unbelieving citizens is obedience. Often that obedience is given only when under the scrutiny of those who enforce the laws. That is why people speed until their radar detector tells them to obey the law. Christian submission does not fall short of secular submission; it far surpasses it. The Christian is to obey civil authorities, whether they are looking or not. Beyond this, we are to give honor to civil authorities even when their performance does not seem to deserve it. We honor them for their position as given by God.

I must confess that I have fallen far short of Peter’s instructions in my own life. I have always had nicknames for people, particularly people in authority. I cannot give you an illustration of this without violating Peter’s command to give honor to those in authority. But one thing I know, God requires me to show honor to those in authority whether I voted for them or not.

May God grant us the ability to obey these instructions both in spirit and in truth, to the glory of God and for our ultimate good.

64 A number of commentaries note that the term “institution” is the unusual rendering of a Greek word consistently rendered “creation” or “creature” elsewhere in the New Testament. At least two meanings are inferred from this fact: (1) that the term refers to all mankind, not just to governing authorities, and (2) the terms emphasizes the divine origin and authority of human governments. The first is advocated by Kelly: “. . . the writer is laying it down that the principle of the redeemed Christian life must not be self-assertion or mutual exploitation, but the voluntary subordination of oneself to others (cf. Rom. xii.10; Eph. v. 21; Phil. ii. 3 f.).” J. N. D. Kelly, The Epistles of Peter and of Jude (New York: Harper & Row, Publishers), 1969. Harpers New Testament Commentaries Series, pp. 108-109.

The second is the position of Stibbs: “It is, therefore, probably truer to biblical usage to understand the phrase here as meaning ‘every divine institution among men’--thus ascribing the existence of such human institutions directly to the divine initiative . . . .” Alan M. Stibbs, The First Epistle General of Peter (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company), [photolithoprinted] 1968. Tyndale Bible Commentaries Series, pp. 109-110.

New Testament theology and the context would support the emphasis of both, whether the Greek term requires it or not.

65 “Ignorance is not the more common term agnoia, used in 1:14, but agnosia, also used in 1 Corinthians 15:34, which does not so much denote intellectual inadequacy as a religious failure to perceive the true nature of the Christian faith and life. It implies a stronger sense of blameworthiness.” D. Edmond Hiebert, First Peter (Chicago: Moody Press), 1984, p. 157.

66 “The necessary stance of the Christian community is further described in vv. 16-17 with two corollary questions in mind: (1) What have the universal obligations of Christians to their fellow citizens to do with their particular obligations to one another? (2) What do their obligations to the emperor and civil magistrates have to do with their obligations to God? The answer follows in a terse four-part maxim in v. 17. The first two and the last two form pairs: respect is for everyone but love is for fellow believers--God deserves reverent fear while the emperor deserves respect.” J. Ramsey Michaels, 1 Peter (Waco, Texas: Word Books, Publisher), 1988. Word Biblical Commentary Series, p. 123.

67 This seems to point back to the expression “every human institution,” which is literally “every human creature or creation.”

68 While this text certainly focuses on the Son of Man, the Lord Jesus Christ, it also indicates the privileged position which God has given men in creation.

69 “To honour, or to ‘esteem highly’, is the proper general attitude to adopt towards all men. It is due equally to all as God’s creatures, and as the objects of His peculiar love and care (see Gn. v. i, ix. 6; Ps. vii. 4,5; Pr. xiv. 31; Rom. xiv. 10; Jas. iii. 8-10). This principle condemns much of man’s treatment of his fellows both in the political and in the industrial world.” Alan M. Stibbs, The First Epistle General of Peter (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company), [photolithoprinted] 1968. Tyndale Bible Commentaries Series. p. 112.

70 Paul does not make the same distinction between “fear” and “honor” that Peter does as we can see in Romans 13:7. Peter distinguishes between “honor” and “fear” because he has already commanded the saints to conduct themselves in fear in relation to God (1 Peter 1:17-21).

Likewise, ye husbands, dwell with [them] according to knowledge, giving honour unto the wife, as unto the weaker vessel, and as being heirs together of the grace of life; that your prayers be not hindered (King James Version).

You husbands likewise, live with [your wives] in an understanding way, as with a weaker vessel, since she is a woman; and grant her honor as a fellow heir of the grace of life, so that your prayers may not be hindered (NASB).

Husbands, in the same way be considerate as you live with your wives and treat them with respect as the weaker partner and as heirs with you of the gracious gift of life, so that nothing will hinder your prayers (NIV).

Similarly, you husbands should try to understand the wives you live with, honoring them as physically weaker yet equally heirs with you of the grace of life. If you don’t do this, you will find it impossible to pray properly (Phillips).

In the same way, you husbands must conduct your married life with understanding: pay honour to the woman’s body, not only because it is weaker, but also because you share together in the grace of God which gives you life. Then your prayers will not be hindered (The New English Bible).

In the same way, husbands must always treat their wives with consideration in their life together, respecting a woman as one who, though she may be the weaker partner, is equally an heir to the life of grace. This will stop anything from coming in the way of your prayers (The Jerusalem Bible).

Introduction

Some years ago I was invited to a gathering of six to eight couples, all of whom shared something in common—they all had either separated or divorced and then come back together as husband and wife. They all shared how their marriages had crumbled and then how they had been reunited after they came to trust in Jesus Christ. It has been about twenty years since that gathering, and to my knowledge no more than one of these couples is still together. I am not even certain that one couple remains.

How can a man and a woman who both believe in Jesus Christ fail to fulfill their calling as a married couple? Why does the divorce rate among Christians differ little from non-Christians? The answer is many-fold. First, Christians have forgotten, ignored, or blatantly rejected our Lord’s teaching on the permanence of marriage. Second, Christian husbands and wives fail to understand and apply the biblical principles governing the practice of both partners in marriage. Third, Christian husbands and wives forget the divine purpose for marriage, and therefore the profound ramifications of failing our responsibilities in marriage. Fourth, Christian couples fail to view their marriage responsibilities in the light of eternity. Christian hope is foundational to a Christian marriage. Fifth, somehow it is mistakenly assumed that the spiritual equality of the husband and the wife wipes out the necessity for the submission of the one mate to the other.

In but one verse, Peter addresses each of these five fundamental dimensions of marriage. I believe I can safely say that where these truths are understood and obeyed, no Christian marriage should fail. For God’s sake, and our own, let us hear and heed these words from the apostle Peter.

The Context

We know this verse is a part of a larger passage in which Peter is dealing with the subject of submission, which introduced in chapter 2:

13 Submit yourselves for the Lord’s sake to every human institution, whether to a king as the one in authority, 14 or to governors as sent by him for the punishment of evildoers and the praise of those who do right. 15 For such is the will of God that by doing right you may silence the ignorance of foolish men. 16 [Act] as free men, and do not use your freedom as a covering for evil, but [use it] as bondslaves of God. 17 Honor all men; love the brotherhood, fear God, honor the king. (1 Peter 2:13-17).

From here, Peter goes on to specifically address slaves (2:18-21a) and wives (3:1-6). The example set for all is the Lord Jesus Christ who is the model Suffering Servant (2:21b-25).

The words “in the same way” (3:1) and “likewise” (3:7) are unfortunately different translations of precisely the same term in the original text. They indicate that just as the example of our Lord is the pattern for slaves and Christian wives, it is also the pattern for Christian husbands. When Peter turns to husbands in verse 7, he simply continues the subject of submission he began in chapter 2 and continues to the end of chapter 3. Some unique features of Peter’s instructions to husbands in verse 7 need to be recognized:

(1) This is the only instance in Peter’s discussion of submission thus far in which a reciprocal obligation is specified. Elsewhere when children are instructed to obey their parents, parents are likewise exhorted concerning their responsibilities. When slaves are addressed, so are their masters. This is not so with Peter, except for wives and their husbands.

(2) Elsewhere submission is specifically called for, but here it is required by inference.

(3) In the other instances requiring submission, it is assumed the one submitting is a believer, while the one to whom submission is required may likely be an unbeliever.

(4) Elsewhere the one to whom submission is required is looked upon as the source of suffering for the one who is required to submit.

(5) Elsewhere, the goal of submission is the salvation of the one to whom submission is required. Here, Peter assumes that both the husband and the wife are saved.

(6) Elsewhere, the goal is a public witness to the proclamation of the excellencies of Him who called us to the unbelievers who behold our submission in the midst of suffering. Here, the outcome is an unhindered prayer life of the husband and wife.

(7) Elsewhere, submission is assumed to require silence on the part of the one who submits. Nowhere is the husband specifically called upon to be silent.

(8) Elsewhere, submission is called for on the part of a subordinate to his or her superior. Here, the husband is called upon to submit to one under his authority.

Crucial Decisions

From the various ways this one verse is translated, we see that those who have studied it do not understand it in exactly the same way. Several fundamental decisions have significantly impacted my interpretation of this verse, which I will spell out so you will understand the premises on which my interpretation is founded.⁹⁸

First, it is my conviction that the text is best explained and applied as rendered in its most strictly literal fashion. The King James Version and the American Standard Version are the most literal translations I have encountered.

Second, there are two principle verbs (actually they are participles) in this verse, and I understand them to provide the two main points of emphasis.

Third, I understand the term “knowledge” to refer, first and foremost, to the knowledge which comes to believers from the Scriptures rather than from other sources.

