这是用户在 2025-6-3 1:00 为 https://app.immersivetranslate.com/word/ 保存的双语快照页面,由 沉浸式翻译 提供双语支持。了解如何保存?

1 彼得

D a n i e lM .D o r i a n i

x BeCex

改革宗释经注释

系列丛书

系列编辑

理查德·D·菲利普斯 菲利普 ·格雷厄姆 ·莱肯

圣经书卷分卷主编

伊恩·M·杜古德,旧约 丹尼尔 ·M· 多里安尼,

x BeCex

·M·

©2014 年丹尼尔·M· 多里安

版权所有。 未经出版商 P&R 出版公司 (地址: 新泽西州菲利普斯堡邮政信箱 817 号, 邮编 08865–0817) 事先书面许可, 不得任何形式方式—— 包括电子、 机械、 影印、 录音等—— 复制、 存储检索系统传播本书任何内容,书评评论目的简短引用除外。

除非另有说明, 经文引述出自 国际(NIV®)。 版权 ©1973、1978、1984国际圣经协会。 经 Zondervan 出版社许可使用。版权所有。

经文引述标注 (esv)源自 ESV® 圣经 ( 圣经 · 英文标准版 ®), 版权 ©2001Crossway 所有 , 该机构GoodNewsPublishers 出版事工。经许可使用。版权所有。

经文引述中斜体表示强调为后加。

ISBN:978-1-59638-469-9(精装)

ISBN:978-1-62995-040-2 (电子书)

ISBN:978-1-62995-041-9(Mobi 版)

印刷于美利坚合众国

美国国会图书馆出版品编目数据

多里亚尼, 丹尼尔·M.,1953 年出生

1 彼得丹尼尔 M. 多里安尼.

厘米页数. --(改革宗释经注释系列) 包含参考文献和索引.

ISBN978-1-59638-469-9(精装)

圣经. 彼得前书--注释.I. 题名. II. 题名: 彼得前书. BS2795.53.D67 2014

227'.92077--dc23

2013048513

谨以此书献给我在中央长老会教堂的朋友们,特别是教会的长老和执事们。感谢他们批准我的研究假期以完成此书,感谢他们的友谊,以及他们渴望

成为彼得前书第 5 章所描述敬虔牧者典范心愿

致谢 ix 丛书导言 xi 前言 xv

异乡(彼得前书 1:1-2)3

确凿而活泼的盼望 (彼得前书 1:3-9)14

彼得及其书信的权威性 (彼得前书 1:10-12)24

盼望圣洁 (彼得前书 1:13-21)36

福音的洁净 (彼得前书 1:22-2:3)51

基督徒的身份 (彼得前书 2:4-10)64

客旅与公民(彼得前书 2:11-17)76

被钉十字架的基督所塑造的生命 (彼得前书 2:18–25)91

贤德的妻子,体贴的丈夫 (彼得前书 3:1–7)107

美好生活,和平国度 (彼得前书 3:8–12)124

正确的敬畏 (彼得前书 3:13–18)134

活着的基督工作 ( 彼得前书 3:18–22)146

断绝 ( 彼得前书 4:1–6)158

来自神的恩赐,为神献上的礼物 (彼得前书 4:7–11)169

试炼之道 ( 彼得前书 4:12–19)187

耶稣通过仆人式领袖牧养祂的教会 (彼得前书 5:1-4)201

谦卑自己(彼得前书 5:5-6)218

劝勉祝福 彼得前书 5:7-14)227

彼得前书精选注释 239 经文索引 241

主题人名索引 255

I thank Jo Durham and Andrew Allen for timely editorial and research assistance. Rick Phillips’s comments strengthened and clarified the book at many points. Walker Cosgrove offered invaluable assistance for the seg- ment on the Crusades. In ways that each one knows, Clay Smith, Robbie Griggs, Bryan Chapell, Iain Duguid, and Phil Ryken helped me to think through the issues or the presentation. My daughters Abby and Beth and my beloved wife, Debbie, became assistant editors at essential points. I especially thank Tom and Sue Hays, whose home on the South Carolina coast offered a blessed setting for a gentle launch of the final push toward completion. Their porch is the one of the finest places in God’s good world for blessed meditation that leads to action. ...

Series Introduction ...

In every generation there is a fresh need for the faithful exposition of God’s Word in the church. At the same time, the church must constantly do the work of theology: reflecting on the teaching of Scripture, confessing its doctrines of the Christian faith, and applying them to contemporary culture. We believe that these two tasks—the expositional and the theological—are interdependent. Our doctrine must derive from the biblical text, and our understanding of any particular passage of Scripture must arise from the doctrine taught in Scripture as a whole. ...

We further believe that these interdependent tasks of biblical exposition and theological reflection are best undertaken in the church, and most specifically in the pulpits of the church. This is all the more true since the study of Scripture properly results in doxology and praxis—that is, in praise to God and practical application in the lives of believers. In pursuit of these ends, we are pleased to present the Reformed Expository Commentary as a fresh exposition of Scripture for our generation in the church. We hope and pray that pastors, teachers, Bible study leaders, and many others will find this series to be a faithful, inspiring, and useful resource for the study of God’s infallible, inerrant Word. ...

The Reformed Expository Commentary has four fundamental commit- ments. First, these commentaries aim to be biblical, presenting a comprehen- sive exposition characterized by careful attention to the details of the text. They are not exegetical commentaries—commenting word by word or even verse by verse—but integrated expositions of whole passages of Scripture. Each commentary will thus present a sequential, systematic treatment of an entire book of the Bible, passage by passage. Second, these commentaries are unashamedly doctrinal. We are committed to the Westminster Confession ...

of Faith and Catechisms as containing the system of doctrine taught in the Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments. Each volume will teach, promote, and defend the doctrines of the Reformed faith as they are found in the Bible. Third, these commentaries are redemptive-historical in their orientation. We believe in the unity of the Bible and its central message of salvation in Christ. We are thus committed to a Christ-centered view of the Old Testament, in which its characters, events, regulations, and institutions are properly understood as pointing us to Christ and his gospel, as well as giving us examples to follow in living by faith. Fourth, these commentaries are practical, applying the text of Scripture to contemporary challenges of life—both public and private—with appropriate illustrations. ...

The contributors to the Reformed Expository Commentary are all pastor- scholars. As pastor, each author will first present his expositions in the pulpit ministry of his church. This means that these commentaries are rooted in the teaching of Scripture to real people in the church. While aiming to be scholarly, these expositions are not academic. Our intent is to be faithful, clear, and helpful to Christians who possess various levels of biblical and theological training—as should be true in any effective pulpit ministry. Inevi- tably this means that some issues of academic interest will not be covered. Nevertheless, we aim to achieve a responsible level of scholarship, seeking to promote and model this for pastors and other teachers in the church. Significant exegetical and theological difficulties, along with such historical and cultural background as is relevant to the text, will be treated with care. We strive for a high standard of enduring excellence. This begins with the selection of the authors, all of whom have proved to be outstanding com- municators of God’s Word. But this pursuit of excellence is also reflected in a disciplined editorial process. Each volume is edited by both a series editor and a testament editor. The testament editors, Iain Duguid for the Old Testa- ment and Daniel Doriani for the New Testament, are accomplished pastors and respected scholars who have taught at the seminary level. Their job is to ensure that each volume is sufficiently conversant with up-to-date scholar- ship and is faithful and accurate in its exposition of the text. As series editors, we oversee each volume to ensure its overall quality—including excellence of writing, soundness of teaching, and usefulness in application. Working together as an editorial team, along with the publisher, we are devoted to ensuring that these are the best commentaries that our gifted authors can ...

Series Introduction ...

provide, so that the church will be served with trustworthy and exemplary expositions of God’s Word. ...

It is our goal and prayer that the Reformed Expository Commentary will serve the church by renewing confidence in the clarity and power of Scripture and by upholding the great doctrinal heritage of the Reformed faith. We hope that pastors who read these commentaries will be encour- aged in their own expository preaching ministry, which we believe to be the best and most biblical pattern for teaching God’s Word in the church. We hope that lay teachers will find these commentaries among the most use- ful resources they rely on for understanding and presenting the text of the Bible. And we hope that the devotional quality of these studies of Scripture will instruct and inspire each Christian who reads them in joyful, obedient discipleship to Jesus Christ. ...

May the Lord bless all who read the Reformed Expository Commentary. We commit these volumes to the Lord Jesus Christ, praying that the Holy Spirit will use them for the instruction and edification of the church, with thanksgiving to God the Father for his unceasing faithfulness in building his church through the ministry of his Word. ...

Richard D. Phillips Philip Graham Ryken ...

Series Editors ...

Preface ...

This book is the product of a long relationship with 1 Peter. When I first read Peter’s epistle as a new Christian, it seemed like a distillation of the whole of Christian theology and much of the Christian life. His epistle presents Jesus as both Redeemer and Exemplar of the holy life. It offers the broadest principles for Christian living, grounds them in the work of Christ past, present, and future, and then presents norms for life in the family, at work, and in society at large. Peter’s guidance is perfect for Christians who hope to engage their culture in uncertain times. It holds out hope that a beautiful life will be noticed, that no one will harm those who do good, and that we can do good because Jesus has given us life and gifts that we can use to serve others. On the other hand, Peter banishes triumphalism. We are aliens here, he warns, and must expect to attract unwarranted hostility, as Jesus did. ...

As a seminary professor, I surveyed Peter fourteen times, but never had the occasion to probe its depths. I finally had the opportunity to explore 1 Peter in a series of sermons for Central Presbyterian Church, where I was senior pastor until my recent return to Covenant Seminary. As always, the blessed members of the church and my many good friends there listened well, thanked me, and asked questions that made me study more thoroughly. I thank them for the kingdom-mindedness that led them to grant me the study leave that let me conclude the work. ...

Grace-Driven Discipleship in a Difficult Age ...

1

Strangers in a Strange Land ...

x BeCex x:x–z ...

Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ, to God’s elect, strangers in the world, scattered throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia and Bithynia, who have been chosen according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through the sanctifying work ...

of the Spirit, for obedience to Jesus Christ and sprinkling by his blood: Grace and peace be yours in abundance. (1 Peter 1:1–2) ...

The Author: The Apostle Peter ...

