having your conversation honest among the Gentiles, that [as to that] in which they speak against you as evildoers, they may through [your] good works, [themselves] witnessing [them], glorify God in [the] day of visitation.
Peter has warned his readers about the wrong desires inside them; now he points to the watching world outside. Three questions follow: what life Peter asks for, why the slander comes, and what the "day of visitation" means.
Hamilton Smith ties this to the warning just before it, and shows what good conduct is for.
Having warned us against sinful desires within, the Apostle now urges us about our outward conduct before the world. We are to be careful to act with complete honesty, so that our good works prove false the hard words that call us evildoers.
ESV says "honorable" where older translations say "honest." The word covers more than being trustworthy.
In the New Testament these words are not limited to trustworthiness, the way we commonly use them today. They extend to any honourable conduct.
Kelly names both the source of this conduct and the aim behind it.
So the call is to have their behaviour attractive (Greek kalen) among the Gentiles... The spring of this conduct is the faith that looks to the Father and calls on Him. But it is also a duty to win over the unbelieving and hostile by living in a way that matches Christ, giving no opening to those who are looking for one. People of the world suspect the motives and the ways of the faithful. Yet they have a strong, if not well-informed, sense of their responsibilities, and they are always on the watch for them to stumble and fail.
The slander had a shape. Critics looked at Christian meetings and noticed what was missing.
It was an early and common accusation among the Gentiles that Christians must be atheists, because they turned from idols. In their meeting places you saw no image of gold, silver, stone, or wood, and no picture made by human hands. The Jews knew perfectly well that this was only because the living and true God had won these believers away from such empty things, to serve Him.
Darby points to the real target behind the attacks.
Christians bore the name of God. People's minds were hostile to His name. They tried to disgrace it by blaming Christians for the evil conduct they themselves practised without remorse. At the same time they complained (1 Peter 4:4) that Christians would not join them in the same excess and disorder. The Christian had only to follow the path of faithfulness to God.
Commentators differ over what this day is. Some read it as God visiting in grace, when trouble drives people to look for help.
Does this mean a visitation in judgment, or the visitation in grace? It means the second, though a visit by the chastening hand of God is not ruled out. When sorrows come, when hopes on earth collapse, when sickness makes it impossible to enjoy material things, unbelievers often turn to the people of God for help and comfort. God's grace then shows itself in the day of visitation, and this glorifies God.
Others read it another way, starting from how Scripture uses the phrase elsewhere.
It is a mark of Scripture that you can only find the meaning of a phrase from its context... For example, the words in Luke 19:44, "the time of your visitation," clearly mean the day of grace for Jerusalem through the presence and testimony of our blessed Lord... But when we come to Peter's words, "the day of visitation," the thought is judgment rather than grace — whatever effects, gracious or otherwise, the "visitation" has on the people who go through it. We take it that this is not about one particular time or day. It is any time when God steps in and shows His power openly before the eyes of men, forcing them, in one way or another, to glorify Him and to prove His people right.
Both readings end in the same place. The accusers themselves finish by speaking for God.
In the day when God visits men, these slanderers will have their will broken and their pride subdued by God's visitation. They will be brought to confess that God had acted in these Christians, and that He had been present among them. What brings them to it is the good works which, despite their slanders, had always reached their consciences.
- Watched. People of the world suspect the motives of believers. They watch for them to slip.
- Beautiful. ESV's "honorable" means more than trustworthy. It covers any conduct that looks attractive.
- Slandered. Expect the charge of being an evildoer. Critics often pin their own conduct on the people of God.
- Silenced. The reply to hard words is not argument but good works, which contradict the accusation.
- Glorified. When God visits, the accusers confess He was at work in the people they attacked. Commentators differ on whether that visit is grace or judgment.
Be in subjection [therefore] to every human institution for the Lord's sake; whether to [the] king as supreme,
Peter writes to Christians scattered among the nations, and he tells them to submit to the rulers over them. He attaches one reason: the Lord. The verse raises three questions. What must I submit to? How far does it go? And what if the ruler is a bad man?
Does "human institution" mean religious rules? One writer says no, and shows that Peter defines his own terms in the next verse.
In 1 Peter 2:13 we have nothing to do with the rules of religion on earth. Colossians 2 declares that they were nailed to the cross and taken out of the way. The apostle urges the believing Jews to behave well among the Gentiles, and to be in subjection to every human creation or institution for the Lord's sake. This he explains as civil government: "whether it be to the emperor as supreme, or to governors as sent by him to punish those who do evil and to praise those who do good." Christian Jews must not be unruly like their unbelieving brothers.
Peter attaches one reason: "for the Lord's sake." Is that phrase about the ruler, or about the believer?