Fourth, I define the term “to live together with” as it is employed in the Greek translation of the Old Testament (the Septuagint). This term has a broad meaning of “living together with” another, without any marital or sexual connotations (Deuteronomy 25:5a⁹⁹; 24:1). Its most common use is in reference to a man living with a woman as his wife (Genesis 20:3).¹⁰⁰ Sometimes there is a more specific reference to sexual intercourse between a husband and his wife (Deuteronomy 22:13; 25:5b). Isaiah 62:5 appears to merge the idea of taking a wife and consummating it with a sexual union.

Fifth, I understand that this verse indicates the wife in view is a Christian and that the prayers referred to are the prayers of the husband and the wife.¹⁰¹

Sixth, I understand the text which most literally translates the original text of 1 Peter 3:7 is the King James Version, which should be outlined as on the following page:

Likewise, ye husbands, dwell with [them] according to knowledge, giving honour unto the wife, as unto the weaker vessel, and as being heirs together of the grace of life; that your prayers be not hindered. (King James Version)

Dwelling Together According to Knowledge

We must remember that Peter’s instructions to slaves in chapter 2 and to wives in chapter 3 were not calling for actions radically different from what the culture of that day expected. Slaves were expected to submit to their masters, as wives were expected to submit to their own husbands. The difference was the attitude which motivated this submission and the manner in which this submission was carried out. Wives and slaves might do what they were told, but Peter required something more, a truly submissive spirit which silently accepted suffering for being godly.

When we come to Peter’s words to husbands, there is little common ground between what society expected from Christian husbands and what God required of them. The command to dwell with their wives should be understood in the light of our Lord’s teaching:

3 And [some] Pharisees came to Him, testing Him, and saying, “Is it lawful [for a man] to divorce his wife for any cause at all?” 4 And He answered and said, “Have you not read, that He who created [them] from the beginning MADE THEM MALE AND FEMALE, 5 and said, ‘FOR THIS CAUSE A MAN SHALL LEAVE HIS FATHER AND MOTHER, AND SHALL CLEAVE TO HIS WIFE; AND THE TWO SHALL BECOME ONE FLESH’? 6 “Consequently they are no longer two, but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let no man separate.” 7 They said to Him, “Why then did Moses command to GIVE HER A CERTIFICATE OF DIVORCE AND SEND [her] AWAY?” 8 He said to them, “Because of your hardness of heart, Moses permitted you to divorce your wives; but from the beginning it has not been this way. 9 “And I say to you, whoever divorces his wife, except for immorality, and marries another woman commits adultery.” 10 The disciples *said to Him, “If the relationship of the man with his wife is like this, it is better not to marry.” 11 But He said to them, “Not all men [can] accept this statement, but [only] those to whom it has been given. 12 “For there are eunuchs who were born that way from their mother’s womb; and there are eunuchs who were made eunuchs by men; and there are [also] eunuchs who made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the kingdom of heaven. He who is able to accept [this,] let him accept [it.”] (Matthew 19:3-12).

Whether liberal or conservative, Jewish religious leaders had a much lower view of marriage than our Lord. All of these leaders, including the disciples, expected a good number of husbands to forsake their marriage vows, divorce their wives, and marry another wife. The question in their mind was not “if” divorce should occur, but only how petty the excuse would have to be to justify the divorce. In this Matthew 19 text, Jesus did not contradict His teaching on divorce elsewhere. There were certain circumstances in which it was allowed. But He is emphatic in this passage that marriage is to be entered into as a permanent commitment. The disciples were shocked. Perhaps, they reasoned, it would be better not to enter into marriage if Jesus’ view of marriage was the standard. Jesus did not back off when the disciples reasoned this way. They should not hastily enter into a marriage commitment which they did not expect to keep for a lifetime.

While the men of Peter’s day could rather easily ease out of one marriage and into another, the same was not true for women. There was therefore no need for Peter to command wives as he does husbands. The command to “dwell with their wives” is but the instruction of our Lord as expressed through His apostles. Although the culture of that day and ours tolerates divorce, Peter instructs Christian husbands to remain in their marriage. Paul agrees, instructing wives not to abandon their marriages and husbands not to divorce:

10 But to the married I give instructions, not I, but the Lord, that the wife should not leave her husband 11 (but if she does leave, let her remain unmarried, or else be reconciled to her husband), and that the husband should not send his wife away (1 Corinthians 7:10-11).¹⁰²

Does a Christian husband feel “abused” by his wife? It certainly can happen, for the Bible indicates the wife can make life miserable for her husband. One way a wife can make her husband suffer is by being unsubmissive—contentious. Another way is by her tongue. Peter certainly addresses these, and we likewise find them dealt with in the Book of Proverbs (see 12:4; 19:13; 21:9, 19; 25:24; 27:15). Paul likewise warns husbands of bitterness (Colossians 3:19). Regardless of the “suffering” a husband might think he endures at the hand (or tongue) of his wife, Peter says, “stay with her.”

It is not enough for the husband merely to endure marriage. He must take the “high road” of marriage, the road only a Christian is enabled to walk. Peter instructs husbands to “dwell with” their wives according to knowledge. This expression is very important. As one looks at the various translations, one sees how much difference there is in the way the expression is understood.

But what does Peter want us to understand by this word “knowledge”? Having looked up every use of this term in the New Testament,¹⁰³ I think it is safe to say its primary emphasis is upon that “knowledge” which is from above, knowledge of Christ, the Gospel, and that which God has revealed, especially as it relates to marriage.¹⁰⁴ There are distorted forms of knowledge, but this false knowledge is clearly indicated (Romans 2:20; 1 Timothy 6:20).

Most significant is the way Peter uses this term “knowledge” in his second epistle:

4 Seeing that His divine power has granted to us everything pertaining to life and godliness, through the true knowledge of Him who called us by His own glory and excellence … 5 Now for this very reason also, applying all diligence, in your faith supply moral excellence, and in [your] moral excellence, knowledge; 6 and in [your] knowledge, self-control, and in [your] self-control, perseverance, and in [your] perseverance, godliness (2 Peter 1:3, 5-6).¹⁰⁵

But grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ. To Him [be] the glory, both now and to the day of eternity. Amen (2 Peter 3:18).

The principle thrust of Peter’s command to husbands, therefore, is this: Husbands, keep on living with your wives in accordance with that knowledge which you now have as Christians. Further evidence in support of this emphasis on Scriptural knowledge can be seen in Peter’s description of our condition before salvation as being “ignorant:”

As obedient children, do not be conformed to the former lusts [which were yours] in your ignorance (1 Peter 1:14).

For such is the will of God that by doing right you may silence the ignorance of foolish men (1 Peter 2:15).

What is this knowledge which should govern the way Christian husbands live with their wives? Peter mentions several specific aspects of this knowledge. First, we are to live with our wives in the knowledge that we are to subordinate our own selfish desires to the benefit and blessing of our wives, as Christ did for the Church. Peter has already referred to this in chapter 2, verses 21-25, and points to it by the word “likewise” in 1 Peter 3:7. Paul even more pointedly points to the way in which our Lord’s love for His church is to be the pattern for the husband’s relationship with his wife:

22 Wives, [be subject] to your own husbands, as to the Lord. 23 For the husband is the head of the wife, as Christ also is the head of the church, He Himself [being] the Savior of the body. 24 But as the church is subject to Christ, so also the wives [ought to be] to their husbands in everything. 25 Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ also loved the church and gave Himself up for her; 26 that He might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word, 27 that He might present to Himself the church in all her glory, having no spot or wrinkle or any such thing; but that she should be holy and blameless. 28 So husbands ought also to love their own wives as their own bodies. He who loves his own wife loves himself; 29 for no one ever hated his own flesh, but nourishes and cherishes it, just as Christ also [does] the church, 30 because we are members of His body. 31 FOR THIS CAUSE A MAN SHALL LEAVE HIS FATHER AND MOTHER, AND SHALL CLEAVE TO HIS WIFE; AND THE TWO SHALL BECOME ONE FLESH. 32 This mystery is great; but I am speaking with reference to Christ and the church. 33 Nevertheless let each individual among you also love his own wife even as himself; and [let] the wife [see to it] that she respect her husband (Ephesians 5:22-33).

The knowledge which should govern the conduct of the Christian husband and wife is not knowledge known to mankind in general. Paul tells us it is a mystery (Ephesians 5:32). Thus, the mystery of the gospel (Ephesians 3) is the knowledge which instructs us concerning Christian marriage.

Secondly, we are to recognize that some aspects of marriage are matters of mutual submission. Other revelation regarding Christian marriage which we find in Paul’s first epistle to the Corinthians appears to compliment Peter’s words to husbands in our text.

3 Let the husband fulfill his duty to his wife, and likewise also the wife to her husband. 4 The wife does not have authority over her own body, but the husband [does]; and likewise also the husband does not have authority over his own body, but the wife [does.] 5 Stop depriving one another, except by agreement for a time that you may devote yourselves to prayer, and come together again lest Satan tempt you because of your lack of self-control (1 Corinthians 7:3-5).

Paul, like Peter, points out a very practical connection between the sexual relationship of a husband and wife to their prayer life, which we will consider later in the lesson. But it is very interesting that Paul does not speak of the sexual union between a husband and his wife only in terms of the wife’s submission to her husband, but rather in terms of the mutual submission of both the husband and the wife. The husband does have authority over his wife’s body, but so also the wife has authority over his body. It is not a one-sided submission, but a mutual submission.