The unanimous tradition of the early church declares that the apostle Peter wrote his first epistle while living in Rome, late in his life, around ...

a.d. 65.1 If that is correct, then Peter wrote from a lifetime of wisdom and conviction. He experienced everything, not least the trials and suffering that he describes in his letter. He also walked with Jesus every day for roughly three years. Yet Peter drew on more than experience when he wrote his epistles. He was an apostle, God’s ambassador, chosen by Jesus to see his ...

Peter writes from “Babylon,” which is code for “Rome” (1 Peter 5:13); church tradition places Peter in Rome, where he died in the mid-60s. ...

deeds, hear his words, and declare what it all means. Peter was at ease with this authority. He did not trumpet his credentials. Rather, he assumed that he had the right to describe God’s salvation and explain its significance. ...

Peter addressed his epistle to people and churches that he calls “God’s elect.” They lived in regions east of Rome, in “Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia and Bithynia” (1 Peter 1:1). ...

Since Peter identifies himself as “an apostle of Jesus Christ” (1 Peter 1:1), he invites us to read his letter through the lens of his experience as dis- ciple and apostle. The Gospels name Peter as one of “the Twelve” (Mark 10:32; 14:10) and as a member of the inner three, “Peter, James and John” (5:37; 9:2; 14:33). Peter was, at a minimum, the most outspoken among the twelve disciples. At most, he was their spokesman, and in some sense their leader. He articulated their best thoughts, thoughts given by God himself. He confessed Jesus: “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God” (Matt. 16:16). But Peter also blurted out the disciples’ worst errors. He even dared to rebuke Jesus—on the very day that he confessed Jesus’ deity—for saying that he must go to the cross (16:21–22). He asked pointed questions (19:23–27), made rash vows (“I will never disown you,” Mark 14:31), and failed to keep them, above all by denying Jesus three times (John 18:15–27). ...

After the resurrection, Jesus commissioned the apostles to make disciples ...

of the nations (Matt. 28:18–20). Despite Peter’s failures, Jesus reinstated him as an apostle and commanded Peter to feed his sheep (John 21:15–17). At Pentecost, Peter proclaimed Jesus’ resurrection, and three thousand repented, believed, and were baptized. That marked the birth of the church as we know it (Acts 2:22–41). When Peter preached again, the church exploded with additional disciples (4:4; 5:14). Peter performed signs, testified to Christ, solved problems, and rebuked sin within the infant Jerusalem church. Before Paul took the lead, Peter inaugurated the mission to the Gentiles (Acts 10). Peter did betray Jesus, but even his failures fascinate us and illumine both the man and the message. It is fitting that Peter, who betrayed the Lord and received the grace of forgiveness, both opens and closes his epistle by offering his churches the grace of God. His letter begins, “Grace and peace be yours in abundance” (1 Peter 1:2). And he closes, “I have written to you briefly, encouraging you and testifying that this is the true grace of God. Stand fast in it” (5:12). Knowing Peter’s history, we understand that his talk of grace is no mere formula. Peter denied Jesus three times, ...

insisting, with oaths, that he did not even know Jesus. He did this despite warnings, despite vows to the contrary, and at the hour of Jesus’ greatest need. Yet Peter repented, in tears, and received forgiveness and reinstate- ment as an apostle (Luke 22:62; John 21:15–17). Because he knew the depth of his need and because he understood the perfection of Jesus’ offer, Peter loved the grace of God. ...

Peter’s need of grace was most acute when he denied Jesus during the trial. It is moving, therefore, that Peter wrote his letter to help God’s elect as they “suffer grief in all kinds of trials” (1 Peter 1:6). Yet trials bring more than misery and temptation. When we endure trials, when we remain loyal in hardship, according to Peter, it proves our faith genuine (1:6–7), and that brings us glory when Christ is revealed. So suffering can create confidence. If we are willing to suffer for Jesus, it shows that we truly belong to him (4:1) and stand fast with him (5:12). We stand fast when we remain holy in a corrupt age (1:14–16; 4:1–4) and when we remain loyal to Jesus through persecution (4:12–16). ...

The Audience: Believers Who Are Strangers in Their Own Land ...

Peter wrote for everyone, but especially for believers, God’s elect. He explicitly addressed a group of churches scattered through a wide swath in the northeast of the Roman Empire: “To God’s elect, strangers in the world, scattered throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia and Bithynia” (1 Peter 1:1–2). These named areas represent millions of people across an area of roughly the size of Turkey or America’s Southwest from Texas to California (about 750,000 square miles). In short, this is a universal letter, not a local letter. ...

Peter reminded his people of their status, privileges, and responsibilities. The church is God’s elect, “who have been chosen according to the fore- knowledge of God the Father, through the sanctifying work of the Spirit, for obedience to Jesus Christ and sprinkling by his blood” (1 Peter 1:2). The elect are redeemed by the triune God. The Father chose them according to his foreknowledge. The Spirit sanctifies them for obedience to the Son, who sprinkled them with his blood and so atoned for their sins. In God’s name, Peter blesses his readers: “Grace and peace be yours in abundance” (1:2). ...

So Peter opens with his great themes: the work of the triune God who elects, gives grace, commands and empowers holiness, and leads us to a mission. The first hint of that mission arrives in the salutation. Peter iden- tifies us as “God’s elect, strangers in the world” (1 Peter 1:1). More literally, we are “elect exiles of the dispersion” (1:1 esv). The church is privileged by God; we are his chosen ones. Yet at the same time, and for the same reason, the church is disadvantaged in society. Because believers are God’s chosen people, we are “strangers” or “exiles” in our own world. The word stranger or exile (parepidemos) denotes a temporary resident, a traveler whose stay is measured in weeks or a few months.2 The term alien (paroikos), used in 1 Peter 2:11, is similar but suggests a long-term resident. It could describe an immigrant from a distant place who has lived in another land for several years, started a career, and found a home.3 Both terms signify that the person originally belonged elsewhere. ...

Peter wants believers to realize that we never fully belong in this world. Strangers have no permanent residence. Aliens cannot hold positions of power and rarely enjoy full privileges. This is essential to a Christian’s identity. People in Reformed and Calvinist churches have committed to engage the culture rather than fleeing from it, and rightly so. Yet we must remember that we are exiles and therefore will never be completely at home in this world. ...

Most commentators believe Peter’s audience consists primarily of Gentiles, not Jews. Peter’s people “were redeemed from the empty way of life handed down . . . from your forefathers” (1 Peter 1:18). For years, they did “what pagans choose to do” (4:3). Their neighbors thought it “strange” when they abandoned their former life of dissipation (4:4). Their lifestyle was manifestly different from the conduct of others in the empire. So most of Peter’s people did not grow up in the covenant. God’s election, salvation, and subsequent sanctification estranged them from their native culture. ...

The life of John Adams is illustrative. Adams was a Massachusetts farmer and lawyer. The Constitutional Congress named Adams as its ambassador to France. He was not successful. He was too fiery, too much the unyield- ...

Peter H. Davids, The First Epistle of Peter (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1990), 95. ...

J. Ramsey Michaels, 1 Peter, Word Biblical Commentary 49 (Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 1988), 6–9; Johannes Louw and Eugene Nida, Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament: Based on Semantic Domains, 2nd ed. (New York: United Bible Societies, 1998–99), 1:133. ...

ing crusader, to suit the cool and venial French court. Adams was a great American, but in France he was a stranger in a strange land.4 Travelers often experience the same sense of estrangement. Whether we know the language or not, we feel out of place when we first visit a new land. The food, the conception of time, and sundry unwritten rules of conduct conspire to surprise and unsettle us. Similarly, the first visit to any established group, whether social, spiritual, professional, or intellectual, can easily leave the newcomer feeling out of place. ...

These are the experiences of strangers and aliens. Peter understood that life. He knew Greek, he had once had a good income as a fisherman, and he had traveled widely in the Roman Empire before settling in Rome itself. But he was a Jew from Galilee, a backwater of the empire. When he first traveled to Jerusalem, he marveled at its sights (Mark 13:1). We can imagine how Rome impressed him. Since Galilee had been Hellenized to a degree, he was familiar with elements of Greco-Roman culture. Still, a wholly Gentile world had to seem strange at times to an observant Jew (Acts 10:14). ...

In fact, because Peter had followed Jesus from the beginning, he had become an outsider even within Israel. After he became a disciple, he left his business and family to wander through Galilee and Judea with Jesus (Luke 5:1–11). When the authorities began to question Jesus, Peter and the other disciples were implicated (e.g., Matt. 12:1ff.; John 18:1–27). After Jesus’ ascension, Peter became even more controversial. He performed miracles like the miracles of Jesus and did so in his name (Acts 4:2, 13). As the church grew, the authorities threatened, beat, and jailed Peter (Acts 4, 5, 12). Peter fit neither in Rome nor in Israel, and he tells the believers in the church that his lot will be theirs. They, too, will be outsiders and aliens. ...

But we must not think Peter resented his status. He knew his identity and savored his call. He knew that every disciple of Jesus will, in part at least, be an outsider, stranger, and exile in the wider world. ...

Peter wrote his epistle to Christians scattered through five provinces of the eastern empire, provinces that encompassed many peoples and languages. But Peter ignored race, ethnicity, and language and defined the churches by their status as God’s elect. He said that Jesus had sprinkled us with his blood and so atoned for our sin. We are sanctified by the Spirit, that we ...

David McCollough, John Adams (New York: Simon & Schuster, 2001). ...

may believe the gospel, obey Jesus, and experience God’s grace and peace (1 Peter 1:1–2). ...

Exiles live between two worlds. When a couple has a baby, they remain in their old world, with the same marriage, skills, friends, and interests. Yet their baby places them in a new world, with a new schedule and a powerful new interest in the eating, sleeping, crawling, and babbling of their child. They meet other parents, who become new friends and advisers. The new world of parenting will partially alienate them from their former world, since they have less in common with their childless friends, whether single or married. But the change from pagan polytheist to Christian is greater than the changes wrought by parenthood. As strangers and exiles, we will never perfectly fit in with, never fully belong to, pagan society. We feel like aliens in our own world because we are—at least partially so. ...