A republic had its claim no less than royalty. The only relation revealed for the believer is subjection. There is not one word here, or anywhere else in the New Testament, about the believer exercising authority in the present evil age. The grace of Christ is the pattern for every Christian. "For the Lord's sake" does not mean His relation to the human creation, though He is indeed Lord of all. It means His appeal to the saints themselves, that they obey Him in submission to the powers of the world.
What if the ruler is a bad man who never acknowledges God?
As honour is not at all based upon their personal character, we have nothing at all to do with their origin, how they got their power, or how they use their power. All that we have to do, as believers, is to own God and the magistrate. Perhaps the magistrate, or the king, does not own God himself. That is a serious thing for him, but it does not change our relation.
Believers hold the place of strangers in this world. That standing rules out one thing and requires another.
It would be wholly inconsistent for those who take the place of strangers in this world to attempt to form these institutions or appoint the authorities. We are, however, to be subject to them, and this with the highest motive, for the Lord's sake. We are to be subject to subordinate as well as to supreme authorities, and, again, for the reason that we view them all in relation to the Lord. Whether they exercise their authority in the fear of God or fail to do so, we are to view them as sent by God for the maintenance of the government of the world.
Subjection has a limit. One writer sets it from Peter's own words to the Sanhedrin, the Jewish ruling council.
Are we, then, advocating a blind subjection to earthly rule? By no means. When human commands conflict with the word of God, this same apostle has taught us how to act. He, with the other apostles, told the Sanhedrin: "We must obey God rather than men" (Acts 5:29).
Refusing to obey is not the same as fighting back.
It is our duty to obey and submit ourselves to them in all things. The one condition is that they do not call on us to disobey God, or do violence to conscience. If they do this, we must — what? Resist? No, but suffer.
Peter's readers had every natural reason to resent the foreign rulers set over them, and the verse cuts across that instinct.
These scattered Christian Jews might well resent the Gentile authorities over them, whether kings or governors. They might resent the many ordinances and laws and regulations that had been set up too. Still, they were to submit. Government, they had to recognise, was a divine institution. The Christian is of course free, for he stands in the liberty of Christ. Still, he must not use his freedom as "a cover-up for evil" — in any way to vent his anger on others. He must regard it as liberty to serve God, and the service of God demands the subjection to rulers laid down here.
- Scope. The command is about civil government — kings and governors — not religious rules. Peter defines his own terms in the next verse.
- Motive. "For the Lord's sake" is an appeal to the believer, not a statement about the ruler. Obedience to Him is the reason we submit.
- Reach. The ruler's origin, character and use of power are not the believer's business. We own the highest and the lowest authorities alike.
- Limit. Subjection is not blind. Where a human command conflicts with God's word, we obey God rather than men — and then suffer instead of resisting.
- Result. Freedom in Christ is real. But it is freedom to serve God, and that service shows itself in submission, not in venting anger.
or to rulers as sent by him, for vengeance on evildoers, and praise to them that do well.
Peter writes to believers scattered across the empire. He tells them how to live under rulers they did not choose. The verse names two things at once: who governors answer to, and what they exist to do.
The wording marks out a chain of authority. Governors are not sent straight from heaven. The king sends them. The ESV reads "sent by him"; older translations render the same phrase "sent through him," and that is the wording discussed below.
The Spirit makes a distinction, even while He commands subjection to all: the king is supreme, and the governors are sent through him to punish evildoers and to praise those who do well. "Sent through him" points to the king's authority as the higher one. If God had been meant here, the phrase would, I believe, have been "by," and not the in-between word "through." Anyone can see how odd the mistake would be. It would make the divine commission belong not to the king, but only to the governors he appoints.
The two aims named here did not start with Peter. One writer traces them back to what God said to Noah after the flood.
The aim of government stated in the last part of verse 14 is quite clear. It is to punish evildoers and to encourage those who do well. God laid this broad duty on Noah after the flood. We hear of neither king nor magistrate in the world before the flood... "Whoever sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed, for God made man in His own image" (Gen. 9:6) first laid the basic foundation of human government as it stands. Life belonged to God, and He gave this principle to Noah.
Peter covers the local official as well as the emperor. The believer's reason for obeying is not the ruler's personal godliness.
The exhortations that follow view the believer in relation to the institutions and authorities of this world. It would be wholly inconsistent for those who take the place of strangers in this world to try to form these institutions or appoint the authorities. We are, however, to be subject to them, and this with the highest motive, for the Lord's sake. We are to be subject to lower authorities as well as to supreme ones, and again for the reason that we view them all in relation to the Lord. Whether they use their authority in the fear of God or fail to do so, we are certainly to see them as sent by God to maintain the government of the world.
Nero ruled Rome, and he was capable of anything. A believer can still obey such a ruler, because the worst he can do cannot reach what matters most.