This is not to say the relationship between a husband and his wife is entirely governed by mutual submission, so that the headship of the husband over his wife is denied or nullified. It simply says that in the Christian marriage, some matters are governed by mutual submission, while others are governed by the submission of the wife to the authority of her husband. Even when the husband is in authority, his obligation is to relate to his wife as Christ loved the church, using His authority and power to minister to her for her benefit and blessing.

I understand Peter’s words to include the sexual dimensions of marriage.¹⁰⁶ From the use of this expression (“to dwell together with”) in the Old Testament (Septuagint), I understand Peter to be referring not only to the fact that the husband lives with his wife, but that the husband persists in fulfilling his responsibilities as a husband, which includes the sexual intimacy the husband is expected to maintain with his wife. I believe this is what Paul refers to in 1 Corinthians 7.

Some would favor the view that Peter’s words here refer primarily to the husband’s knowledge of his wife, of her weaknesses, her needs, her uniqueness as a woman and as an individual. While this kind of knowledge is important for the husband to minister to his wife, I do not think Peter’s emphasis lies here. This, in my opinion, is a secondary matter, while biblical knowledge is primary. I therefore seem to differ with Edmund Clowney’s emphasis, but not in a way that rejects the point he makes:

“Does Peter mean knowledge of the wife, or knowledge of God and his calling? The close connection with the description of the wife as the weaker partner favors the specific sense: the husband must dwell with his wife as one who knows her needs, who recognizes the delicacy of her nature and feelings. On the other hand, Peter has warned against ‘the evil desires you had when you lived in ignorance’ (1;14). Knowledge of God distinguishes Christian love from pagan lust. That saving knowledge enables the husband to love his wife as Christ loved the church and gave himself for it.”¹⁰⁷

Granting Honor to the Wife

Not only is the husband to live with his wife according to knowledge, he is also instructed to grant honor to his wife. The noun “honor” is found here in 1 Peter as well as in 2:7 and then in 2 Peter 1:17. The verb, “to honor,” is used twice by Peter in 1 Peter 2:

Honor all men; love the brotherhood, fear God, honor the king (1 Peter 2:17).

To honor someone is to attribute value to them, to esteem them as having value. To dishonor someone is to view them as having little, lesser, or no value (see Matthew 5:22; James 2:1-6). Honor often has to do with value, but it also has to do with importance. Submission is evidenced when we consider the interests of another more important than self-interest (see Philippians 2:3-8). The husband is not to submit to his wife in the sense of subordinating himself to her authority, but he is to submit to her in the sense that he highly values her and subordinates his selfish interests to her well-being.

It would be safe to say that in the world of Peter’s day (not to exclude our own) wives were not honored by their husbands. The honoring of one’s wife was foreign to that culture, as it is in our day. The reasons for honoring one’s wife are even more foreign. Peter sets down two reasons why a Christian husband should honor his wife. First, he should honor her as the weaker vessel. Second, he should honor her as a fellow heir of the grace of life. Let us consider each of these areas of honor.

Husbands are to grant their wives honor as the weaker vessel. If we are to understand and obey Peter’s teaching we must first understand what Peter means when he refers to the woman as the weaker vessel. Furthermore, we must also grasp how a husband can and should honor his wife as the weaker vessel.

The term “vessel” is used in various ways. In 1 Thessalonians 4:4 Paul seems to use the term vessel in reference to the human body. Whether that be of the man or of his wife is a matter of discussion in this particular instance, but it is not crucial for our study. In 2 Corinthians 4:7, Paul writes that the treasure of the gospel is contained in “earthen vessels.” Again, he seems to be referring to the human body. Both husbands and wives are “vessels” and while the man is “weak” the woman is the “weaker” of the two.

Just what is this “weakness” to which Peter refers? It is worthwhile to note that Peter does not precisely define just how the woman is the weaker vessel. The term “weak” is used often of physical sicknesses and infirmities which weaken the body. While we can all agree that, in general, women are not physically as strong as men, this does not seem to be Peter’s primary meaning. Weakness is also used in a more general way in the New Testament, which I think is more in line with Peter’s meaning. Consider these texts:

27 But God has chosen the foolish things of the world to shame the wise, and God has chosen the weak things of the world to shame the things which are strong (1 Corinthians 1:27).

21 And the eye cannot say to the hand, “I have no need of you”; or again the head to the feet, “I have no need of you.” 22 On the contrary, it is much truer that the members of the body which seem to be weaker are necessary; 23 and those [members] of the body, which we deem less honorable, on these we bestow more abundant honor, and our unseemly [members come to] have more abundant seemliness, 24 whereas our seemly [members] have no need [of it.] But God has [so] composed the body, giving more abundant honor to that [member] which lacked (1 Corinthians 12:21-24).

And we urge you, brethren, admonish the unruly, encourage the fainthearted, help the weak, be patient with all men (1 Thessalonians 5:14).

For they say, “His letters are weighty and strong, but his personal presence is unimpressive [literally, weak], and his speech contemptible” (2 Corinthians 10:10).

The “weakness” to which Peter refers are not so much a weakness with which a woman is born, but that role or position of weakness to which she submits, in obedience to the Word of God. To be weak is to lack power and prominence. For a woman to submit to her husband, to be silent and have a gentle and quiet spirit (as taught in 3:1-6) is to be weak in the eyes of the world. The husband is to honor his wife because she has been divinely appointed to assume the “weaker” role.

How then does the husband honor his wife as the weaker vessel? If the responsibility of the wife is to give priority to her inner beauty rather than to outward adornment, it is the husband’s duty to honor his wife, to promote her well-being and praise. In submission to His Father, our Lord sought only to obey and not to promote His own glory but the glory of the Father. The Father is the One who promotes the glory of the Son (see Philippians 2:3-11). The husband of the godly woman of Proverbs is “known in the gates” of the city, because of his wife (31:23). But it certainly seems that he proclaims the praises of his wife in the gates (31:31). In Ephesians 5, the husband is to imitate Christ’s relationship to the church by his relationship to his wife. Christ is then said not only to have given Himself sacrificially for the church, but He is actively at work to perfect and beautify His bride:

25 Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ also loved the church and gave Himself up for her; 26 that He might sanctify her, having cleansed her by the washing of water with the word, 27 that He might present to Himself the church in all her glory, having no spot or wrinkle or any such thing; but that she should be holy and blameless. 28 So husbands ought also to love their own wives as their own bodies (Ephesians 5:25-28a).

Should the husband therefore not be seeking to glorify the wife, even as she seeks to bring glory to him (see also 1 Corinthians 11:2-16, especially verses 7, 15)?

The same principle seems evident in relation to spiritual gifts. Some members of the body, some gifts, do not seem to be as significant as others. They seem weaker, and so we bestow greater honor on them. We seek to exalt and enhance them (1 Corinthians 12:20-25). So the husband honors his wife as the weaker vessel by seeking to exalt and elevate her.

What a wonderful thing submission is in marriage! The wife seeks to glorify her husband, but submits to him. The husband uses his leadership to “glorify” his wife as he exercises leadership over her in a way that sacrifices his personal interests to bring about the best interests of his bride.

We see another illustration of how we honor those who are weaker in the Scriptures in Romans 14 (also see 1 Corinthians 8-10). There Paul instructs us concerning our conduct in relationship to a “weaker brother.” A weaker brother is one who does not understand the Scriptures so well as to understand certain areas of personal liberty. Neither does he or she have the faith to do the things a “stronger” brother can do in good faith. The stronger brother honors the weaker brother by refraining from practicing his liberty so that the weaker brother is not made to stumble in his faith.

I have only recently begun to appreciate this area. My wife and I have counseled a number of couples preparing for marriage, but only recently have I begun to warn husbands to be careful to use their authority in such a way as not to force or pressure their wives to do something contrary to her convictions. The principles of Romans 14 apply as much to husbands and wives as they do to anyone else in the church.

Here we can see the true spirit of submission. True submission does not exercise strength at the expense of the weak, but rather refrains for the benefit of the weak. In the world, men use their strength to their own advantage and to the disadvantage of the weak. In the Christian faith, the strong employ their strength in such a way as to edify the weak:

14 Now we who are strong ought to bear the weaknesses of those without strength and not [just] please ourselves (Romans 15:1; see also 1 Thessalonians 5:14).

The Christian husband seeks to discover the weaknesses of his wife, not so that he may use these to his advantage but to employ his strength in compensating for her weakness. This kind of spirit guards the husband from misappropriating his authority so as to rule with an iron fist over his wife. This kind of servant leadership causes the Christian husband to stand apart and above unbelieving husbands, who do not live with their wives according to knowledge but according to their ignorance.

There is a second basis for the honor the Christian husband is to grant his wife. This is her position as a “fellow heir of the grace of life.” I do not understand Peter to be talking about a husband and wife sharing physical life here, but rather to be talking about spiritual life. First Peter is not only about suffering; it is also about hope, our future hope:

13 Therefore, gird your minds for action, keep sober [in spirit,] fix your hope completely on the grace to be brought to you at the revelation of Jesus Christ (1 Peter 1:13; see also 1:3-12, etc.)