We need to grasp the right lessons from this. Peter says that we are aliens, but he never tells us to alienate ourselves from this world by abandoning it or cursing it. God did not abandon his creation; he sent his Son to redeem and restore it and fully renew it one day. Since God’s ways are our model, we should remain engaged with this world. Historically, the Reformed or Calvinistic branch of Christendom has engaged the culture. We hope to form, reform, and transform it, not abandon it. We admire Calvin not only for his theology but also for his social action. For example, an infec- tious plague swept through Italy and Switzerland during Calvin’s day, in the sixteenth century. Showing admirable courage, Cardinal Borromeo of Milan stayed in his city to feed and pray for those who were dying. Yet we may admire Calvin more, not because he was braver, but because he was wiser. “Calvin acted better and more wisely, for he not only cared inces- santly for the spiritual needs of the sick, but at the same time introduced hitherto unsurpassed hygienic measures whereby the ravages of the plague were arrested.”5 ...

Nor was Calvin’s cultural engagement limited to the traditional sphere of ...

works of mercy. In sixteenth-century Europe, the growth of market econo- mies led to a sharp increase in the cost of living and a simultaneous drop in ...

Abraham Kuyper, Calvinism: Six Stone Foundation Lectures (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1943), ...

120. See also Cornelius Plantinga, Engaging God’s World (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2002); Lee Hardy, The Fabric of This World (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1990); Gene Edward Veith, God at Work: Your Christian Vocation in All of Life (Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 2002). ...

the value of labor. Calvin spoke prophetically against a rising aristocracy that exploited the poor by depriving them of fair wages.6 We are prone to admire Calvin for his cultural engagement, but is this the way that God expects his exiles to act? ...

Scripture holds two ideas in tension. We are, simultaneously, exiles in this world and agents of change within it. Because we are exiles, we resist conformity to the patterns of this age. God told his people, living in the shadow of Babylon, that great city of wealth and decadent pleasures, “Come out of her, my people, so that you will not share in her sins, so that you will not receive any of her plagues.” Clearly, we must flee the corrupt world, for judgment will fall upon it (Rev. 18:4). Yet we are reformers, constantly ready to engage society. Jesus notes that his disciples are “in the world” but that “they are not of the world any more than I am of the world.” He continues, “My prayer is not that you take them out of the world but that you protect them from the evil one” (John 17:11–15). As we so often notice, Jesus called his disciples “the salt of the earth”—retarding its decay—and “the light of the world” (Matt. 5:13–14). ...

So, then, we are engaged exiles. A few years ago, I shared a long meal with the brilliant, crusading atheist Christopher Hitchens. His book title, God Is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything, reveals his conviction.7 Hitchens’s tone was occasionally brutish but generally cordial (it helped that my agnostic dissertation adviser had been a friend of his). Through our long conversation, I came to understand atheism better and, as he listened to me and another theologian at the table, he came to understand Christian- ity better. Since his main ideas about Christianity came from European Catholicism, liberal Protestantism, and the atheist’s list of “repulsive things we found in the Bible,” we were able to blunt many of his objections to bib- lical Christianity. We cleared up serious misconceptions and introduced him to essential tenets of the faith. At times it seemed that we were making progress. Yet Hitchens remained a devoted atheist. A radical individualist and libertarian, he despised the very concept of a sovereign, all-powerful ...

Calvin had a view of “fair wages”—one formed both by an older cultural consensus and by theological convictions. See William P. Brown, “Calvin and Qoheleth Meet after a Hard Day’s Night,” in Reformed Theology: Identity and Ecumenicity II, ed. Wallace Alston and Michael Welker (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2007), 75–76. ...

Christopher Hitchens, God Is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything (New York: Warner Books, 2007). ...

God who calls humans to worship him and render an account for their lives. He hated biblical notions of grace and called the atonement barbaric. He raged at the idea that hell awaits those who deny God, but found heaven offensive, too. He had no desire to spend eternity “groveling” before a deity. Therefore, no matter how cordial and instructive our discussion was, there was no ultimate rapprochement, for he believed the God of the Bible to be a cosmic despot. We would always be exiles if Hitchens hosted a table, unless the Spirit renewed him. ...

In a similar sense, Peter’s people were aliens in the empire. Their beliefs and practices were, and inevitably remained, radically at odds with their culture. In certain lands, Christianity is now so widespread that it obtains general tolerance, possibly even respect. But Christians are “aliens” and will never perfectly fit into secular society. We will never be able to laugh at every joke or enjoy every entertainment and pastime. ...

No one likes to be excluded. Everyone cringes or bristles when things we hold dear are mocked or dismissed, even if the manner is polite. But exclusion is not necessarily an evil. If we detest cigar smoke, we should not mind if we are banned from a cigar club, with its pointless discussion of the virtues of Cuba’s soil and climate, and its constant pollution of lips, lungs, and clothes. So, too, there are groups, however attractive they initially seem, to which a wise disciple will not want to belong. There are jokes that make people laugh, even though they are more cruel than funny, so that a noble person should not be amused. There are entertainments that are novel and exciting at first, but degrading and enslaving in the end. It is a gain, not a loss, to stand outside such groups, with their humorless jokes and weari- some entertainments. ...

The first Christians knew they were outsiders, for their beliefs and prac- ...

tices stood in radical conflict with their culture. Today, wherever Christian- ity is most widespread, it gets tolerance, if not respect. But we must neither attempt nor expect to fit perfectly into secular society. The life of the exile is not necessarily onerous, since we join God’s exiled community. Peter promises that although the redeemed are aliens now, we will have a better home and “an inheritance that is imperishable, undefiled, and unfading” (1 Peter 1:3–4 esv). That initiates the theme of the next passage. But before we consider that, we need an overview of the main message of 1 Peter and of its structure, that is, the way its message unfolds. ...

The Themes and Goals of 1 Peter ...

在《新约》二十七卷书中,十二使徒仅撰写了其中八卷;8 悠久的传统认为彼得彼得马可福音幕后作者。 在这九卷中, 我们可以观察到一种倾向:卷首 (如《马可福音》1:1)卷末 (《马太福音》28:18-20;《约翰福音》20:31;《约翰一书》5:13) 阐明全书主旨。 事实上,《彼得前书》开头结尾呈现了主题陈述。

恩典

彼得开篇便告诉他的子民,他们是被天父拣选的,被圣灵分别为圣的,并蒙耶稣基督宝血洒净的(彼得前书1:1-2)。他赐予我们恩典;我们理当顺服于他(1:2)。我们赞美他的大怜悯,因这使我们得着重生,并拥有与基督共享永恒基业的盼望(1:3-4,7)。

彼得结束书信时,读者发出呼吁:"劝勉宣告这就是恩典。 你们在其中站立得稳"(彼得前书 5:12 和合本)。 短语 "这就是神的真恩典" 中的 "这"至关重要。 由于它出现在书信结尾, "恩典"似乎指向整封书信, 其中传递着福音中盼望救赎信息。这封书信中, 彼得始终上帝 "百般恩典"管家 (4:10 和合本)。恩典始于耶稣的赎罪 (1:2,18-21) 延续于我们确信耶稣是我们的牧者监督, 即便患难中亦然 (2:25)。 此外,撒但吼叫的狮子遍地游行, 弟兄们世上受苦时,"赐诸般恩典的上帝" 应许复兴、 坚固、 建立祂的子民 (5:8-11)。 “这……恩典”始于耶稣为罪代赎(1:17–21;2:24;3:18–22), 包含现今苦难中保守应许 并应许将来与基督同享荣耀(1:6–9)。

因此, 尽管苦难始终萦绕彼得心头, 但这并非关注焦点。 相反, 耶稣 "曾一次受苦, 义的代替不义的, 为要我们面前"(3:18 和合本)。 耶稣"你们灵魂救赎" 受苦, 如同无瑕疵羔羊血, 成为永恒 “无瑕疵的羔羊 (1:9,19)。 藉着祭, 彼得教会成员“从你们祖宗所传虚妄行为出来 (1:18后)。

马太福音、 约翰福音、 彼得前书后书、 约翰一二三书、 以及启示录。

教会的苦难是其新生命的必然结果,并非生命核心 相反, 因为彼得的子民如今已成为神的子民 彼得前书 1:1;2:4-10), 他们必须祖先那里继承的异教生活方式决裂 (1:14,18)。 由于这种决裂, 他们在昔日友人眼中将显得怪异,甚至可能被视为邪恶(2:12;4:1-4)。 甘愿信仰承受后果 表明他们基督联合 获得同享永生应许 (1:3–9;4:13;5:1,4,10)。 在我写下这段话的时代,任何人宣称上帝要让婚姻结合一男一女,都会被斥为偏执者和仇恨者。每个时代都有敏感议题。 门徒必须甘愿顺服基督所处文化发生冲突。

苦难中的信实

然而, 苦难《彼得前书》中占据重要地位。 使徒时代, 无论是罗马帝国还是犹太当局未制定系统迫害教会的政策。由于信徒拒绝崇拜皇帝, 迫害始终可能发生的。 基督徒追随的是一位被钉十字架的犹太人(即被定罪之人), 这位宣称自己是以色列的主—— 这种主张当权者听来可能构成威胁。 这有助于解释为何试炼与苦难成为《彼得前书》每一章的主题(1:6-9;2:18-25;3:13-18;4:12-19;5:9),且随着书信的展开,警告的力度似乎愈发强烈。试比较第三章与第四章的警告:

善,呢?便苦,的。备,

凡有人问你们心中盼望的缘由,就要常作准备,以温柔敬畏的心回答各人。(彼得前书3:13-15)

亲爱的朋友们,你们遭遇痛苦的试炼时,不要惊讶, 仿佛什么稀奇临到你们。 倒要欢喜, 因为你们是与基督一同受苦。(4:12-13)

第一段经文中, 迫害可能发生的。 而在第二段,似乎已成定局。 显然,彼得想告诉读者苦难即将来临,但他以渐进的方式引导他们接受。3指出: 这事可能发生。预备好, 以防万一真的来临。”

4道:生,讶,与基督联合的关系来看待它。” 彼得因此旨在教导信徒如何在这个常常充满敌意的世界中尽可能忠实地生活。

明。持守圣洁(彼得前书 1:18;2:9;4:3-4)。我们遵循使社会生活得以维系的准则(2:20;3:8-12)。逼迫,效法基督的榜样(2:21-23;3:13-18;4:12-16)。

说明

观察彼得书信的结构很有益处。开篇问候 (彼得前书 1:1-2)之后, 彼得赞美上帝赐予信徒新生进入活泼的盼望 (1:3-9),圣经已有描述 (1:10-12)。 上帝呼召祂的子民圣洁的生活,根基在于基督的救赎之工。因上帝是圣洁的,我们也是圣洁的。既然耶稣赎买了我们,我们也尝过祂的恩慈,就当弃绝罪恶(1:13-2:3)。 因为我们是上帝拣选的子民,是圣洁的国度,所以我们远离罪恶,活出尊贵的生命,即使遭受毁谤也不改其志(2:4-12)。

圣洁体现社会层面,顺服执政者主人 (《彼得前书》2:13–25)。 妻子虽仍顺服丈夫, 丈夫亦当敬重自己的妻子, 使二人能在恩典中共同生活 (3:1–7)。 只要我们爱心、诚实, 追求和睦 (3:8–13), 通常就能眷顾, 得享美善生活。 然而行善受苦的情形确实存在 (3:13–17)。 耶稣正是如此我们受苦我们死亡中解救出来时(3:18-22)。耶稣的榜样使我们能够抵御外邦人的反对(彼得前书 4:1-6)。

Nonetheless, the disciple is not combative. He is self-controlled, loving, hospitable, and eager to use God’s gifts to administer God’s grace (4:7–11). This is necessary if we hope to face the trials that will come to those who share in Christ, to whom we entrust ourselves (4:12–19). While individual believers seek to endure and do good, the elders of the church lead by setting an example and by watching over all (5:1–5). While Peter is glad to advise people in their specific callings, the great principles of life are the same for all: we humble ourselves before God, cast our cares on him, resist Satan, and stand firm in God’s grace (5:6–14). ...