The place of the Christian is complete obedience to the governing authorities, even if Nero were king. Nero could not touch my portion, which is heavenly. So whatever the question is, unless it interfered with my obedience to God, I would not mind. He could only bring me into "the lion's mouth," and this might turn into a testimony. He could not touch my resurrection life... I take my example from Christ, who appealed to no one but God. Yet even in the darkest hour of wickedness, when God's priests were pressing the Roman authorities to crucify His Son, the Lord says, "You would have no authority over me at all unless it had been given you from above."
Doing good draws praise from rulers. One writer says that praise is worth having, then names the ambition it must never become.
There is also a praise that should never be taken lightly. Doing practical good, and submitting readily for the Lord's sake to human institutions, calls out this praise from the rulers of this world. It can be won with honour even from the very worst of human governments. On the other hand, someone who shares in the heavenly calling, whose name is registered above and whose rights as a citizen are there and not here, can never consistently seek the reputation of a social or political reformer.
Obedience is wide, but it is not unlimited. The order of Peter's own words settles which claim comes first.
Other Scriptures clearly show that the only limitation to our subjection to men is the fear of God. When men insist upon direct disobedience to God, we must set God first (Acts 4:19). So here the order is, "Fear God. Honour the king."
- Sent — the governor comes through the king, not straight from God. The chain is human, yet God stands behind the whole structure.
- Sword — government exists to punish wrong and praise right. God gave that charge to Noah after the flood and never withdrew it.
- Scope — obedience covers the local official as well as the emperor. It does not wait for a ruler to be godly.
- Safe — even a Nero can only reach the body. He cannot touch a believer's heavenly portion, so submission costs nothing eternal.
- Stop — the single limit is the fear of God: when men demand disobedience to Him, "Fear God" outranks "honour the king."
Because so is the will of God, that by well-doing ye put to silence the ignorance of senseless men;
Peter has just told scattered believers to submit to kings and governors for the Lord's sake. Now he gives the reason: this is what God wants, and it has a target — the ignorance of people who speak against Christians.
Scripture uses "the will of God" in more than one sense, and this verse is not about God's hidden purposes but about how a believer walks day by day.
In many passages the will of God has reference to the eternal counsels of God, as we read, "who works all things according to the counsel of His will" (Ephesians 1:11). In other passages the reference is to God's will for His people in their daily path (1 Thessalonians 4:3; 1 Peter 2:15, etc.).
The "doing good" Peter means is not abstract. It is the quiet submission described in the verses just before. It comes from people whose real interests lie elsewhere.
Those who belong to Christ have nothing directly to do with governing the world. Scripture says plainly that they are not of the world, just as He was not... Now is the time to suffer with Him, and to look to be glorified with Him later. So meanwhile we should be all the more eager to submit to every human institution (the literal word is "creation"), not only to a king as the highest authority, but also to the governors he sends out from time to time to punish those who do evil and to praise those who do good. Our real interests are above; but this is our duty for the Lord's sake.
That submission has one boundary.
The word of God plainly tells His people to obey the governing authorities (Romans 13:1; Titus 3:1; 1 Peter 2:13-17). It is not for us to question how that authority came to power, or what kind of person holds it. Our part is to obey. But when the will of man clashes with the word of God, and tries to force that will on our consciences, we must obey God rather than man (Acts 4:19).
The word behind "put to silence" is stronger than it sounds in English. And "foolish" is about not knowing God.
A weighty reason follows. "For this is the will of God (and are we not sanctified for obedience — the obedience of Jesus?), that by doing good you should put to silence (literally, muzzle) the ignorance of foolish people."... The true and fitting answer to the world's spiteful hatred is a godly life. For all men, not just some, are foolish if they do not know God. That is why they take a malicious pleasure in blaming His children for their own evils.
The ignorance is not vague. Believers faced a specific charge, and their obedience answered it.
By submitting to authority and doing good, the Christian puts to silence the ignorance of foolish men. They accuse the believer of rebelling against authority (Luke 23:14-15; Acts 24:12-13). We are free from the world. But we must not use that freedom to speak evil of this world's rulers. We are to give ourselves wholly to the service of God.
Because the accusation is about conduct, the reply is conduct. Writers facing public attack applied the verse exactly this way.
My own desire would be that you should not answer back, but that by a holy and blameless life you put to silence the ignorance of foolish men... Your best answer is "perfect silence."
Another writer gave the same counsel, and added that even being called Beelzebub — a name for the devil — makes you like your Master.
Dear friends, stand firm; and I beg you, abound in the work of the Lord, and by doing good put to silence the ignorance of foolish people... Remember the word, "When reviled, we bless; when persecuted, we endure; when slandered, we entreat. We have become, and are still, like the scum of the world, the refuse of all things." If you are called Beelzebub, you know well why you should bear it, returning blessing for cursing. It is a privilege we rarely have, to be like our Master.