Peter has been explaining how the Christian’s hope changes his perspective on suffering.¹⁰⁸ The Christian’s hope makes him an alien and a stranger on this earth. The suffering we experience in this life is short and sweet compared to our eternal glory, especially when we understand that our suffering benefits us, glorifies God, and may lead to the salvation of others. And so it is that we can submit to government authorities, slaves can submit to cruel masters, and wives to unbelieving husbands.

But now Peter shows how the Christian husband’s hope should change his attitudes and actions toward his wife. For a short time the wife is subject to her husband in this life. But in eternity it will not be this way at all. For all eternity there will be no distinction between slave and free, rich and poor, male and female. Husbands are to view marriage in terms of eternity:

29 But Jesus answered and said to them, “You are mistaken, not understanding the Scriptures, or the power of God. 30 “For in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are like angels in heaven (Matthew 22:29-30).

29 But this I say, brethren, the time has been shortened, so that from now on those who have wives should be as though they had none; 30 and those who weep, as though they did not weep; and those who rejoice, as though they did not rejoice; and those who buy, as though they did not possess; 31 and those who use the world, as though they did not make full use of it; for the form of this world is passing away (1 Corinthians 7:29-31).

The Sadducees of Jesus’ day (and I suspect many other Jews) thought heaven was going to simply be a continuation of things the way they have been on earth. Jesus shocked them by telling them things would be very different in heaven. There would be no marrying in heaven. The husband-wife relationship is temporal, not eternal. This is why Paul urged those who were single to seriously contemplate staying single, and why he instructed those who are married to live as though they are not.

So far as what awaits Christian husbands and wives, there is no difference in heaven. The roles which husbands and wives are to fulfill in this life will be left behind when we enter into the hope of heaven. Christian husbands, therefore, cannot look on their wives as unbelievers do, for they look upon their wives only in terms of the present time and culture. Christian husbands must look upon their wives in the light of their ultimate possession and their present status as joint heirs of this possession.

Unhindered Prayers

The goal of Christ’s suffering was our salvation (1 Peter 2:21-25). The goal of the wife’s submission in suffering is the salvation of her husband (3:1-2). The goal for the Christian husband’s conduct in relation to his wife is unhindered prayer.

7b So that your prayers may not be hindered.

Peter speaks here of the relationship of a Christian husband and his believing wife. It is also my understanding that Peter is speaking of all the prayers of the husband and the wife—their individual prayers, but most particularly those prayers which they engage in together (see also 1 Corinthians 7:5).¹⁰⁹

Peter is applying a more general principle to the relationship of a husband and his wife in marriage. That general principle is: Broken or injured relationships between Christians hinder them in their interaction with God. Loving God and loving men sums up the Old Testament Law (see Matthew 22:34-40). If our relation-ship with others is strained, it would seem to create problems in our relationship with God (see Matthew 6:14-15). Our strained relationship with a brother must be reconciled before we conduct our worship:

23 “If therefore you are presenting your offering at the altar, and there remember that your brother has something against you, 24 leave your offering there before the altar, and go your way; first be reconciled to your brother, and then come and present your offering” (Matthew 5:23-24).

In a similar fashion, when the relationship between a husband and his wife is strained, it hinders our communion and fellowship with God, and thus the prayer life of a couple is paralyzed by the sin of one or both partners. When there is conflict between believers, it is often due to their pursuit of self-interest rather than a mutual submission to each other. In such cases, our prayers are both misdirected and unanswered:

1 What is the source of quarrels and conflicts among you? Is not the source your pleasures that wage war in your members? 2 You lust and do not have; [so] you commit murder. And you are envious and cannot obtain; [so] you fight and quarrel. You do not have because you do not ask. 3 You ask and do not receive, because you ask with wrong motives, so that you may spend [it] on your pleasures. 4 You adulteresses, do you not know that friendship with the world is hostility toward God? Therefore whoever wishes to be a friend of the world makes himself an enemy of God (James 4:1-4).

Conclusion

Peter instructs Christian husbands to follow the example of the Lord Jesus Christ, the ultimate “Suffering Servant” (1 Peter 2:21-25). They are to do so by manifesting the servanthood of Christ toward their wives, just as Christ demonstrated His servanthood toward the church. Our Lord did not cling to His elevated status over men and demand that men serve Him. Instead, He became the servant and the Savior of men:

4 Do not [merely] look out for your own personal interests, but also for the interests of others. 5 Have this attitude in yourselves which was also in Christ Jesus, 6 who, although He existed in the form of God, did not regard equality with God a thing to be grasped, 7 but emptied Himself, taking the form of a bond-servant, [and] being made in the likeness of men. 8 And being found in appearance as a man, He humbled Himself by becoming obedient to the point of death, even death on a cross (Philippians 2:4-8).

The husband should not endeavor to “use” his headship over his wife for his own fulfillment or satisfaction but should use it as a means of serving his wife. Rather than demanding honor from his wife, he should grant honor to her. And this should be done not only when she is obedient and fulfilling her responsibilities. It should be done even when the wife is failing to be and to do all that our Lord has required of her. Christ’s humbling did not occur when we were “strong,” when we were obedient, but when we were enslaved to sin, helpless and hopeless on our own:

6 For while we were still helpless, at the right time Christ died for the ungodly. 7 For one will hardly die for a righteous man; though perhaps for the good man someone would dare even to die. 8 But God demonstrates His own love toward us, in that while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us. 9 Much more then, having now been justified by His blood, we shall be saved from the wrath [of God] through Him. 10 For if while we were enemies, we were reconciled to God through the death of His Son, much more, having been reconciled, we shall be saved by His life (Romans 5:6-10).

In chapter 2, Peter turned our attention to the Lord Jesus Christ as the model servant, whose silent and sacrificial suffering brought about our own salvation. Paul does the same thing in Ephesians 5:22-33. The cross is not only the pattern for Christian marriage, it is the basis. Only the husband who has the “mind of Christ” will, like Christ, persistently seek to serve his wife at the cost of personal sacrifice. It is only through the grace of God in Christ that this can be done.

The “weakness” of the wife is the context for the husband’s servanthood. He lives with his wife at the deepest level of intimacy, and thus the weaknesses of the wife will be most apparent to him. The problem is that our fallen nature inclines us to capitalize on our wife’s weaknesses to enhance our own position and power. How many husbands have you heard publicly expose some weakness of his wife, often with sarcasm?

The weaknesses of the wife should be recognized and responded to by the husband as an opportunity for ministry, but often they are not. One reason this is true is because the wife’s weaknesses may be directed against the husband. When the wife fails to live up to her high calling as a Christian wife, she often strikes out at the one who is nearest—her husband. And so we can see how the husband may be “abused” and in his suffering as a husband may toy with the temptation of giving up or of getting out. The times when we most need to minister to our wives are those times when we will likely least desire to do so. This is why obedience to Christ’s commands can only be done through His power. He is the One who causes us both to “will and to do His good pleasure” (Philippians 2:13).

Peter’s instructions to us as husbands requires that we first have a personal relationship with Him who suffered and died on our behalf (1 Peter 2:21-25). Then it is essential that we know the Scriptures, for it is only by the knowledge God has revealed in His Word that we can “dwell with” our wives in a way that pleases Him and honors the one God has joined together with us in marriage. We must not allow our position and its authority to harden us so that we become calloused and insensitive to the weaknesses of our wives, for only in recognizing those weaknesses can we respond as we should as servants and minister to those needs.

Finally, we must also be aware of the danger that especially exists in our culture of abusing Peter’s teaching here. It is one thing for a husband to be a servant to his wife by knowing and ministering to the weaknesses of his wife; it is quite another for her to expect and even demand that he “meet her needs,” as she defines them. The feminist movement and the essence of its emphasis might be symbolized by a female Arnold Swartzenager, standing with clenched fists and demanding, “Go ahead, meet my needs!”

Our weaknesses are more evident to those close to us than they are to us. That is why they are weaknesses; they are blind spots. If we were keenly aware of them, they would not be the problem they are. And so the one with the weakness may not be the one who informs us of their true needs. This does not at all suggest we should not listen carefully and sensitively to our wives or to other believers. It is simply to say that the weaknesses of the weak believer are most readily apparent to the one who is strong in that area.

We see this especially true in the area of spiritual gifts. The one who is weak in teaching is most apparent to the one with the gift of teaching. The one who is weak in evangelism is most apparent to the evangelist. And so let us beware of looking only to our mate to learn what their true needs are. This is where the entire body of Christ may begin to play a very necessary and needed role. It is where counsel may need to be sought from others. Let us seek to minister to true weakness, but let us also remember that this is but one aspect of our responsibility to others. As Paul once wrote:

14 And we urge you, brethren, admonish the unruly, encourage the fainthearted, help the weak, be patient with all men (1 Thessalonians 5:14).

Sometimes it is not encouragement that is needed, but help. Sometimes it is not help that is needed, but admonition. Let us minister to true needs, to the good of our mate, and to the glory of God.

As we conclude, let us remember that these principles, which Peter has applied to husbands in the context of their relationship with their wives, apply in general to all relationships in the church.