So, then, let us plunge into the riches of the work of Peter, eyewitness and apostle of Christ, and servant of God’s elect. ...

2

A Sure and Living Hope ...

x BeCex x:3–s ...

Praise be to the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ! In his great mercy he has given us new birth into a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead. (1 Peter 1:3) ...

once wrote a short story and everyone seemed to like it, but I have no contacts in fiction, so I have faint hope that it will ever be published. I have a middling hope of visiting Hawaii someday. e to hike its isolated trails, yet it seems far away, commercial- ...

ized, and expensive. But if I say I hope my wife will always love me, I mean something quite different. That hope is strong and personal, and a great deal rests on it. Even if I shiver at the weight of saying, “I hope she always loves me,” I am not troubled with doubts, because I know her. ...

In a similar vein, Peter begins with a strong and personal hope. It rests on the God he knows. His hope rests in God’s election (1 Peter 1:1), God’s foreknowledge (1:2), and God’s power (1:5). Peter also names Jesus Christ five times in his first seven verses. He tells us to praise Jesus and obey him (1:2–3). Our hope is “living,” that is, imperishable and undying (cf. Rom. 6:9). It depends on Jesus’ blood (1 Peter 1:2), Jesus’ resurrection (1:3), and Jesus’ second appearance (1:7). ...

After he describes God’s character and work, Peter moves swiftly to bless- ing and praise. “Blessed be God” was a common phrase in Jewish devotion, but Peter’s focus on Jesus makes it a Christian blessing (see 1 Peter 1:3 esv). Peter gives us several reasons to bless God. We were chosen by God the Father, sanctified by God the Spirit, and sprinkled clean by the blood of Jesus, the Son. Because of the triune God’s work, Peter can tell us, “May grace and peace be multiplied to you” (1:2 esv). Peter knows that God has blessed his people, but he also says that God is blessed—and, he hints, we may bless him, too, as we see the present hope and future inheritance that God has granted us (1:3–5). ...

This hope was essential, since Peter’s churches, scattered through the region now called Asia Minor, suffered all kinds of trials (1 Peter 1:6). These fiery trials tested and refined their faith, but also provoked fear (3:14; 4:12). Peter assures his people that God’s power will shield them. They will pass these tests, prove their faith genuine, and gain honor when their salvation is complete (1:7–9). ...

Blessed Be Our Lord God ...

The niv translates Peter’s first words as “Praise” be to God (1 Peter 1:3a), while the esv says “Blessed” be God. It is easy to defend both choices. The word that Peter uses, eulogētos, means “blessed.” Yet Peter does not bless God in the way that God blesses us. God gives us his blessing, but we declare that God is the Blessed One. Full of knowledge and strength (1:2, 5), he gives us grace, mercy, and life (1:2–3). When we say these things, we praise God. God doesn’t need our blessing, so in one sense we cannot bless him. As Hebrews 7:7 notes, the greater blesses the lesser. God doesn’t need to hear nice words in order to feel better about himself or to stay motivated to do good. Rather, it is good for us to declare God’s excellence. ...

In verse 3, Peter cites Jesus’ full title, “our Lord Jesus Christ,” which appears about thirty-five times in eleven different books of the New Testament.1 Working backward, Christ means that he is the promised Messiah. Jesus means that he is Savior; in Hebrew, Joshua/Jesus means “Yahweh saves.” Lord means that he rules all things. Beyond all that, he is ours, and we are ...

There is some doubt about the numbers because of variant readings in the original text. ...

his. So he is the Lord and our Lord. He is God’s Anointed, and Yahweh saves through him. ...

Our Hope and Inheritance ...

Peter’s praise mentions both the quality and the certainty of God’s salva- tion: “In his great mercy he has given us new birth into a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead, and into an inheritance that can never perish, spoil or fade” (1 Peter 1:3b–4a). The opening verses of Peter are steeped in covenantal language. Peter has already said that God elects and has foreknowledge of his people. His mercy (hesed in the Old Testament, eleos in the lxx2 and New Testament) is closely linked to God’s covenant name and covenant-making deeds. He shows mercy (hesed is also translated “steadfast love”) to thousands who love him (Ex. 20:6; Deut. 5:10). When he reveals himself to Moses, he says that he is “the compassionate and gracious God, slow to anger, abounding in love [hesed] and faithfulness” (Ex. 34:6). In his mercy, Peter continues, “he has given us new birth” (1 Peter 1:3). “Give new birth” translates one Greek verb (anagennaō) that appears only in 1 Peter. The term echoes Jesus’ teaching of Nicodemus, Israel’s teacher, that he had to be born anew and born of the Spirit if he hoped to see God’s kingdom (John 3:1–10). Nicodemus and Peter, Jews and Gentiles, you and I—all need God’s Spirit to breathe life into our dead souls. Pastors need to believe this, and to say it, to move believers to gratitude and to move unbe- ...

lievers to humble themselves and receive this rebirth. ...

In his mercy, God has given us three things: a living hope (1 Peter 1:3), an inheritance (1:4), and salvation (1:5). All three follow our new birth. Our hope rests not in teachings, nor even in a teacher, but in the Redeemer who rose from the dead. ...

Through his death, Jesus bore our sins (1 Peter 2:24), and through his resurrection, we obtain “an inheritance that is imperishable, undefiled, and unfading, kept in heaven for you” (1:4 esv). The resurrection of Jesus gives us hope because it proves that death is not the last word. Death could not hold him (Acts 2:24), and it cannot hold us if we are united to him by faith (Rom. 5:21–6:9). An inheritance is a gift based on a relationship, not ...

The Septuagint (lxx) is the oldest translation of the Hebrew Old Testament in Greek. It was completed around 100 b.c ....

a wage for a performance. Because the gift rests on the Father’s grace and covenant, and because God keeps us safe, our inheritance is safe. In lan- guage that is almost poetic in the original, Peter says that this inheritance is “imperishable, undefiled, and unfading.” Nothing can spoil our inheri- tance. It is “untouched by death, unstained by evil, unimpaired by time; it is compounded of immortality, purity and beauty.”3 Nothing can jeopardize it and nothing can ruin it.4 ...

Nothing can keep this inheritance from us, and, Peter declares, nothing can keep us from it. Our inheritance is “kept in heaven for you, who by God’s power are being guarded through faith for a salvation ready to be revealed in the last time” (1 Peter 1:4b–5 esv). The symmetry is perfect. God keeps the inheritance for us, and he keeps us for the inheritance. He keeps the treasure for us, and he guards us so that we will properly enjoy it.5 ...

Suppose someone’s fortieth birthday is at hand. Family and friends plan a surprise party. The celebrants have everything ready at the chosen venue. But if it is a surprise, someone has to deliver the birthday girl to the appointed place at the ordained time. Peter says that God plays both roles in this vignette. He prepares the perfect party and he brings us to the party. Philippians promises that God “who began a good work in you will carry it on to completion until the day of Christ Jesus” (Phil. 1:6). ...

The Westminster Confession perhaps offers the finest description of the assurance that believers should have that the Lord will grant them eternal life in chapter 17, “Of the Perseverance of the Saints”: ...

They, whom God has accepted in His Beloved, effectually called, and sanctified by His Spirit, can neither totally nor finally fall away from the state of grace, but shall certainly persevere therein to the end, and be eter- nally saved. ...

This perseverance of the saints depends not upon their own free will, but upon the immutability of the decree of election, flowing from the free ...

F. W. Beare, The First Epistle of Peter, 3rd ed. (Oxford: Blackwell, 1970), 83–84. ...

Inheritance is a common concept in Scripture. Believers can inherit the kingdom, the promise, the land, the earth, and salvation. An inheritance is a settled and sanctioned possession, whether it comes from family or from God. See J. Ramsey Michaels, 1 Peter, Word Biblical Commentary 49 (Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 1988), 20–21. ...

The Greek verbs are different. The first, tēreō, means “to keep” or “guard.” The second, phroureō, means “to guard” or “watch over.” Clearly, their meanings are close. ...

and unchangeable love of God the Father; upon the efficacy of the merit and intercession of Jesus Christ, the abiding of the Spirit, and of the seed of God within them; and the nature of the covenant of grace: from all which arises also the certainty and infallibility thereof. ...

Peter teaches that God keeps both us and the inheritance until salvation is “ready to be revealed in the last time” (1 Peter 1:5). Although he knows there is more, Paul typically stresses that the “mystery” of salvation has already been revealed (e.g., Eph. 3:8–12; Col. 1:25–27). Peter stresses that there is more to be revealed (1 Peter 1:5, 7). Both are true. Similarly, John calls our attention to eternal life as a present possession (John 3:36; 4:36; 5:24; etc.), while Peter tells us that eternal life is coming. Again, both are true and necessary perspectives. Life is here, but there is much more to come. ...

Joy in Suffering ...