This submission is not slavery, and the freedom behind it is not an excuse for self-will.
For he is free. He does not depend on the government, though he respects it. He depends on God. And such liberty must not be twisted into mere self-will, because it is really liberty to please God as His willing servants.
- Will — The "will of God" here is not His hidden counsel. It is His will for your daily path.
- Well-doing — That will means submitting to human authority for the Lord's sake. One limit: when man's will clashes with God's word, obey God.
- Muzzle — The literal word is muzzle. "Foolish" covers everyone who does not know God, and such people blame believers for their own evils.
- Weapon — The charge is about conduct, so the answer is conduct. Not a reply, not a defence — a holy life is the best silence.
- Freedom — None of this is slavery. The Christian is free and depends on God alone. That freedom is liberty to serve Him, never a cover for self-will.
as free, and not as having liberty as a cloak of malice, but as God's bondmen.
Peter has just told believers to submit to kings and governors. Now he guards that command from the other side: those who submit are free people, and their freedom is given for serving God, not for hiding wrongdoing.
The order to submit does not cancel the Christian's freedom. One commentator holds both together.
The Christian is of course free, for he stands in the liberty of Christ. Still, he must not use his freedom as "a cloak of malice" — in any way to vent his anger on others. He must treat it as liberty to serve God, and serving God demands the subjection to rulers set out here.
This freedom is not a better position inside the world. It is freedom from belonging to the world at all.
Here the Christian receives the place of being completely free. He does not belong to the world; he belongs to heaven. He does not use his liberty as a cloak of maliciousness. He lives as the servant of God, seeking only to be a servant. Now a servant's business is simply to follow the will of his master, and God's will is that I should submit.
"A cover-up for evil" pictures freedom worn like a coat over something hidden. Older translations call it "a cloak of maliciousness." Outsiders were making that charge against Christians, and the answer to it was conduct, not argument.
The true and fitting answer to the spiteful hatred of the world is a godly course of living… This steady well-doing does not give up the liberty with which Christ set us free. We live by the Spirit, so we are to walk by it too, instead of wearing liberty as a cloak of malice — which is what our enemies claimed we did.
The accusation was political. The reply was a life that gave it nothing to hold on to.
By subjection to authority, and by well-doing, the Christian would put to silence the ignorance of senseless men. Such men charge the believer with rebellion against authority. We are free from the world. But we are not to use our freedom to speak evil of this world's authorities. Instead we are to devote ourselves wholly to the service of God.
The word behind "servants" is stronger than hired help. It reaches into every relationship named around it in this chapter.
"Servants of God" (verse 16). This is the last of the descriptions the apostle uses in this chapter, and it takes in all the rest. The word translated "servants" is really "bondmen," and speaks of those wholly devoted to the will of God. Notice the instructions that surround this description: "Be subject… to the emperor… to governors"; "Honor everyone"; "Love the brotherhood"; "Fear God"; "Honor the emperor"; "Servants, be subject to your masters." Wherever we are, whatever our sphere, our conduct should match our position as "servants of God."
Being God's bondman changes who the Christian leans on while he obeys the government.
He is free: he is not dependent on the government, though he respects it; he depends on God. And this liberty must not be twisted into mere self-will. It is liberty to please God as His willing servants.
If freedom means doing as I please, the freest man who ever lived would have been the least obedient. Jesus shows the opposite.
The liberty of the saint is not licence to do his own will. If anything could have taken away the liberty of the Lord Jesus, it would have been hindering Him from always being obedient to the will of God. All that moves in the sphere of man's will is sin… The essence of sanctification is having no will of our own… True slavery is being enslaved by our own will. True liberty means having our own will completely set aside.
The Christian submits as God's servant. So the submission stops where a human order contradicts God's word.
Obedience to the powers that be is the plain direction of the word of God for His people. We are not to raise questions about how the authority came to power, or about the character of the person who holds it. Our part is to obey. But sometimes the will of man clashes with the word of God and tries to force that will on our consciences. Then we must obey God rather than man.
- Free — the believer belongs to heaven, not to the world, and depends on God, not on any government.
- Free for — that freedom exists so he can serve God, and God's will for him now is submission to human authority.
- Not a cloak — never wear freedom as a coat over spite or self-will. Outsiders were already accusing Christians of just that.
- Bondman — "servant" here means someone wholly devoted to God's will. That title covers every sphere: rulers, masters, fellow believers, everyone.
- The one limit — do not ask how a ruler came to power; refuse only when man's will overrides God's word.
Shew honour to all, love the brotherhood, fear God, honour the king.
Peter ends his teaching on submission with four short commands. Each names one relationship — the world, fellow believers, God, and the ruler — so what do you owe a stranger, and what do you owe a king?