We are all to live together in unity and harmony:

(A Song of Ascents, of David.) Behold, how good and how pleasant it is For brothers to dwell together in unity! (Psalms 133:1)

12 And so, as those who have been chosen of God, holy and beloved, put on a heart of compassion, kindness, humility, gentleness and patience; 13 bearing with one another, and forgiving each other, whoever has a complaint against anyone; just as the Lord forgave you, so also should you. 14 And beyond all these things [put on] love, which is the perfect bond of unity. 15 And let the peace of Christ rule in your hearts, to which indeed you were called in one body; and be thankful. 16 Let the word of Christ richly dwell within you, with all wisdom teaching and admonishing one another with psalms [and] hymns [and] spiritual songs, singing with thankfulness in your hearts to God. 17 And whatever you do in word or deed, [do] all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks through Him to God the Father (Colossians 3:12-17; see Ephesians 4:1ff.; Philippians 2:1-8; 1 Peter 3:8-12, etc.).

We are to live together according to knowledge:

9 For this reason also, since the day we heard [of it], we have not ceased to pray for you and to ask that you may be filled with the knowledge of His will in all spiritual wisdom and understanding, 10 so that you may walk in a manner worthy of the Lord, to please [Him] in all respects, bearing fruit in every good work and increasing in the knowledge of God (Colossians 1:9-10; see Ephesians 4:1-24).

We are to grant honor one to another:

17 Be devoted to one another in brotherly love; give preference to one another in honor (Romans 12:10; see also 1 Peter 2:17).

We are to minister to the weaknesses of one another:

1 Now we who are strong ought to bear the weaknesses of those without strength and not [just] please ourselves. 2 Let each of us please his neighbor for his good, to his edification (Romans 15:1-2).

1 Brethren, even if a man is caught in any trespass, you who are spiritual, restore such a one in a spirit of gentleness; [each one] looking to yourself, lest you too be tempted. 2 Bear one another’s burdens, and thus fulfill the law of Christ (Galatians 6:1-2).

May God grant that all of us would seek to live toward one another as Peter has directed Christian husbands to live in relationship to their wives, to His glory, and for our ultimate good.

98 Every student of this text must answer several crucial questions before its interpretation and application can be discerned. The answers to these questions will dictate the meaning of the text:

(1) Is Peter talking to “abused husbands” suffering at the hand (or mouth) of their wives? If so, what is the abuse, and how does Peter’s instruction directly deal with it? If these husbands are abused, why is a Christian wife seemingly referred to, rather than an unbelieving mate? If the husbands are not looked upon as “abused,” why are husbands addressed in this context, with the same term which introduced his instruction to wives (“in the same way,” 3:1)?

(2) In the command to “dwell with them according to knowledge,” is the emphasis on “living with” or on “according to knowledge,” or both? What do the expressions “dwell with,” “according to knowledge,” “giving honour,” “as the weaker vessel,” and “being heirs together of the grace of life” mean?

(3) In what sense is the wife a “weaker vessel”? How and why does the husband give her honour as a weaker vessel?

(4) How does not obeying Peter’s instruction result in the hindering of prayers? Whose prayers are hindered? Are these the prayers of the husbands, of the wives, of husbands and wives separately, or of husbands and wives together?

(5) What parallel texts, if any, do we have to help us here?

99 This first instance in Deuteronomy 25:5 refers to two brothers who live in the same place. When the first brother dies, the second, who lives nearby, is to take the widow as his wife in order to raise up seed for his deceased brother.

100 In this instance, Abimelech had taken Sarah as “his wife,” but he had not had sexual relations with her.

101 This is opposed to the view that the reference is only to the husbands’ prayers.

102 The terms used for the wife’s departure from her husband and the husband’s divorcing of his wife are not the same in this text, suggesting at least that divorce was more an option for the husband, while separation was the alternative open to the wife.

103 Luke 1:77; 11:52; Romans 2;20; 11:33; 15:14; 1 Corinthians 1:5; 8:1, 10, 11; 12:8; 13:2, 8; 14:6; 2 Corinthians 2:14; 4:6; 6:6; 8:7; 10:5; 11:6; Ephesians 3:19; Philippians 3:8; Colossians 2:3; 1 Timothy 6:20; 1 Peter 3:7; 2 Peter 1:5, 6; 3:18.

104 “With an intelligent recognition of the nature of the marriage relation.” Vincent, as cited by A. T. Robertson, Word Pictures in the New Testament (Nashville: Broadman Press, 1933), vol. VI, p. 110.

105 The first term, “true knowledge,” is not the exact term, but the same root with an intensifying prefix. It does fall into the same word group.

106 Some go too far in this. Edmund Clowney, for example, takes the expression, “dwelling together according to knowledge,” as referring especially to the sexual relationship of the husband and the wife: “The expression describing their living together is not limited to sexual intimacy, but it has particular reference to it. In all their life together, and particularly in their sexual union, the husband is to relate to his wife ‘according to knowledge’.” Edmund Clowney, The Message of 1 Peter (Downers Grove: Inter-Varsity Press), 1988. The Bible Speaks Today Series. pp. 133-134.

107 Clowney, p. 134.

108 Paul does the same thing. See Romans 5:1-11; 8:18-25; 2 Corinthians 4 and 5; Philippians.

109 There are those who think it is only the husbands’ prayers which are in view here. For example, William Barclay cites Bigg: “As Bigg puts it: ‘The sighs of the injured wife come between the husband’s prayers and God’s hearing.’” William Barclay, The Letters of James and Peter (Philadelphia: The Westminster Press, [rev. ed], 1976. The Daily Study Bible Series. P. 224. I do not think this conforms to the spirit of this text or to Paul’s words in 1 Corinthians 7:5.

8 To sum up, let all be harmonious, sympathetic, brotherly, kindhearted, and humble in spirit; 9 not returning evil for evil, or insult for insult, but giving a blessing instead; for you were called for the very purpose [because unto this you were called] that you might inherit a blessing. 10 For, “Let him who means to love life and see good days Refrain his tongue from evil and his lips from speaking guile. 11 “And let him turn away from evil and do good; Let him seek peace and pursue it. 12 “For the eyes of the Lord are upon the righteous, And His ears attend to their prayer, But the face of the Lord is against those who do evil.”

Introduction

Years ago as I walked across my college campus to my next class, a fellow student happened to be walking with me. As usual in Seattle it had been raining, and the ground was wet. There was a vast array of sidewalks, but also muddy paths in the lawn where students cut corners. As we approached one muddy spot, an obviously-hurried coed attempted to pass us on our right. Moving too quickly for her footing, she began to fall, with books flying into the air as she desperately reached out to catch her balance. It might have worked had not the fellow beside me, who could have been the hero of the day, jumped back just as she reached out to catch hold of him, allowing her to sprawl headlong into the mud!

It was a pathetic scene as the girl attempted to salvage some scrap of human dignity by snatching up her books and running off out of public view. Since there was now nothing we could do, the other fellow and I began to make our way to class again. Sensing the need to explain his actions, the student exclaimed: “I thought she was trying to attack me!” Now here was an amazing thought. This young girl was trying to attack a young man. And the young man could think of nothing to do other than jump back and allow her to fall. Here was a man who desperately needed help.

Yet we find a parable in this story. All too many Christians shrink back as fellow-believers and others fall right before their very eyes. We are a nation so caught up in ourselves, so introspective and self-seeking, that many times we do not even recognize what is taking place until it is too late. And when we do see others in need of help, like the priest and the Levite in the story of the Good Samaritan, we avoid becoming involved.

In the verses preceding this lesson (2:11–3:7), Peter gave instructions on submission and suffering as it relates to specific relationships. Now, in 1 Peter 3:8-12, Peter sets down the general principles which should govern all our relationships.¹¹⁸

Attitudes That Revolutionize Relationships¹¹⁹
(3:8-9a)

Let All Be Harmonious

The Christian should have an attitude and outlook at harmony with others. One can easily see how this can be true of a believer as he or she relates to fellow believers. As Paul writes:

16 Be of the same mind toward one another … (Romans 12:16a).

3 Being diligent to preserve the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace. 4 [There is] one body and one Spirit, just as also you were called in one hope of your calling; 5 one Lord, one faith, one baptism, 6 one God and Father of all who is over all and through all and in all (Ephesians 4:3-6).

1 If therefore there is any encouragement in Christ, if there is any consolation of love, if there is any fellowship of the Spirit, if any affection and compassion, 2 make my joy complete by being of the same mind, maintaining the same love, united in spirit, intent on one purpose (Philippians 2:1-2).

The Christian should seek to be “harmonious” in his relationships with all men. Surely this is required in seeking to maintain peaceful relationships:

18 If possible, so far as it depends on you, be at peace with all men (Romans 12:18).

I think Peter would have us go further than this however. True submission involves more than mere obedience; it involves discerning the mind of the one to whom we are to submit and seeking to embrace it to the degree possible. For example, a submissive employee should endeavor to determine how his employer wants things done and then seek to do it that way. A child should seek not only “to mind” a parent but to learn “the mind” of his parent and act accordingly. If such were the case, far fewer rules would be required. Rules are required when we are not of one mind.

Being harmonious does not mean becoming a clone. This does happen in cults, but it is not so in Christianity. In a cult, everyone thinks the same thing—whatever the cult leader teaches. Conformity is the operative principle in cults. Harmony is the operative principle in Christianity. Perhaps the best illustration would be orchestra made up of many different musicians, with a wide variety of instruments, but many different parts to be played even by the same kind of instrument. In a good orchestra, every member plays the same song, and all follow the leadership of one conductor. So it should be in the church. We all have different stations in life, different gifts, different ministries; but we have all embraced the same gospel, trusting in the same Savior, and following His leadership through His Word and His Spirit.