At that moment, the Christians of Asia Minor were suffering grief, but Peter teaches that the prospect of an inheritance, secured by God, still brings joy. We can celebrate because we know that the salvation that is already ours will one day be revealed in full: “In this you greatly rejoice, though now for a little while you may have had to suffer grief in all kinds of trials” (1 Peter 1:6). This suffering is brief—“for a little while”—from the perspective of eternity, even if pain can seem to last forever when we are immersed in it. ...

Peter says that his people “had to suffer.” He says this because suffering is a logical result of conversion. It is “the wake following behind salvation’s boat.”6 It was predictable because following God entails abandoning “the gods” whose worship was part of the glue that united Roman society. It was foreseeable because Christian morality clashed with pagan morality. ...

Peter doesn’t quite say that suffering is inevitable, but he says that it is no surprise (1 Peter 4:12). In the quasi-Christianized societies of the West, when belief in one God is common and Christian ethics have some influ- ence on social ethics, suffering is not certain. But in most places and times, Christian beliefs and practices are exceptional, not normal. If we tell the world that its ideas are false and its practices dangerous, as we must, the world will not be pleased, and that displeasure readily leads to opposition. ...

司各特 ·麦奈特, 彼得前书 ——NIV 应用注释》(大急流城: 桑德凡出版社,1996 年), 第 74 页。

若身处非基督教文化却未遭遇任何反对,很可能是因为我们过分热衷于融入环境、避免冲突。当世界观发生碰撞时,我们无权保持沉默。当我们对抗这个误入歧途的世界时, 它必会猛烈反扑。 正如耶稣所言: 我们应当预见为此欢喜,

为义受逼迫的人有福了,因为天国是他们的。

人为我的缘故辱骂你们,逼迫你们,捏造各样坏话毁谤你们,你们就有福了。应当欢喜快乐,因为你们在天上的赏赐大的, 因为你们以前先知 这样逼迫他们。(马太福音 5:10-12)

彼得在《彼得前书》1:6-7 中从五个方面描述了我们的试炼。首先,与永恒相比,它们在持续时间上是短暂的;它们只持续"片刻"。其次, 这些试炼形式异;" 各种类型"。 第三, 它们具有某种必然性;"你们...必须受苦"。第四,苦难证明我们的信仰是真实的;"这些试炼临到你们,是要叫你们的信心经过试验,就比那被火试验仍然能坏的金子更显宝贵,可以在耶稣基督显现的时候得着称赞、荣耀、尊贵"(1:7a)。第五,苦难将"在耶稣基督显现的时候,带来称赞、荣耀和尊贵" 耶稣基督现时"(1:7b)。 因为苦难限度和目的,我们仍能在其中喜乐。

彼得关于黄金的论述是一个插入语,用以解释试炼如何"验证"我们的信心。首先,黄金与信心都需经火炼:真实的火焰检验黄金,而象征性的逆境之火则考验人及其信心(参诗 66:10;箴 17:3;雅 1:2-4 等)。7"正如古人用火区分真金与赝品[及掺杂质或不纯的金属],神也以试炼辨别真实信心与表面认信。"8 其次,虽然黄金是古人眼中最贵重的金属,但信心具有更崇高的价值。 正如其他受造之物, 黄金终将朽坏 (彼得前书 1:7,18), 但我们的信心永不衰残,因神在其中保守我们(1:5)。

与彼得同时代的塞涅卡在其著作 《论天道》 书信集5.10 章中写道:"火试炼金子,苦难试炼强者"。 而广受传阅的犹太智慧典籍 《次经·德训篇》 亦云:"金子在火中受试炼,蒙神悦纳之人在屈辱的熔炉里受考验"(德 2:5 新修订标准版)。

艾伦· 斯蒂布斯,《彼得前书注释》(伦敦: 廷代尔出版社,1959 年), 第 78 页。

彼得关于苦难的教导向我们发问。你是否像他那样看待苦难?还是选择退缩,抱怨生活不公? 确实存在需要逃离迫害的时刻:当无人倾听时,当反对或虐待持续不断时,当别处有重要工作待完成时,以及(最重要的)我们没有义务誓约约束, 从而能够自由离开时 (参见马太福音 10:23 上下文)。 但大多数时候,我们并不能自由地离开。这种情况下, 我们竭尽所能逃避痛苦, 还是选择忍耐,这种甘愿承受恰恰证明了信仰的真实?

我们的关系深厚, 我们的思维更敏锐, 我们的身体更健壮, 我们的自律更坚定, 我们的情感更健康,我们的付出备受认可时,感恩是自然而然的。但若你正经历试炼,请振作;上帝在守护你的应许之福。9 许多试炼来自外界——当人们亏待我们, 或当疾病灾祸伤害我们。 另一些试炼源于内心——自我怀疑、非理性恐惧、激情消退。试炼如烈火灼烧,我们切不可自欺欺人。 伤痛袭来,有时剧烈得令人陷入绝望 彼得勉励我们 试炼验证信仰的真实时仍可欢欣。当耶稣显现并成就救恩时, 万物终将化为颂赞 。这即将来临的救赎正在改变我们当下的境遇,即便在最黑暗的时刻也赐予我们盼望。

这些言论听起来可能像宗教术语,但任何在人生中沉浸足够久的人,都尝过生活掷向人类的苦涩痛苦。 再次强调,可能听似修辞, 但对彼得而言绝非空谈。 他曾耶稣同行, 却因讲述关于他的真相遭受逮捕死亡威胁。 诚然,我们可以用空洞的快乐言辞欺骗他人也欺骗自己 心安宁,终究是美好而正确的事。

当我们坚持不懈,信心经受考验时,其结果便是"耶稣基督显现时所得的称赞、荣耀和尊贵"(彼得前书 1:7 下)。这称赞可能是归于神的,因他始终配得赞美,即便是因他完成了救赎之功。信之人的称赞(马太福音 25:19-23;罗马书 2:29)。由于彼得着眼于即将来临的救恩"末候",看来彼得指的是神因我们在这个时代的信心与公义而赐予我们的称赞。

语法敏感的读者会注意到,本节与其他部分一样,从第一人称我们转变为第二人称。彼得通常使用第二人称叙述,但在《彼得前书》1:3、2:24、4:17 中切换为第一人称复数。

First Peter 1:3–9 is one complex sentence with each part connecting to the one before. In the Greek text, Peter links verses 7 and 8 with the relative pronoun whom, referring to Jesus. It works this way: Peter mentions Jesus’ future coming at the end of 1:7 and then turns to his current absence in 1:8. Peter addresses “the discrepancy between [the] present experience of suffering and [the] anticipated future glory.”10 Peter saw Jesus with his own eyes and touched him with his hands, but his people have not done so and will not do so until the day that Jesus is revealed. Peter states, “Though you have not seen him, you love him; and even though you do not see him now, you believe in him and are filled with an inexpressible and glorious joy” (1:8).11 No passage better explains the challenge of believing in Jesus without seeing him than the account of Thomas and the risen Christ in John 20. Late on the day of his resurrection, Jesus appeared to his disciples, minus Judas, who had killed himself, and minus Thomas, who was away for unstated reasons. The ten were so glad to see Jesus, and when Thomas rejoined them, they told him, “We have seen the Lord!” (20:25). Thomas refused to believe them and swore, “Unless I see in his hands the mark of the nails, and place my finger into the mark of the nails, and place my hand into his side, I will ...

绝不要怀疑」(约翰福音 20:25新译本)。

一周后, 耶稣再次门徒们显现, 这次多马也在场。 耶稣多马说了一番话,大意是:「我听见了你的话。你鲁莽的怀疑已站在不信的边缘,但我了解你,愿意满足你愚蠢的要求。」于是耶稣说:「伸出你的指头来,摸我的手;伸出你的手来,探入我的肋旁。不要疑惑,总要信」(约翰福音 20:27新译本)。

John doesn’t mention whether Thomas took up the invitation to touch his wounds or not, but Thomas certainly saw Jesus. It was all he needed, and the braggadocio of unbelief melted away. He repented and confessed, “My Lord and my God!” (John 20:28). Important as Jesus’ encounter with ...

Paul J. Achtemeier, 1 Peter (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1996), 102. ...

The two finite verbs, translated “love” and “are filled with . . . joy,” could be either indicatives or imperatives, since the forms are identical in the present, second-person plural, but it is best to take them as indicatives, since Peter is still describing his people’s situation. Commands begin in 1 Peter 1:13. ...

Thomas was, John’s account looks past Thomas himself and sees the gen- erations coming after him. Knowing that future disciples would not see his f lesh, as Thomas had, Jesus told Thomas, “Because you have seen me, you have believed; blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed” (20:29). ...

So Jesus looked past Thomas and saw us. He envisioned the day when all who believe must do so without the evidence that Thomas enjoyed. The skeptical member of later generations has roughly the position that Thomas had in John 20:25. He had heard that Jesus was alive, but had not seen him. Jesus calls Thomas a poor guide for those who have not seen. Thomas had enough reason to believe. He had the testimony of his trusted friends, yet he refused it. The Lord graciously granted Thomas the evidence that he wrongly demanded. Still, the Lord corrected him when he said, “Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed” (20:29 esv). Jesus speaks this blessing to us, as we trust the testimony of the apostles, yield to the Spirit’s persuasion, and believe. ...

As we believe, Peter concludes, we “are filled with an inexpressible and ...

glorious joy” (1 Peter 1:8b). As Alan Stibbs observes, “Peter’s readers had not seen Jesus during His earthly life, as Peter himself had done, yet they were giving Him the responsive love of their hearts in living fellowship.”12 Because this joy has its origin in God, not man, it is “inexpressible,” that is, it defies perfect human expression. ...

This joy rests on confidence in God’s continuing direction, Peter explains, “for you are receiving the goal of your faith, the salvation of your souls” (1 Peter 1:9). The translation “souls” could mislead us. On most occasions, the Greek word psuchē could just as easily be translated “life.” The defini- tive Greek-English lexicon offers three definitions for psuchē. First, it is “life on earth in its animating aspect”; second, it is the “seat and center of the inner human life”; and third, it is “an entity with personhood.”13 In other words, the soul stands for the whole person, not the spirit or reason in contrast to the body. In Scripture, a human is a psychosomatic unity. The goal of redemption is not the liberation of the disembodied soul from this wretched life, as Greeks thought. It is a new creation, which the whole ...

Stibbs, First Epistle General of Peter, 79. ...