Each phrase names a party and the response that fits it:
Verse 17 sums the matter up briefly, and we find what suits "the servants of God." As to all men — honour. As to the brotherhood, that is, all believers — love. As to God — fear. As to the king, the representative of all human authority — honour. Carrying this out, we do the will of God and silence foolish opponents.
Why these four commands? One writer starts from where Christians stand in the world:
A "stranger" is one who has no home in the place where he finds himself. A "pilgrim" is one who knows where his home is and is going to it. That is our position as Christians in this scene. We have no part in the governing or ordering of the vast system called the world; if we had, we would not be strangers.
Why honour everyone? The reason is not what people do, but what God made them:
They were to "honour all men" — men as men, men in the character which God has given them as His creatures, men as the representatives of God on earth. This holds however far they may in fact have departed from it. How important to give this honour to manhood, even in the most ruined person... If they have in fact sunk to beasts, they still are not beasts. The very penalty they bring on themselves is a witness to the higher destiny God meant them for.
That honour has a practical shape. It saves us from two opposite mistakes:
Naturally we tend to go to one of two extremes, according to our bent. Either we sink too far to the level of other men, or we take on an air of superiority and act the Pharisee. Scripture points out a middle course which, if adopted, would be both a safeguard to ourselves and a help to those who are at present outside.
The verse uses two different words. One writer explains what each one carries:
We are not told to love all men. Love is for the family. We are to esteem all. Those competent to judge say the original word for "esteem" is more the act done when the occasion arises. The word for "love" implies the constant habit of mind.
Kelly adds that this constant love still takes its shape from the state of the person:
Loving the brotherhood is a constant duty; but the love takes a shape according to their state... Love would take pains with those guilty of smaller faults. It would warn the disorderly, comfort the faint-hearted, support the weak, and stay patient with everyone. It is the very opposite of either self-seeking or indifference.
This fear is not dread of a tyrant. It is the settled awareness of who God is, and it displaces every other fear:
Then how necessary to cultivate the fear of God as a habit! Nothing is right where this fails. The holy fear of God shuts out every dishonouring fear of man, and all tormenting fear of God. We know His majesty, His holiness, and His righteous character; and we know also that He loves us beyond a father's love.
Peter wrote this while Nero ruled Rome. Commentators press the point:
Both apostles firmly insisted that the saints render obedience and honour to Nero the Emperor — one of the worst and cruellest men who ever sat on the throne of the Caesars. It is not the character of the ruler, but the office he fills, that demands the respect and reverence of the saints of God.
Honouring the king is one way of fearing God. It also shapes how we love the brotherhood:
We are to "love the brotherhood," but we are also to "honour the king." ... if the king happens to be a brother, do not forget that he is still the king, or if the master happens to be a brother, do not forget that he is still the master. This is one way in which we may fear God. For if we truly fear Him, we will also fear those He has set up, and show them reverence.
- Four-sided. One verse covers the whole of a Christian's duty: to the world, to the family of faith, to God, and to the ruler.
- Honour rests on creation. Honour every person as God's creature and representative, however far they have fallen from that — which keeps us from both looking down on people and copying them.
- Love is narrower and deeper. Esteem meets the occasion. Love is a settled habit, and it is for the family of believers.
- Fear frees. Holy fear of God drives out the fear of man and the tormenting fear of God. The God we stand in awe of loves us beyond a father's love.
- Honour the office. Respect belongs to the position, not to the character of the man who holds it. Peter wrote this while Nero ruled.
Servants, [be] subject with all fear to your masters, not only to the good and gentle, but also to the ill-tempered.
Commentary for this verse has not been generated yet.
For this [is] acceptable, if one, for conscience sake towards God, endure griefs, suffering unjustly.
A hard master. An unjust punishment. A Christian who has done nothing wrong. That is the situation Peter puts before us. Peter says that something in that moment is precious to God. Older translations call it "thankworthy". The ESV calls it "a gracious thing".
Peter is writing to household servants. The point turns on the master a believer may have to serve.
Household servants are told to obey their masters with fear on every side. They were Christians, and had to serve many a master where the danger of being provoked was extreme. So they needed to walk in complete respect. For according to Christ, their godly obedience was owed not only to the good and gentle masters, but also to the crooked or bad-tempered ones — and that last kind was common.
Nothing in the master's behaviour cancels the instruction.
But, as this scripture shows, the duty to obey has nothing to do with the master's character. To forget this is to forget that you serve the Lord Christ. It also means falling into the sin of working only when watched, as people-pleasers, instead of as "the servants of Christ, doing the will of God from the heart; serving willingly, as to the Lord, and not to men."
The ESV says "mindful of God". Other translations read "for conscience toward God". Either way, the phrase gives the reason for the suffering. It also marks the one limit on obeying a master.