Let All Be Sympathetic

The term rendered “sympathetic” in the New American Standard Bible and the New International Version is a compound word made up from the root word “suffer” and the prefix “with.” The word originally meant “to suffer with.” A number of Bible scholars think we should take the term more generally, thus referring to a sensitivity to where others are in their experience. We are to identify or empathize with others, whether in their sorrow or their joy:

15 Rejoice with those who rejoice, and weep with those who weep (Romans 12:15).

What it means to be “sympathetic” might be illustrated by the way people drive in the Third World. The highway may have three traffic lanes, but there are five or six lanes of cars. While traffic signs and lights are not always obeyed, one thing is quite noticeable in all the apparent chaos: every driver is very aware of what the other drivers are doing. When one car veers to miss a bicycle, the other cars adjust accordingly. This is the way Christians should be—sensitive to what is going on around them.

We dare not lose sight of the more specific meaning of the term, “to suffer with.” Peter’s epistle has much to say on the subject of suffering. The writer to the Hebrews also specifically instructs believers to “suffer with” one another:

3 Remember the prisoners, as though in prison with them, and those who are ill-treated, since you yourselves also are in the body (Hebrews 13:3).

Later in this epistle, Peter likewise reminds his readers to bear in mind the sufferings of other saints:

9 But resist him, firm in [your] faith, knowing that the same experiences of suffering are being accomplished by your brethren who are in the world (1 Peter 5:9).

Let All Be Brotherly

Brotherly love is the next requirement for the Christian’s relationship with others. This word is transliterated Philadelphia, brotherly love. It surely refers to the love believers should have one to another (Romans 12:9-10; 1 Thessalonians 4:9; Hebrews 13:1; 1 Peter 1:22; 2 Peter 1:7). This is the love Jesus required of His disciples (John 13:34-35; 15:11-14). I believe Peter’s instruction is broader in that he is instructing us to “love our neighbor,” our fellow-man (see Romans 13:8-10).

Let All Be Kindhearted

This word was originally used to refer to the intestines (“bowels”) or the hidden vital organs of the body as it was believed that deep and intense emotions come from deep within a person. Peter uses the term to refer to the depth of concern or compassion we should have toward others. If “sympathetic” refers to our commitment to know how others are doing, “kindhearted” refers to our emotional response to the state of others. This characteristic is prominent in the life and ministry of our Lord (see Matthew 9:36; 14:14; 15:32; 20:34, etc.).

Let All Be Humble in Spirit

The vitally important quality of humility is the recognition of our weaknesses and limitations. It recognizes strengths too, but it knows these have come from God (1 Peter 4:10; 1 Corinthians 4:7; Romans 12:3). Humility is closely related to submission, and it is essential for true Christian unity (see Philippians 2:1-8). Humility is not just required of those who are younger (1 Peter 5:5), but of all (1 Peter 3:8). Paul’s instructions to believers contain the same challenge to manifest humility:

16 Be of the same mind toward one another; do not be haughty in mind, but associate with the lowly. Do not be wise in your own estimation (Romans 12:16).

12 And so, as those who have been chosen of God, holy and beloved, put on a heart of compassion, kindness, humility, gentleness and patience; 13 bearing with one another, and forgiving each other, whoever has a complaint against anyone; just as the Lord forgave you, so also should you (Colossians 3:12-13).

Our Lord Himself was characterized by humility (Matthew 11:29). Not Returning Evil for Evil:

9a Not returning evil for evil, or insult for insult, but giving a blessing instead ( 1 Peter 3:9a).

From the time of the giving of the Old Testament law, the saint has been forbidden to take revenge:

18 “‘You shall not take vengeance, nor bear any grudge against the sons of your people, but you shall love your neighbor as yourself; I am the LORD’” (Leviticus 19:18).

22 Do not say, “I will repay evil”; Wait for the LORD, and He will save you (Proverbs 20:22; see 29:29).

Jesus taught the same thing during His earthly ministry. Men were not to take revenge; instead, they were to forgive and seek the blessing of those who have wronged us:

12 “‘And forgive us our debts, as we also have forgiven our debtors. 13 And do not lead us into temptation, but deliver us from evil. [For Thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, forever. Amen.]’ 14 “For if you forgive men for their transgressions, your heavenly Father will also forgive you. 15 But if you do not forgive men, then your Father will not forgive your transgressions” (Matthew 6:12-15; see also Luke 6:27-36).

Both Peter and Paul call upon Christians to forgive those who have harmed them, encouraging them to seek to be a blessing to them (Romans 12:16-21; Ephesians 4:2; Philippians 2:3; Colossians 3:12-14; 1 Peter 5:5; see 2 Peter 2).

The qualities Peter has called for are those qualities of God Himself, the qualities called for by the Law, by our Lord, and by His apostles. These are qualities our culture used to highly regard in women but which are now regarded as “weak” in both men and women. These qualities are antithetical to the characteristics of the “flesh” and virtually identical to those produced by the Spirit (see Galatians 5:16-26).

The Relationship Between
Getting a Blessing and Giving a Blessing
(3:9)

9 not returning evil for evil, or insult for insult, but giving a blessing instead; for you were called for the very purpose [because unto this you were called] that you might inherit a blessing.

The Scriptures offer several reasons why we should be characterized by grace rather than by a grudge toward those who have wronged us.

(1) Because it is consistent with the character of God (Matthew 5:43-48; Luke 6:35-36).

(2) Because it is consistent with our praise of God (James 3:8-12).

In our text, Peter supplies yet another reason:

(3) Because it is consistent with our destiny (1 Peter 3:9).

The logic is very simple. We have been called to inherit a blessing. If we are to live consistently with our calling, then we should be characterized by the fact that we bless others. James put it this way:

8 But no one can tame the tongue; [it is] a restless evil [and] full of deadly poison. 9 With it we bless [our] Lord and Father; and with it we curse men, who have been made in the likeness of God; 10 from the same mouth come [both] blessing and cursing. My brethren, these things ought not to be this way. 11 Does a fountain send out from the same opening [both] fresh and bitter [water]? 12 Can a fig tree, my brethren, produce olives, or a vine produce figs? Neither [can] salt water produce fresh. (James 3:8-12).

Not only does God bless us, but we are called to bless God. James argues that it is most inconsistent to bless God (the Creator of men) and then to curse men. Blessing and cursing should not both flow from our lips. Cursing must therefore be put away.

Peter’s instruction rests on this same principle. Our future destiny determines our present conduct. Because our future hope is that of blessing (God will bless us), our present relationships should be characterized by being a blessing to others.

This teaching is not new. From the very beginning, God’s covenant with Abraham spelled out the two-fold dimension of blessing:

2 And I will make you a great nation, and I will bless you, and make your name great; and so you shall be a blessing (Genesis 12:2, emphasis mine).

From very early times, men chose to forget this truth about God’s blessings. The Jews began to presume that God was obligated to bless them, not because of what they did but because of who they were (“the seed of Abraham,” see Matthew 3:7-10; John 8:33). They believed God’s blessings were to be theirs alone and the handful of proselytes who would convert to Judaism. Jonah portrayed this attitude in his response to God’s command to preach to the Ninevites. It was the prevalent attitude among self-righteous Jews in Jesus’ day also. And it is all too often evident in our own times. We too begin to think “sinners” rightly deserve to be punished, while we deserve to be blessed. We feel little or no obligation to be a blessing to the ungodly.

Peter teaches that we should do otherwise. To show that what he is teaching is not new, he turns us to the words of David in Psalm 34.

10 “Let him who means to love life and see good days Refrain his tongue from evil and his lips from speaking guile. 11 And let him turn away from evil and do good; Let him seek peace and pursue it. 12 For the eyes of the Lord are upon the righteous, And His ears attend to their prayer, But the face of the Lord is against those who do evil” (Psalm 34:10-12).

Several things need to be said before we seek to interpret these words.

(1) Many students of Scripture seem to think Peter is somehow changing the meaning of David’s words, that while David spoke of temporal blessings, Peter “converts” his words to refer to “spiritual” blessings. J. Ramsey Michaels writes,

“How is the psalm being interpreted? In much the same way that the phrase, ‘inherit blessing,’ was interpreted in v 9. ‘Life,’ which to the psalmist meant a long and happy life on earth, is to Peter the same as ‘the grace of life’ in v 7—the eternal salvation that is the believer’s hope. To ‘love’ that life is equivalent to loving the still invisible Christ who will come revealing that salvation. To ‘see good days’ is to see what is now unseen, the glory in store for Christians at that revelation (see Comment on 1:8). The language of the psalm is the language of this world, but Peter has made it metaphorical of the world to come.… ”¹²⁰

(2) This psalm has much in common with the teaching of 1 Peter. It would seem that Peter’s thinking has been shaped to one degree or another by this psalm he has alluded to already in 2:3. The themes of this psalm and Peter’s epistle are remarkably similar.

(3) If Psalm 34 speaks of “earthly blessings,” it also speaks of “earthly trials” as a part of life which we should expect (see verses 17-19). God will deliver the righteous from all his troubles, but it may not be immediately.