Frederick W. Danker, ed., A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, 3rd ed. (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000), 1098–99. ...

person enjoys forever, with both a new spirit and a new body, one much like the resurrection body of Jesus. ...

When I was in third and fourth grades, I attended a Sunday school class that made me think I didn’t want to be a Christian. I heard that if I believed in God, I could go to heaven when I died and be like an angel, sitting on a cloud, playing a harp, and singing all day. I knew I wasn’t supposed to think this way, but I wanted no part of my teacher’s cloud-harp heaven. What boy would? What man or woman should? The gospel story says more than “Jesus is alive.” It says that Jesus is alive in flesh and blood, chewing fish, shaking hands, slapping backs, and looking better than ever! His resurrection body is a foretaste of our resurrected bodies, which we will enjoy as embodied spirits, living in a renewed, sin-free creation. Peter does not say that we will go up to heaven, but that we have started to receive and will one day fully receive comprehensive salvation. That promise gives us hope and joy in affliction. The first sentences of 1 Peter introduce us to his essential themes. Chris- tians are God’s elect, yet strangers in the world. Because we are outsiders, Peter knows we will face trouble. Indeed, the only way to avoid trouble is to live as pagans do, or to hide our lifestyle, or to eviscerate our message so that it ceases to offend. In other words, the way to live without trouble is to remove our nerves and spine. That might be a sad thought, since our culture is our home. We care about it and at least hope to make it a better place. But there are limits. So many of the values of our age stand opposed to God’s truth. Still, it can grieve us when we realize that we will never ...

exactly fit in our world. ...

Peter counters this sobering reality with God’s promises and a call to claim them. Through Christ we have life, and no force from without or within can destroy it. Even when we face trials, we take heart because they demonstrate that our allegiance to God is genuine, especially when we per- severe through them. ...

It is interesting that Peter mentions the cardinal Christian virtues in our passage. He says that our new birth gives us a living hope (1 Peter 1:3), that we receive God’s protection through faith (1:5), and that we love Jesus even if we have never seen him (1:8). Still, as important as our hope, love, and faith may be, our attention stays with Jesus. He has conquered death, he protects us, and nothing can rob us of joy now or keep us from sharing his glory when he returns. ...

3

The Authority of Peter and His Epistle ...

x BeCex x:x0–xz ...

Concerning this salvation, the prophets, who spoke of the grace that was to come to you, searched intently and with the greatest care, trying to find out the time and circumstances to which ...

the Spirit of Christ in them was pointing when he predicted the sufferings of Christ and the glories that would follow. It was revealed to them that they were not serving themselves but you, when they spoke of the things that have now been told you by those who have preached the gospel to you by the Holy Spirit sent from heaven. Even angels long to look into these things. ...

(1 Peter 1:10–12) ...

Peter Reflects on the Character of Scripture ...

Although Peter’s first epistle has no publication date, conservative scholars agree that Peter was an older man, living in Rome around a.d. 62–65, when he wrote his first epistle, as we noted in chapter 1.1 Peter wrote, therefore, ...

Again, “Babylon” is code for “Rome” (1 Peter 5:13). ...

from a lifetime of wisdom and conviction. He had experienced everything, including the trials and suffering described in the letter. As a younger man, he had walked with Jesus every day for three years. Nonetheless, as Peter writes, he does not cite his experience as the source of his knowledge and authority. He does not promote himself as a man who has seen it all from the beginning. He first cites his God-given role as an apostle: “Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ, to God’s elect” (1 Peter 1:1). Jesus appointed the apostles to “be with him” (Mark 3:14), to put his words into their ears (as the original of Luke 9:44 reads), and to witness everything from Jesus’ baptism to his resurrection (Acts 1:22). Jesus chose Peter to witness his deeds, to remember his words, and to declare what everything signified. He was God’s authorita- tive spokesman and representative.2 ...

Peter is at ease with this authority. He does not remind his readers of his years with the Lord, or of the singular events he witnessed. He knows that the Holy Spirit speaks through him, but he makes the point subtly in 1 Peter 1:12, implicitly counting himself among “those who have preached the gospel to you by the Holy Spirit.” Still, Peter knows that Jesus has com- missioned him to present the story of Christ and its implications. In 1:10–12, he explains how God speaks and why God’s prophets (and apostles) speak with his authority. ...

The first segment of Peter states the theme of all Scripture: “In his great mercy [God] has given us new birth into a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ from the dead” and an imperishable inheritance (1 Peter 1:3–4). Peter closes the unit by saying, “The goal of your faith [is] the salvation of your souls” (1:9). Logically, Peter could have moved directly to his next theme, the holy conduct of his people. Instead, he pauses to explain the role of Scripture in their salvation. Historically speaking, most of the people reading 1 Peter first heard of Jesus through Peter or another preacher who had a connection to the apostolic band. Yet these men did not speak on their own authority. They “preached the gospel to you by the Holy Spirit sent from heaven” (1:12). Peter wanted to prepare his readers to grow through Scripture, both from the Old Testament and from the New Testament accounts of the suffering and glory of Christ (1:11). ...

Herman N. Ridderbos, Redemptive History and the New Testament Scriptures, 2nd rev. ed. (Phillipsburg, NJ: Presbyterian and Reformed, 1988), 12–41. ...

Paul knew that his writings were authoritative. He said things such as: “This is the rule I lay down in all the churches” (1 Cor. 7:17b; cf. 15:3ff.). He said that if anyone preaches a gospel that differs from the one he preached, “let him be eternally condemned!” (Gal. 1:8–9; cf. 1 Tim. 1:15). John knew that the Spirit guided him to remember, understand, and record the words and deeds of Jesus (John 2:22; 12:16; 14:26; 20:30–31). Writing around a.d. 65–68, Paul quotes a saying of Jesus that is recorded in Luke, and already calls it “Scripture.” He says, “For the Scripture says, . . . ‘The worker deserves his wages’ ” (1 Tim. 5:18; see Luke 10:7). So Peter joins John and Paul as New Testament writers who attest to the divine origin of their books and letters. ...

First Peter 1:10–12 also says several things about the character of Scrip- ture: “Concerning this salvation, the prophets, who spoke of the grace that was to come to you, searched intently and with the greatest care, trying to find out the time and circumstances to which the Spirit of Christ in them was pointing when he predicted the sufferings of Christ and the glories that would follow.” First, salvation is the theme of Scripture: “Concerning this salvation, the prophets . . . spoke” (1:10). ...

Second, God called and appointed spokesmen to record his Word—the prophets in the Old Testament (“the prophets, who spoke”) and the apostles such as Peter in the New Testament. Paul agrees, saying, “The mystery of Christ . . . has now been revealed to his holy apostles and prophets by the Spirit” (Eph. 3:4–5 esv). If the prophets “searched intently,” they longed to discover what the Spirit was saying. Like Luke, who “carefully investigated” the life of Christ (Luke 1:3), the prophets were (ordinarily) active, not pas- sive, agents of revelation. To be sure, the Lord sometimes told his prophets to write down exactly what he said (Isa. 30:8; Jer. 30:2; 36:2, 28; Ezek. 43:11; Hab. 2:2). Indeed, God himself rewrote the Decalogue on two stone tablets (Ex. 34:1). The Lord can use any means he wishes to ensure that we receive his inspired Word, but this passage accents the active participation of the prophets. ...

Third, Scripture’s theme is God’s grace, given for humanity. The prophets “spoke of the grace that was to come to you” (1 Peter 1:10). ...

Fourth, the Word came by the inspiration of God’s Spirit and yet in such a way that the prophets and apostles were active, too. The prophets “searched intently and with the greatest care” (1:10). Yet God directed them, for the ...

prophets were “trying to find out the time and circumstances to which the Spirit of Christ in them was pointing” (1:11). ...

Fifth, while the prophets understandably inquired after the timing of God’s work, Peter stresses the content of God’s work and message, which he summarizes as “the sufferings of Christ and the glories that would follow” (1 Peter 1:11). Peter returns to the suffering and glory of Christ in 2:21–24; 4:13; 5:1; and 5:9. Of course, the Gospels also describe Jesus’ birth, teachings, encounters, travels, and miracles. But the suffering and glory, especially the death and resurrection, of Christ are central to his work and to our relationship with him. Peter commands believers to “rejoice that you participate in the sufferings of Christ, so that you may be overjoyed when his glory is revealed” (4:13). In his suffering on the cross, Jesus bore our sin and offered us forgiveness (2:20–25; Luke 24:25–27, 45–47). “He suffered death, so that by the grace of God he might taste death for everyone” (Heb. 2:9). Further, Peter’s churches were in travail and needed to identify with Christ in his suffering. If they did so, they could endure and so share in his glory. We must stand “firm in the faith, because you know that your brothers throughout the world are undergoing the same kind of sufferings. And the God of all grace, who called you to his eternal glory in Christ, after you have suf- fered a little while, will himself restore you and make you strong, firm and steadfast” (1 Peter 5:9–10). ...

For Jesus, this “eternal glory in Christ” began with his resurrection (1 Peter 5:10; 1:3). It continued in his ascent to heaven (3:22) and in his present reign at the right hand of the Father, where all powers are subject to him (3:22b). Peter’s churches will share in that glory (5:1, 9). ...

So, then, the prophets foretold this salvation, Jesus accomplished it, and the Spirit led Peter and the apostles to describe it. The pattern is prediction of salvation, the fulfillment of salvation, and the interpreta- tion of saving events. Like all the rest of Scripture, Peter’s letter provides moral guidance, but it isn’t essentially a moral guide. Scripture contains a great many things, but in essence it describes our creation in God’s image, our rebellion and its catastrophic consequences, and then God’s plan for restoration, announced by the prophets, and accomplished in the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus. Before him we must repent, and in him we must believe. Every other theme is secondary. ...

This leads to an interpretive key for reading the Old Testament. God reveals his plan of redemption gradually, not instantaneously. God even reveals parts of his ethical will gradually (Matt. 19:3–9). The Lord revealed his redemptive plan and his ethical norms step by step so that his people had time to grow into them. Christian leaders can learn from this: if we hope to persuade or change others, we, too, may wish to introduce new ideas and laws gradually, so that our people have time to comprehend and truly accept them. ...

The prophets did not discover everything they longed to know. Yet they acquiesced in God’s decision to reveal what he chose, for “it was revealed to them that they were not serving themselves but you, when they spoke of the things that have now been told you by those who have preached the gospel to you by the Holy Spirit sent from heaven. Even angels long to look into these things” (1 Peter 1:12). What angels and prophets never fully saw had now been revealed. Peter further describes the nature of Scripture in his second epistle: ...