I may suffer for conscience' sake. A master may order something that goes against God. Then, of course, we must obey God rather than man. Obedience to God is the first thing — the great ruling principle of the Christian's life.
So the servant obeys and refuses in the same spirit.
The servant, while subject, is to keep a good conscience before God by refusing to do evil. This may lead to suffering unjustly. If it does, let the believer remember that to "do well", "suffer for it", and "take it patiently" is acceptable to God.
Kelly translates the word as grace. His rendering reads: "For this is grace if for conscience toward God one endures griefs, suffering unjustly… but if when you do well and suffer you shall endure, this is grace with God" (1 Peter 2:19-20, William Kelly). Another writer keeps the older word "thankworthy" and shows the warmth in it.
after_note: DELETE_NOT_APPLICABLE
If you do right, get harsh words for it, and take it patiently, you put God in your debt, so to speak. He says "Thank you" to you. How beautiful! Suppose you do good, suffer for it, and take it patiently, and your master never thanks you. Never mind. A surprise is coming later. God has a "Thank you" for you, for this beautiful display of patience in the hardest circumstances.
Peter's next verse removes a false comfort. Pain we brought on ourselves is a different thing.
Look at this child of God. He has to be disciplined for his faults and beaten; his Father has to strike him. He is not suffering for doing well, but for sin. No wonder if he takes it patiently. He has no business to suffer for sin. "Christ has once suffered for sin, the just for the unjust that He might bring us to God." Our God loves us too much to spare us the suffering if we need it for our faults. But let us make sure our suffering is for righteousness.
Even right suffering comes in degrees. One writer says suffering for conscience' sake "has the character of righteousness". Suffering insults for Christ's own sake he calls "a higher thing" (W. T. P. Wolston).
Such endurance is not natural strength. Kelly names what makes it possible.
They were to serve the Lord Christ in the spirit of grace, not merely in self-denial. No matter how worthless their masters might be, grace lifts the soul above the most bad-tempered master. It enables the servant to obey and to suffer, even in the face of shameless wrong.
That also explains why God allows the situation at all.
In a life of patient suffering for doing good, God sees the life of Christ put on display. This explains many of the hard circumstances a Christian may find himself in. God allows them so that we have the chance to show the excellencies of Christ, for His pleasure and our final glory.
- Grace given. Kelly translates "thankworthy" as grace. The power to endure comes from that same grace. It lifts the soul above the hardest master.
- Grace guarded. "Conscience toward God" gives both the motive and the limit. Obey the master, but obey God first when the two clash.
- Grace tested. Suffering for your own faults earns no credit; the verse covers only the one who does well and suffers for it.
- Grace displayed. God permits these hard places so the life of Christ can be seen in a believer's patience.
- Grace rewarded. The master may never say thank you; God does, and the thanks He gives is worth waiting for.
For what glory [is it], if sinning and being buffeted ye shall bear [it]? but if, doing good and suffering, ye shall bear [it], this is acceptable with God.
Commentary for this verse has not been generated yet.
For to this have ye been called; for Christ also has suffered for you, leaving you a model that ye should follow in his steps
Peter first wrote these words to household servants with harsh masters. He told them their unjust suffering was no accident but their calling — which raises two questions: what "example" has Christ left, and how far can anyone follow a path that ends at the cross?
These first readers had almost no rights and no way to answer back. Why do such people get words like these?
The instruction after that goes to the servants — those Jewish believers who were slaves. They get the choicest words of all. God knows that His own beloved Son had been on earth as a servant, here not to be served but to serve and to give His life as a ransom for many. They were in the blessed position to "follow in His steps." But the instruction does not mean servants or slaves only. It is written for all believers.
Suffering for doing right is not a sign that something has gone wrong. It ties the sufferer to Christ Himself.
"If the world hates you, know that it has hated me before it hated you. A servant is not greater than his master. If they persecuted me, they will also persecute you. If they kept my word, they will also keep yours." It is hard, no doubt about it. Yet how great is the moral honour of being linked with Christ like this! "For to this you have been called." God allowed it, overruled it, and used it for the good of His children here below.
The Greek word behind "example" comes from the schoolroom.
When a Greek schoolboy was learning to write his Alpha, Beta, Gamma, his teacher gave him a "hupogrammos." He had to copy it to learn how to form his letters.
That choice of word rules out settling for a second-best model. Other passages hold up an apostle as a pattern; this one does not.
Remarkably, the word "example" here is found nowhere else. It means a "copy or underwriting." It is not the word the Apostle used when he told the saints at Philippi to join in imitating him and to "keep your eyes on those who walk according to the example you have in us." Nor is it the word he used when he urged his son Timothy to "set the believers an example." In those cases the word means a "type"; here it means a "copy." Our Lord Jesus Christ is the standard, and no lower one will do.
Christ suffered in two ways. Only one of them is open to us.