(4) This psalm speaks not only of earthly matters but of eternal ones. When he speaks of future deliverance (see verses 7, 19, 22), it may include both present and future deliverance. And when he refers to judgment (see verses 16, 21-22), it may be temporal, but if not, it will certainly be eternal. Asaph’s psalm should serve as a commentary on Psalm 34. Only when Asaph came to view life from an eternal and spiritual perspective did the (present) suffering of the righteous and the prosperity of the wicked make sense (see Psalm 73:15-28).

(5) We should not fail to notice that Psalm 34 contains a messianic prophecy:

19 Many are the afflictions of the righteous; But the LORD delivers him out of them all. 20 He keeps all his bones; Not one of them is broken (Psalm 34:19).

This prophecy is said to have been fulfilled at the crucifixion of our Lord. While the legs of the other two men beside Him were broken, none of our Lord’s bones were broken (John 20:36).

(6) The circumstances of this psalm are given to us at the beginning. They provide us with the key to understanding the relevance of this text to our lives and also provide us with a key to the psalm’s interpretation. We shall therefore find that Peter’s interpretation and application of this text are not a modification of the psalm but a model of biblical exegesis and application. We who might be inclined to think Peter “spiritualized” this psalm had better take another look. And when we do, we will learn much from Peter’s handling of this great Old Testament text.

The Interpretation
and Application of Psalm 34

Psalm 34 was written by David. Apart from the superscription, one might think he wrote it after a great battle and a triumphant victory. Such was not the case. David wrote the psalm after he had pretended to be insane and thus was spared from the hand of a heathen king. Consider the background to this psalm as recorded in the Book of 1 Samuel:

1 Then David came to Nob to Ahimelech the priest; and Ahimelech came trembling to meet David, and said to him, “Why are you alone and no one with you?” 2 And David said to Ahimelech the priest, “The king has commissioned me with a matter, and has said to me, ‘Let no one know anything about the matter on which I am sending you and with which I have commissioned you; and I have directed the young men to a certain place.’ 3 “Now therefore, what do you have on hand? Give me five loaves of bread, or whatever can be found.” 4 And the priest answered David and said, “There is no ordinary bread on hand, but there is consecrated bread; if only the young men have kept themselves from women.” 5 And David answered the priest and said to him, “Surely women have been kept from us as previously when I set out and the vessels of the young men were holy, though it was an ordinary journey; how much more then today will their vessels [be holy]?” 6 So the priest gave him consecrated [bread]; for there was no bread there but the bread of the Presence which was removed from before the LORD, in order to put hot bread [in its place] when it was taken away. 7 Now one of the servants of Saul was there that day, detained before the LORD; and his name was Doeg the Edomite, the chief of Saul’s shepherds. 8 And David said to Ahimelech, “Now is there not a spear or a sword on hand? For I brought neither my sword nor my weapons with me, because the king’s matter was urgent.” 9 Then the priest said, “The sword of Goliath the Philistine, whom you killed in the valley of Elah, behold, it is wrapped in a cloth behind the ephod; if you would take it for yourself, take [it.] For there is no other except it here.” And David said, “There is none like it; give it to me.” 10 Then David arose and fled that day from Saul, and went to Achish king of Gath. 11 But the servants of Achish said to him, “Is this not David the king of the land? Did they not sing of this one as they danced, saying, ‘Saul has slain his thousands, And David his ten thousands’?” 12 And David took these words to heart, and greatly feared Achish king of Gath. 13 So he disguised his sanity before them, and acted insanely in their hands, and scribbled on the doors of the gate, and let his saliva run down into his beard. 14 Then Achish said to his servants, “Behold, you see the man behaving as a madman. Why do you bring him to me? 15 Do I lack madmen, that you have brought this one to act the madman in my presence? Shall this one come into my house?” (1 Samuel 21 NAS)

Saul was told he would lose his kingdom. David was the one who would be king in his place. David’s victories in battle were a source of bitter jealousy for Saul. Sadly, even David’s close friend Jonathan, Saul’s son, had to admit to David his father intended to kill him (see 1 Samuel 20). Along with some of his men, David fled for his life to Nob, where David lied to Ahimelech the priest about the reason for his arrival and received some provisions for his escape. As a result, Ahimelech and all of his family (save one) were put to death by Saul (see 1 Samuel 22:6-23). David knew he was to blame (1 Samuel 6:22).

After this, David fled to Gath where he sought safety and sanctuary in a foreign land from a heathen king. When some of the king’s servants reminded the king of David’s military might, he was viewed as a serious threat to the kingdom. Upon learning this, David became afraid of the king and saved himself by acting like a lunatic. He went about acting the fool, a disguise which proved successful, for he was allowed to live.

A significant clue to the meaning of these events and their relationship to Psalm 34 can be found in a later chapter of 1 Samuel in the story of Nabal and Abigail. Great wisdom is displayed by Abigail, while great folly is displayed by her husband Nabal. Both Abigail’s wisdom and Nabal’s foolishness are seen in light of their response to David’s identity as Israel’s future king.

5 So David sent ten young men, and David said to the young men, “Go up to Carmel, visit Nabal and greet him in my name; 6 and thus you shall say, ‘Have a long life, peace be to you, and peace be to your house, and peace be to all that you have. 7 And now I have heard that you have shearers; now your shepherds have been with us and we have not insulted them, nor have they missed anything all the days they were in Carmel. 8 Ask your young men and they will tell you. Therefore let [my] young men find favor in your eyes, for we have come on a festive day. Please give whatever you find at hand to your servants and to your son David.’ “ 9 When David’s young men came, they spoke to Nabal according to all these words in David’s name; then they waited. 10 But Nabal answered David’s servants, and said, “Who is David? And who is the son of Jesse? There are many servants today who are each breaking away from his master. 11 Shall I then take my bread and my water and my meat that I have slaughtered for my shearers, and give it to men whose origin I do not know?” 12 So David’s young men retraced their way and went back; and they came and told him according to all these words. 13 And David said to his men, “Each [of you] gird on his sword.” So each man girded on his sword. And David also girded on his sword, and about four hundred men went up behind David while two hundred stayed with the baggage. 14 But one of the young men told Abigail, Nabal’s wife, saying, “Behold, David sent messengers from the wilderness to greet our master, and he scorned them. 15 Yet the men were very good to us, and we were not insulted, nor did we miss anything as long as we went about with them, while we were in the fields. 16 They were a wall to us both by night and by day, all the time we were with them tending the sheep. 17 Now therefore, know and consider what you should do, for evil is plotted against our master and against all his household; and he is such a worthless man that no one can speak to him.” 18 Then Abigail hurried and took two hundred [loaves] of bread and two jugs of wine and five sheep already prepared and five measures of roasted grain and a hundred clusters of raisins and two hundred cakes of figs, and loaded [them] on donkeys. 19 And she said to her young men, “Go on before me; behold, I am coming after you.” But she did not tell her husband Nabal. 20 And it came about as she was riding on her donkey and coming down by the hidden part of the mountain, that behold, David and his men were coming down toward her; so she met them. 21 Now David had said, “Surely in vain I have guarded all that this[man] has in the wilderness, so that nothing was missed of all that belonged to him; and he has returned me evil for good. 22 May God do so to the enemies of David, and more also, if by morning I leave [as much as] one male of any who belong to him.” 23 When Abigail saw David, she hurried and dismounted from her donkey, and fell on her face before David, and bowed herself to the ground. 24 And she fell at his feet and said, “On me alone, my lord, be the blame. And please let your maidservant speak to you, and listen to the words of your maidservant. 25 Please do not let my lord pay attention to this worthless man, Nabal, for as his name is, so is he. Nabal is his name and folly is with him; but I your maidservant did not see the young men of my lord whom you sent. 26 “Now therefore, my lord, as the LORD lives, and as your soul lives, since the LORD has restrained you from shedding blood, and from avenging yourself by your own hand, now then let your enemies, and those who seek evil against my lord, be as Nabal. 27 And now let this gift which your maidservant has brought to my lord be given to the young men who accompany my lord. 28 Please forgive the transgression of your maidservant; for the LORD will certainly make for my lord an enduring house, because my lord is fighting the battles of the LORD, and evil shall not be found in you all your days. 29 And should anyone rise up to pursue you and to seek your life, then the life of my lord shall be bound in the bundle of the living with the LORD your God; but the lives of your enemies He will sling out as from the hollow of a sling. 30 And it shall come about when the LORD shall do for my lord according to all the good that He has spoken concerning you, and shall appoint you ruler over Israel, 31 that this will not cause grief or a troubled heart to my lord, both by having shed blood without cause and by my lord having avenged himself. When the LORD shall deal well with my lord, then remember your maidservant” (1 Samuel 25:5-31, emphasis mine).

Nabal did not recognize David as the future king of Israel. To him, David was a nobody, and he was not about to be generous to a nobody. To Abigail, however, David was the future king. On that basis, she sought to persuade him not to shed innocent blood in order to get revenge. She appealed to David to act like the king he was destined to be and to allow God to deal with his enemies. Abigail appealed to David to do exactly what Peter appeals to us to do: live now in the light of what God has promised we will be.

There were times when David took the “high road” of Christian conduct. Especially prominent are the two times he refused to take Saul’s life, even though it appeared God had providentially provided the opportunities to do so (1 Samuel 24, 26). At other times, David failed to live up to his calling. On this occasion, apart from Abigail’s intervention, David would have acted foolishly in seeking vengeance on Nabal and his household.