Above all, you must understand that no prophecy of Scripture came about by the prophet’s own interpretation. For prophecy never had its origin in the will of man, but men spoke from God as they were carried along by the Holy Spirit. (2 Peter 1:20) ...

So Peter teaches that Scripture is at once the work of prophets who “searched intently” and the Word of God, “for prophecy never had its origin in the will of man.” Rather, “men spoke from God” (that is, the Father) as the Holy Spirit carried them along. At times, God delivered oracles to the prophets, who wrote what they saw and heard (Isa. 13:1; 15:1; 17:1). But ordinarily the Bible’s human authors did not simply take dictation. Scripture has a dual authorship. Luke, drawing on “eyewit- nesses and servants of the word,” could write an orderly account of the work of Christ because he “carefully investigated everything from the beginning” (Luke 1:2–3). Similarly, Paul wrote “with the wisdom that God gave him,” straining with all his skills to apply his gospel to the challenges of his churches. Yet the Spirit so guided his work that Peter casually notes that Paul’s letters, like “the other Scriptures,” can be hard to understand (2 Peter 3:15–16). ...

So Peter agrees with the prophets and with Paul that Scripture is “inspired” or, more accurately, “God-breathed” (theopneustos), as Paul says in 2 Timothy 3:16. When we say that Scripture is God-breathed, we mean that our sixty-six books are the very words of the triune God. Scripture is a collective term for what we call the Old and New Testaments (Matt. 26:54–56; Luke 24:27–45; John 5:39; Acts 17:2, 11; Rom. 1:2; 15:4; 1 Cor. 15:3–4). ...

Paul notes that Scripture is “useful for teaching, rebuking, correcting and training in righteousness, so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work” (2 Tim. 3:16–17). Paul asserts that all Scrip- ture does these four things—history and prophecy, doctrinal and moral instruction, even the genealogies. The four uses of Scripture fall into two classes—creed and conduct. Scripture teaches what to believe and how to behave. The word teaching is didaskalia, which in Paul almost always means “doctrinal instruction.” Rebuking, elegmon, belongs to a word family that commonly has the sense of correcting or pointing out a mistake, whether moral or doctrinal. Thus, training in the truth will lead to correction of false ideas. But doctrine is practical, too, and false teaching leads to sin. So Scripture also corrects wrongdoing. It trains us in righteousness and prepares us for good works.3 ...

We say that Scripture is inspired because it proceeds from the mouth of God, through the agency of the Holy Spirit, and from the work of his chosen apostles and prophets. Because God is truth and always tells the truth, his “word is truth” (John 17:17). If it is true, it contains no errors. It is inerrant. Because God stands behind his Word, it will never fail. It is infallible. God pledges that his Word is the truth about himself and his salvation, and the guide to the church’s faith and practice. ...

As all Christian leaders know, these traits make it essential to read Scripture in public worship and in private, as a guide to daily life. Lead- ers might not realize that most people, even in the church, read the Bible sporadically. Many hardly read the Bible outside of worship services. Sadly, even many church leaders read the Bible only occasionally. Chris- tian leaders tend to address this through straight exhortations: “You need to read the Bible more!” We should extol the virtues of reading and ...

B. B. Warfield, The Inspiration and Authority of Scripture (Philadelphia: Presbyterian and Reformed, 1948), 234–39, 299; Daniel M. Doriani, Putting the Truth to Work: The Theory and Practice of Biblical Application (Phillipsburg, NJ: P&R Publishing, 2001), 55–57, 213ff. ...

meditation, but we should also teach people how to read and meditate more fruitfully. ...

Leaders should also read and expound the Bible in public worship. We can use biblical texts for confessions of faith, confessions of sin, and assur- ances of pardon. We can sing the Scriptures, including the Psalms. We can have Old Testament and New Testament readings. Sermons should feature the reading and exposition of Scripture. Pastors, as a corollary, can preach through books of the Bible, lest they focus unduly on favorite topics and miss the whole counsel of God (Acts 20:27). ...

Finally, let’s remember that however valuable private reading and public teaching are, disciples also grow through study and discussion in small groups. We should be thankful that we have so many ways to hear or read excellent teaching, but we also need to seek the truth actively. For many people, the best way to do that is in a small group. Jesus and the apostles followed this practice. ...

Peter mentions the Spirit twice, so let’s remember that he illumines minds and opens hearts to his truth. Pastors see this in surprising ways. We study, plan, and prepare to preach, but most of us also diverge from our notes at times. Sometimes a thought comes to us spontaneously, and we say it, with surprising results. One day a man strode up to me and said, “Five years ago you said something that changed my life. I was such a hypocrite; I’m not sure if I was a Christian or not, but I certainly wasn’t serious. So thank you.” As he told me what I had said, I was dumbfounded. The lesson he shared seemed both true and important, but I was sure I had not said it, and told him so: “What you say is certainly true and I believe it, but it’s not the kind of thing I would say in public. I’m truly happy for you, but you must be thinking of someone else.” ...

He looked at me strangely, and then began to quote my sermon line by ...

line: “You said A, then B, then C, then D—the words God used to change my life.” Suddenly, I realized that he was right! I remembered the week, when the topic that led to “the words that changed his life” had been in my thoughts. It wasn’t in my notes, but it had been on my mind, and the Spirit nudged me to say what his receptive heart needed to hear. So our words become more than we plan, yet what he intends. ...

No teacher living today has a status like that of the apostles. Jesus chose and trained them, and the Spirit moved in them. Peter followed Jesus, but ...

after the resurrection, Peter also studied, ministered, and spoke with other apostles (Gal. 2:1–10). In this way, he spent years preparing to write. Yet alongside Peter’s human activities, the Spirit kept pointing him to Christ and carried him along so that his errors fell away as he wrote (1 Peter 1:11; 2 Peter 1:21). Peter wrote what he knew, yet he wrote better than he knew. ...

The Reliability of the New Testament ...

The Bible doesn’t ask us to accept these claims as a matter of blind faith. There are reasons to believe that the Bible is reliable, reasons that should gain the respect of any open-minded person, especially if he is trained in evaluat- ing historical evidence. A wide literature shows how historical remains, such as stone inscriptions and archaeological artifacts, verify the Bible’s historical accounts. Evangelicals have written masterly defenses of the reliability of the Gospels and Acts.4 ...

Scripture shows that Jesus prepared Peter, the disciples, and other New Testament writers for their work. Jesus appointed the apostles to “be with him” and to witness everything (Mark 3:14; Matt. 17:5; Acts 1:22). Some people treasured events and remembered them (Luke 2:19; 22:61; 24:8). Others did careful research. Luke knew many accounts of Jesus’ life. He consulted “those who from the first were eyewitnesses and servants of the word,” and then “carefully investigated everything from the beginning” (Luke 1:1–4). Similarly, Paul studied for fourteen years in Arabia and consulted with no one before he became the apostle to the Gentiles (Gal. 1:15–2:10). John relates that Jesus performed “many . . . miraculous signs in the presence of his disciples” (John 20:30; see also 21:25). His gospel did not hold them all, but they present enough evidence “that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name” (20:31). Finally, Peter said, “We did not follow cleverly invented stories when we told you about the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but we were eyewitnesses of his majesty” (2 Peter 1:16). ...

To mention just a few, see Craig S. Keener, The Historical Jesus of the Gospels (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2009), a densely detailed study of the reliability of the Gospels. At a slightly more popular level, see companion works by Craig Blomberg, The Historical Reliability of the Gospels, 2nd ed. (Downers Grove, IL: IVP Academic, 2007), and The Historical Reliability of John’s Gospel (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2002). For Acts, see note 10 below. ...

But as we affirm the reliability of the New Testament, we have more than the claims of the apostles. There are objective, historical reasons to believe that the apostles recorded events accurately. We can consider five of them. First, we can trust their record of Jesus’ words because memorization was essential to education in Israel (and other lands). Jewish students were expected to memorize every word of their teachers. Teachers repeated their main ideas again and again until students knew them by heart. Since the ancients lacked opportunity to retrieve data from the sources we have today, they developed superior skill in memorization. Jesus’ disciples treasured his words, and because he was an itinerant preacher, they heard his teachings many times. Beyond that, Israelites sometimes took notes on the teachings of their rabbis.5 Second, ancient Greeks and Romans had standards for historical writing. ...

Herodotus, called the father of history, was roundly criticized, five hundred ...

新约圣经收录未经证实的传说故事而受到质疑。约公元前 400 修昔底德宣称自己严格依据目击者的一手证词,仅记录当代政治军事事件的事实性报告,但他也承认偶尔会尽其所能概括演讲的要点。

无论世俗之人还是信徒清楚历史虚构的界限。 一位长老美化彼得生平革除圣职, 即便这种润饰本意是劝善导人。德尔图良在其论文 《论洗礼》质询道: 紧急情况下是否允许女性施行洗礼?肯定意见者援引 《保罗行传》——这部"劝谕性"基督教小说为证,因其中记载了女性教导并施洗的事迹。 德尔图良说:"但那些错误地冠以保罗之名的著作, 声称 [这个] 例子允许妇女进行教导施洗许可, 他们应当知道 那位 [领袖] 编造这份文件 ... 如果为了提升保罗的声望" 却被判定捏造事实。 这位领袖承认自己 "出于对保罗的爱"这样做, 却仍被革除职务。6 显然,早期基督徒意识到伪造行为, 加以防范, 并予以惩处, 即使内容符合正统作者本意良善。

在古代教会中,大多数人讲希腊语。由于新约圣经希腊文写成, 因此无需翻译; 每个人都理解

E.E. 埃利斯,《预言解释学》(大急流城: 埃德曼斯出版社,1978 年), 第 242-247 页。

德尔图良,《论洗礼》,S.特尔沃尔译,收录于 《尼西亚前期教父文集》,亚历山大·罗伯茨与詹姆斯·唐纳森编,共 9 卷(大急流城:埃德曼斯出版社,1979-1985 年),第 3 卷第 677 页。