"Christ also suffered for you" — there He stood alone. No one but He could take our place under the judgment we deserved, or endure its awful sentence to the end, when for our sake God "made Him to be sin." But besides making atonement in death, He left us an example. Here He is not alone. Every one of His loved and blood-bought people should follow His steps.
The order matters. Copying Christ is not the way in. It is what comes after.
He suffered an atoning death on the cross. Without it there could be no example. Sin has to be dealt with first, and a righteous relationship with God set up. Then the example comes in.
Scripture records what Christ said and did. That record, not our imagination, is the safe guide.
The great trap to watch out for is following your own ideas while wrongly thinking they are the footsteps of Christ. That is almost certain to happen if, when you reach a hard point, you ask yourself, "What would Jesus do?" How can you know what He would do in your situation? It would be better to ask, "What has He said?" or "What did He do?" Then you would find a dependable answer in the Bible.
So what do the steps look like? They are the steps of the one Person who never failed.
The saint needs an object from God to form our souls and fashion our ways. And He sets before us Christ. What or who can compare with Him? Flaws were in the best of saints at their best — think of Peter, Paul, John. Christ always did the things that pleased His Father. He never once did any will but His Father's. He was the lowliest of men, yet above the highest. Nothing is as lowly as obedience, and nothing is as pure and morally uplifting as always obeying God.
- Cross first. Without the atoning death there is no example to copy; sin must be dealt with before imitation can begin.
- Called next. Suffering while doing good is not a breakdown. It is the calling itself, shared with a rejected Master.
- Copy given. "Example" is the schoolteacher's copy line to trace over, and Christ is the standard — no lower one will do.
- Copy studied. Follow what Scripture records He said and did, not private guesses about what He would do.
- Copy limited. He bore the judgment alone; in patient suffering He is not alone — every one of His people is to walk there.
who did no sin, neither was guile found in his mouth;
Peter writes to household servants with harsh masters, and he points them to a Man who suffered worse and deserved none of it. His words echo the prophet's picture of the suffering Servant, and they raise a question: why point to a spotless life when people are suffering unfairly?
Peter aims these words at slaves in believing homes, but the lesson is not for them alone. One writer explains why servants receive the choicest words of all.
The instruction that follows is for the servants — that is, for those Jewish believers who were slaves. God gives them the choicest words, knowing that His own beloved Son had been on earth as a servant... But the instruction is not only for servants or slaves; it is written for all believers... And what an example has He left for us? He was the holy, spotless Son of God. He could not suffer for His own sins, because He was spotless. Yet He suffered.
Peter puts the example in a negative form: not what to do, but what not to do. One writer, using the older wording "did no sin," shows why that is harder than doing good.
First, we are reminded that He "did no sin"... Here, however, the exhortation takes a negative form; we are to follow His steps in this respect that He did no sin. Whatever happens, whatever circumstances may arise... whatever insults we may have to endure, we are to do no sin. It is fairly easy to do good as a benefactor, meeting the needs of others. But we still have the flesh in us, and at times it is hard to do no sin. It is a greater thing to do no sin in trying circumstances than to do good in easy ones... It is better to suffer wrong than sin; better to lose your coat than let go the character of Christ.
The verse now moves from what He did to what He said. One writer explains the word, and where else it appears.
The New Testament often translates this word as "guile." It means cunning, craftiness, plotting to deceive, and it usually has to do with a person's words. There was no guile found in the mouth of Christ (1 Peter 2:22)... But it was by guile that the Jewish council sought to arrest Jesus and put Him to death (Matt. 26:4; Mark 14:1).
That is where most of us slip: kind words hiding an unkind motive.
No matter how hard wicked men pressed Him, no question He asked, no answer He gave, no word that fell from His lips ever carried a trace of guile. Sadly, malice and envy sometimes lurk in us behind words that are "smoother than butter" and "softer than oil." With Him, no evil motive ever hid under fair speech. Guile lurked behind the apparently innocent question of the religious Pharisees when they asked "Is it lawful to give tribute to Caesar or not?" for we read they were seeking to "entangle Him in His talk."
The prophet pairs violence with deceit, and Peter keeps the pair. One writer traces each of the two back to its root.
Again the prophet bears witness: on the one hand, "He had done no violence"; on the other, "there was no deceit in His mouth." Violence comes from the abuse of power; deceit is the resource of weakness. In the Lord there could be neither. The perfect trial was nothing but a perfect display of supreme excellence.
Peter's statement is about what Christ did and said. One writer sets two other verses beside it, and shows what hangs on them.