The two events described in 1 Samuel 21 are not noble acts David would want as his epitaph. I believe Psalm 34 was written by David after he reflected on his own folly. God did deliver him from Achish of Gath, but it was due to God’s grace and not to David’s piety. God did deliver Abraham from Egypt (Genesis 12:10-20) and from Abimelech (Genesis 20), but not in a way that commended his actions. Abraham was deceitful and sought to save his own skin at the risk of sacrificing his wife’s purity rather than trusting God.

David describes the “fear of the Lord,” hoping to instruct and encourage others by the lessons he learned from his folly. God is always righteous and faithful. He will deliver the righteous and judge the wicked (compare Psalm 34 with 2 Peter 2). Those who trust in Him need never fear men. Rather, we should turn from evil and do what is right. We should demonstrate Christ’s righteousness with our tongues by keeping our tongues from evil and our lips from deceit (34:13). When we are in danger, we should trust God to deliver us and not resort to a lie or deceit to save ourselves. This demonstrates faith and righteousness and manifests the character of God to men. Doing so also makes His divine intervention all the more evident and glorious.

What can David say to us who live as “aliens and strangers” in a hostile world? What can he say to us about our conduct when persecution and even death might result from persisting in righteousness? He can say this:

“I know what it is like to live as a stranger and alien. I lived this way during the days king Saul sought to kill me. I know what it is like to have God’s promise of blessings to come, and to go about day by day fearing for my very life. I know what it is like to live in a world hostile to me and my destiny when the promise of a future day of blessing seems remote and dubious. But I can say from sad experience that these are the times when righteous living are most apparent. These are the times when our speech and our conduct manifest the character of our Lord. These are the times when we can identify with the rejection and suffering of the Savior.”

And this is precisely why Peter can turn to Psalm 34 for support. Like David of old, we are living as “aliens and strangers” in a hostile world, knowing that in God’s time we shall enter into the blessings He has promised. Like David, we should live in a manner consistent with our future hope. Specifically, rather than seeking to retaliate for the evils men commit against us, we should actively seek to be a blessing to them, trusting God to be faithful to His promises for us.

Psalm 34 is not entirely about future blessings, however, and neither is 1 Peter. Up to this point in time, Peter has emphasized our future hope and the conduct it requires of us in the present. David’s psalm promises not only future blessings but present blessing. Peter begins at the point in the psalm where David promises blessings in the present:

10 “Let him who means to love life and see good days Refrain his tongue from evil and his lips from speaking guile. 11 “And let him turn away from evil and do good; Let him seek peace and pursue it. 12 “For the eyes of the Lord are upon the righteous, And His ears attend to their prayer, But the face of the Lord is against those who do evil” (Psalm 34:10-12).

David and Peter both want us to understand that the “good life” is not just a future hope. The “good life” is not what the popular beer or other commercials offer us. The “good life” is the fullest enjoyment of the days God gives us in this life and in the next. Only a Christian is free to enjoy the “good life.” Those who are enslaved to the flesh (see 1:14; 2:11) are not free to say “no” to it; they are compelled to obey its desires (see Romans 6:15-18). The one who can do without earth’s delights is the one who can most enjoy them.

Peter’s use of Psalm 34 allows him to make a transition at this point in his epistle. Having contrasted the minimal price we have of suffering in this life for the blessings of the next (like Paul in 2 Corinthians 4 and 5), Peter now begins to change his emphasis. He shows us those things we may have considered to be a “pain” are really a privilege. Many of the burdens we think we are bearing are really blessings.

This truth is powerfully taught in Psalm 73 where Asaph begins by confessing his self-pity and self-absorption in verses 1-14. How could God be “good to Israel” (verse 1) when the wicked were prospering and the righteous were suffering? By verses 15-18, Asaph sees things from God’s perspective (verses 15-28) and recognizes the depth of his sin in his response thus far (verses 21-22). He realizes that his suffering has drawn him closer to God but prosperity has done the opposite for the wicked. He sees that the pleasures of the wicked are momentary, but their torment is eternal. He comes to understand that God is his portion now and for all eternity (verses 24-27). Most of all, Asaph comes to understand “good” in a biblical sense. Good is not measured by pleasure in life; good is measured by the “nearness of God” (verse 28). The psalmist’s suffering drew him to God, and thus his suffering was “good.”

Peter is about to say the same thing. Suffering is not “evil;” ungodliness is evil. The good in life is not only to know God but to make Him known to others. Suffering for Christ’s sake is a high calling, a privilege, for Peter and for Paul—and for us:

14 But even if you should suffer for the sake of righteousness, [you are] blessed. AND DO NOT FEAR THEIR INTIMIDATION, AND DO NOT BE TROUBLED (1 Peter 3:14).

12 Beloved, do not be surprised at the fiery ordeal among you, which comes upon you for your testing, as though some strange thing were happening to you; 13 but to the degree that you share the sufferings of Christ, keep on rejoicing; so that also at the revelation of His glory, you may rejoice with exultation. 14 If you are reviled for the name of Christ, you are blessed, because the Spirit of glory and of God rests upon you (1 Peter 4:12-14).

For to me, to live is Christ, and to die is gain (Philippians 1:21).

For to you it has been granted for Christ’s sake, not only to believe in Him, but also to suffer for His sake (Philippians 1:29).

7 But whatever things were gain to me, those things I have counted as loss for the sake of Christ. 8 More than that, I count all things to be loss in view of the surpassing value of knowing Christ Jesus my Lord, for whom I have suffered the loss of all things, and count them but rubbish in order that I may gain Christ, 9 and may be found in Him, not having a righteousness of my own derived from [the] Law, but that which is through faith in Christ, the righteousness which [comes] from God on the basis of faith, 10 that I may know Him, and the power of His resurrection and the fellowship of His sufferings, being conformed to His death; 11 in order that I may attain to the resurrection from the dead (Philippians 3:7-11).

When we suffer for Christ’s sake, we should respond with blessing, not only because we will be blessed eternally, but because we are being blessed in time as well. How great God’s blessings are for the saint. How great our blessings should be for the world. And all the glorious blessings we now experience are but a foretaste of what will follow.

Conclusion

When Jesus was given the opportunity to judge and to condemn men and women during the time of His first coming to the earth, He declined. He had not come to judge, He said, but to save. Jesus came to the earth to bring God’s blessings to men. The sad reality is that those who reject God’s blessings, provided in Christ at His first coming, will experience the judgment of God to be meted out by our Lord at His second coming. I am therefore compelled to ask you this question: “Have you entered into the blessings God has provided in Christ?” If not, I urge you to do so today. The present promise of blessing for those who believe is accompanied by a word of warning for those who do not. It was none other than Peter who sounded this word of hope, along with a warning, on the day of Pentecost:

33 “Therefore having been exalted to the right hand of God, and having received from the Father the promise of the Holy Spirit, He has poured forth this which you both see and hear. 34 For it was not David who ascended into heaven, but he himself says: ‘THE LORD SAID TO MY LORD, “SIT AT MY RIGHT HAND, 35 UNTIL I MAKE THINE ENEMIES A FOOTSTOOL FOR THY FEET.” ‘ 36 “Therefore let all the house of Israel know for certain that God has made Him both Lord and Christ—this Jesus whom you crucified.” 37 Now when they heard [this], they were pierced to the heart, and said to Peter and the rest of the apostles, “Brethren, what shall we do?” 38 And Peter [said] to them, “Repent, and let each of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. 39 For the promise is for you and your children, and for all who are far off, as many as the Lord our God shall call to Himself.” 40 And with many other words he solemnly testified and kept on exhorting them, saying, “Be saved from this perverse generation!” (Acts 2:33-40).

For those of us who are saved, we see that God has set a very high standard of conduct for His saints. It is indeed an impossible standard, apart from His grace. We are to manifest the mind of Christ and seek to bless those who harm us rather than seek revenge. We are to be a blessing to those in this world, even our enemies, knowing that we are destined to receive God’s blessings in the future and experience them now in the present. May God give us the grace to understand and apply the words of this precious text in 1 Peter.

Attitudes Which Revolutionize Relationships

This chart gives parallel passages which refer to the particular attitude either as a characteristic of the Christian or as an attribute of God. It is my contention that each of these characteristics is an attribute of God which should be evidenced in the Christian as well.

118 Two Pauline texts closely parallel the words of Peter in our text: Romans 12:9-21 and Colossians 3:12--4:6. In the Colossians text, Paul begins with the general principles and then gives specific instructions afterward. In 1 Peter, the order is the reverse. Peter starts with specific relationships and then concludes with general principles. Peter’s teaching is more oriented toward the ungodly to whom we are to submit and to the suffering which often results. See also 1 Corinthians 13; 2 Corinthians 6:1-10; Galatians 5:13-24; Ephesians 4:1-3, 25--5:2; Philippians 2:1-8; 1 Thessalonians 5:13-22.

119 At the end of this lesson, a chart has been provided for further study and meditation. It gives parallel passages which refer to the particular attitude either as a characteristic of the Christian or as an attribute of God. It is my contention that each of these characteristics is an attribute of God which should be evidenced in the Christian as well.

120 J. Ramsey Michaels, 1 Peter (Waco, Texas: Word Books, Publisher), 1988. Word Biblical Commentary Series, p. 180.