"He committed no sin, neither was deceit found in his mouth" (1 Peter 2:22). No one could accuse Him of sin in deed or word. Many a man sins in word while he holds back from sinful deeds. Many a man holds back from outward acts of sin, yet his mind and thoughts are sinful and evil, even when he never turns them into action. "In Him is no sin" (1 John 3:5); "Who knew no sin" (2 Cor. 5:21), proves that our Lord was as pure inwardly as He was irreproachable outwardly. If there had been any flaw in Him outwardly or inwardly He could not have been our Saviour.
- Setting — Peter writes to servants under harsh masters, but the call reaches every believer who suffers for doing right.
- Deeds — "He committed no sin" marks the step to follow: not doing good when it is easy, but doing no wrong when others wrong us.
- Words — guile is craftiness dressed as fair speech; under hostile questioning, not one word of His carried it.
- Range — the prophet pairs violence with deceit, the sin of power and the sin of weakness; neither was in Him.
- Result — the spotlessness we copy is the spotlessness that qualifies Him as Saviour; without it there is neither example nor rescue.
who, [when] reviled, reviled not again; [when] suffering, threatened not; but gave [himself] over into the hands of him who judges righteously;
Peter points his readers to the way Christ met insult and injury. Two questions follow. Why did the Lord stay silent when He could have answered? And what does it mean to hand a case over to God?
One writer walks through the steps Peter sets out, then names each trial where the Lord kept silent.
First, He did no sin, and no deceit was found in His mouth. Secondly, He suffered, being reviled and threatened. Thirdly, when reviled, He took it patiently; He neither reviled nor threatened. In the presence of all His accusers His resource was in God. He committed Himself to Him that judges righteously. When falsely accused before the Jewish council, He "held His peace" (Matthew 26:63). When the Jews accused Him before Pilate, "He answered nothing." To Pilate himself, "He answered … never a word" (Matt. 27:12-14). The mocking Herod questioned Him in many words, "but He answered him nothing" (Luke 23:9). He was silent before men because He had a resource in God.
Silence can look like having nothing to say. One writer asks whether that was the case here.
If then He was silent, if He took no revenge on His enemies, was it that He had no resource? Far from it. His resource was not to insult His enemies and turn on those who attacked Him, but to turn to the Father in prayer. As He can say, "For my love they are my adversaries; but I give myself to prayer" (Ps. 109:4).
The first three things said of Him here are things He did not do. The last is something He did.
To do no sin, to speak no deceit, to keep silent when others speak malicious words, all have a negative character. This last step is positive. If we keep silent when insulted, it is not that evil and malice have no answer; it is that the answer is left with God. We are never to try to take vengeance on the wrongdoer. God keeps all vengeance in His own hands. He has said, "Vengeance belongs to Me, I will repay, says the Lord" (Hebrews 10:30).
The older wording in these quotes — "committed Himself," or "committed His cause" — is what the ESV renders "continued entrusting himself." One writer sees our example in how He met the power set over Him.
Our blessed Lord submitted to the power that came from God, and committed His cause "to Him that judges righteously"; and this is our example.
To commit a case to God is to leave the verdict with Him. One writer calls that rest, and a victory.
And then, in deepest confidence, "He committed Himself to Him who judges righteously." If the other statements showed His life by what He did not do, this one shows the constant rest of His soul in a positive way. His vindication was of God. Are we in the habit of making this committal? We gain a victory when we do so, for there the battle ends. His whole life was submission, hearty and unquestioning, to the will of the Father. This was His yoke, and it was easy. When we bow to that will through grace, we too prove the yoke easy and the burden light.
When the Jewish leaders called Him a Samaritan with a demon, He had the power to end the argument at once. His reply shows the same committal at work.
To think of Him, the Holy One of God, being attacked like this! Had He crushed them at once by His almighty power, who could have charged Him with injustice? But He showed He was the Son of God by His patience and His bearing with the Jews. Calmly and with an unruffled spirit He answered them, "I have not a demon; but I honour My Father, and you dishonour Me. And I seek not My own glory: there is One that seeks and judges" (49, 50). Little did they think how their accusation against Him was viewed on high. "He committed Himself to Him that judges righteously," wrote Peter.
This pattern changes what we aim at when others wrong us.
When people wrong us, and say hard, unkind and malicious things against us, our concern should not be to defend ourselves and maintain our rights, but to express Christ. As for any wrongs, we are to commit ourselves to Him that judges righteously. If we make Christ's interest our great concern, we can trust God to make our concerns His interest.
- Reviled — He met insult without insulting back. Before the council, Pilate and Herod, He answered nothing.
- Resource — The silence was not weakness. He had somewhere to go: He gave Himself to prayer.
- Committed — Three negatives, then one positive act. Evil does have an answer, but God gives it: He keeps all vengeance in His own hands.
- Vindicated — His vindication was God's business. When we make the same committal, the battle ends there.
- Copied — When wronged, aim to express Christ, not to defend your rights. Make His interest your concern, and God will make yours His.