文。前。2——krabbatos——skimpeus——文。"krabbatos"视。7忘。中。情。 记得我的论文答辩; 想起那次一群警察指控谋杀拔枪相向。 甚至记得队友们少年棒球联盟比赛最后一局两人出局时击出再见安打扑向我的场景—— 还有许多其他历历在目记忆。 你, 我的读者, 同样拥有无数难以磨灭回忆。 那么试想,耶稣平息海上风暴时,雷霆般的命令唤出仍裹着尸布的复活拉撒路时, 门徒们心境。 想象他们目睹基督复活刹那。 这些场景深深烙在门徒记忆深处, 永世难忘。 然而即便某个门徒真的

忘记什么,可以请教其他人。

第四,活着的见证人发挥了作用。新约记载了鲜为人知的罗马官员如彼拉多和迦流,他们的身份通过世俗记载得到证实,这些文本记载了普通人。 四部福音书详细记载了发生在具名城镇的具体事件。 例如, 耶稣医治了瞎眼的巴底买,过去常在通往耶路撒冷的耶利哥城外乞讨 (马可福音 10:46)。 当耶稣使拉撒路复活的时候,他在耶路撒冷附近的一个小镇 ,名叫伯大尼 (约翰福音 11:1)。耶稣十字架下跌倒时, 西门芘、 父亲亚历山大鲁弗斯、(马可福音 15:21). 正如理查德鲍克姆他的美学研究中所指出的、 这些真实的人、教会中,他们的城镇中闻名。8 福音书本来立即流传开来。如果捏造故事传到 就会立即被否定 。id=94> 传到这些城镇耶利哥Bethany 福音书它们发生在那里。 但是福音书没有被否认。

埃塔·林内曼,《是否存在对观问题?重探前三福音书的文学依存关系》,罗伯特·亚伯勒译(大急流城:贝克出版社,1992 年),序言第 x 页。

理查德·鲍克汉姆,《耶稣与目击者:作为目击证言的福音书》(大急流城:伊尔德曼斯出版社,2006 年),第 39-66 页。一部考据极为详尽的著作。

不, 它们所到之处皆被奉为圣经。9 使徒行传》详载官员职衔并将其置于真实城邑之中。10

第五, 这些见证人自己的生命他们的证言盖印。 确实, 人们谎言赴死, 尤其他们蒙骗时。 有时人们明知谎言仍愿为之牺牲——若这谎言曾带来巨大利益。但门徒们为耶稣作证并未获得世俗好处,他们遭受各种迫害,几乎所有人都最终为见证殉道。然而门徒们至死都坚守对耶稣的信仰,无人转投他业。 无人为苟活而背弃信仰 他们见证基督深知所传之道真实不虚。

I 愿你坚信圣经圣言 信仰生命确凿指南。 即便信, 仍有理由相信可靠的, 值得我们仔细研读。 然而圣经可能艰深难懂, 正如彼得评述保罗书信时所言。 我们如何才能阅读圣经获益?

First, we read the Bible seriously. This means that we take the Bible literally when it expects us to do so, but we read it metaphorically when appropri- ate. Peter expects us to take it literally when he reports that Jesus performed miracles, died on the cross, and rose again. The Bible also uses metaphors. Second Chronicles 16:9 says that “the eyes of the Lord range throughout the earth.” This does not mean that God literally has eyes that rapidly run over the land. Jesus uses hyperbole: “If your right hand causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away” (Matt. 5:30). We see no battalions of one-handed Christians. But we do take our sin seriously, and take action to remove it from our lives. Second, we read holistically. That is, we don’t snatch isolated statements from the Bible and find meaning that the authors never intended. We let ...

Bruce Metzger, The Canon of the New Testament: Its Origin, Development and Significance ...

(New York: Oxford University Press, 1987). ...

See Colin Hemer, The Book of Acts in the Setting of Hellenistic History, trans. C. H. Gempf (Tübingen: J. C. B. Mohr [Paul Siebeck], 1989); F. F. Bruce, “The Acts of the Apostles: Historical Record or Theological Reconstruction?,” in Aufstieg und Niedergang der römischen Welt II 25/3, ed. W. Haase (Berlin: de Gruyter, 1985), 2596–603; W. W. Gasque, “The Historical Value of Acts,” Tyndale Bulletin 40 (1989): 136–57; William Mitchell Ramsay, The Bearing of Recent Discovery on the Trustworthiness of the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1979). ...

圣经的伟大主题指引着我们。耶稣宣告圣经的核心主题就是他的位格与工作:

摩西的律法、先知的书和诗篇上所记的,凡指着我的话都必须应验。......

This is what is written: The Christ will suffer and rise from the dead on the third day, and repentance and forgiveness of sins will be preached in his name to all nations, beginning at Jerusalem. (Luke 24:44–47) ...

The promises give us hope of a Redeemer; the law reveals our need of a Redeemer. The history of Israel shows that no one is faithful and so teaches us to long for the faithful, Jesus. The leadership structures of Israel also lead us to Christ. He is the Great Prophet, revealing God to the world. He is the Great High Priest, offering the final sacrifice. He is the Great King, protecting his people from their foes. ...

Third, we read the Bible personally. We take the Bible to heart instead of using it to condemn others. How often preachers hear this: “Wonderful message, Pastor; I wish my friend had come to hear it. She really needs it.” Yes, the friend probably does need to hear it, but did you hear it? Let’s apply God’s Word to ourselves and remove the plank from our own eye before we remove a speck from our neighbor’s. ...

Finally, we should read the Bible meditatively. It’s good to listen to teachers and preachers, whether live or through a convenient medium, but at some point, if someone wants to grow as a Christian, he or she must become an active reader, carefully contemplating everything the Word says. We must also read with godly goals. Donald Carson observes: ...

We human beings are a strange lot. We hear high moral injunctions and glimpse just a little the genuine beauty of perfect holiness, and then prostitute the vision by dreaming about the way others would hold us in high esteem if we were like that. The demand for genuine perfection loses itself in the lesser goal of external piety; the goal of pleasing the Father is traded for its pygmy cousin, the goal of pleasing men.11 ...

So let us read meditatively, to apply Scripture to ourselves, that we might repent and believe and grow in godliness. Let us read for real history, for sound doctrine, and for the person of Jesus Christ, Son of God and Savior. ...

D. A. Carson, The Sermon on the Mount: An Evangelical Exposition of Matthew 5–7 (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1978), 55. ...

4

Hope and Holiness ...

x BeCex x:x3–zx ...

For you know that it was not with perishable things such as silver or gold that you were redeemed from the empty way of life handed down to you from your forefathers, but with the precious blood of Christ, a lamb without blemish or defect. (1 Peter 1:18–19) ...

n 1588, the Spanish Armada, with 130 ships, sailed toward England, bent on depositing over fifty thousand Spanish sol- diers on English soil and deposing Queen Elizabeth. But before ould go ashore, Spanish ships had to get past the English navy. The ...

Spanish warships were larger and had bigger guns, but the English ships had superior commanders and greater speed and maneuverability. The Spaniards knew all this when they set sail. How, then, could they hope to succeed in battle if their guns could not attain a firing position? The Spaniards believed that God was on their side. Therefore, they hoped the English would expose themselves to their heavy guns. They hoped the English would foolishly engage them ship to ship in hand-fighting, so that the many soldiers aboard them would win the day. But as we say, “hope is not a plan.” The British kept ...

their distance and shot the Spanish ships to pieces. The Spanish paid dearly for a vain hope. ...

Misplaced hope is worthless, but well-founded hope is potent. First Peter 1:13–21 begins and ends with such hope. Peter first commands his readers to “set your hope fully on the grace to be given you when Jesus Christ is revealed” (1:13). As he closes, he tells his people that Christ, the Lamb of God, ransomed them from a futile life. “Through him you believe in God, who raised him from the dead and glorified him, and so your faith and hope are in God” (1:21). ...

Hope Leads to Holiness ...

Between verses 13 and 21, Peter describes what happens when we hope in the grace of Jesus. We no longer conform to evil desires (1 Peter 1:14). We exercise self-control rather than indulging every urge. Further, because “he who called you is holy,” we are holy (1:15). That leads to God’s central command: “Be holy, because I am holy” (1:16, quoting Lev. 11:44–45; 19:2). Over the next verses, Peter explains why believers should be holy. First, God “judges each man’s work impartially” (1 Peter 1:17), so that we will have to render an account for everything we say (Matt. 12:37), everything we do (2 Cor. 5:10), and our use of every gift (Matt. 25:14–30; Luke 12:13–21). Sec- ond, the Father redeemed us from our empty life at great cost—by Christ’s precious blood (1 Peter 1:18–19). If he ransomed us from a vain life, how ...

can we return to it? ...

In this call to gospel-driven holiness, Peter harvests his prior themes to enhance his point. For example, Peter addressed his epistle to “God’s elect, strangers in the world” (1 Peter 1:1). Now he says that we should live “as strangers” (1:17), since our holiness will set us apart from the practices of this age. Peter also said that we have a sure and “living hope” that we will gain an imperishable inheritance, guaranteed by Jesus’ resurrection and “kept in heaven” (1:3–4). We await “praise, glory and honor when Jesus Christ is revealed” (1:7). Because we have salvation by grace (1:9–10), we can and should put our hope in Christ (1:13). ...

Now Peter recapitulates his first themes. In 1 Peter 1:13–21, he exhorts his people to live out their hope of redemption. In 1:3, Peter says that we have been born again to a living hope; in 1:21, he says that “your faith and ...

hope are in God.” But in 1:13, he commands, “Set your hope fully on the grace to be given you when Jesus Christ is revealed.” We see the indicative- imperative pattern once more. Because we have a hope that relies on God, we should set our hope on him. ...

彼得前书这一部分包含两个段落。1:13-17 节通过一系列命令句式阐述了盼望生活带来的伦理影响;随后在 1:18-21 节,彼得再次颂赞赐予我们盼望的上帝作为。

Peter commands us to “set your hope fully on the grace to be given you when Jesus Christ is revealed” (1 Peter 1:13). Peter surrounds his central message with subordinate commands that develop the meaning of hope. Translated literally, 1 Peter 1:13 reads, “Girding the loins of your mind, being completely self-controlled, hope on . . . Jesus Christ.” The niv sensi- bly translates “girding the loins of your mind” as “prepare your minds for action.” For the whole of biblical history, most people wore loose robes that worked well for ordinary activities, but inhibited strenuous labor, fight- ing, and running. To gird the loins is to wrap up flowing garments to gain freedom to work hard or run. Our parallel phrase is: “Roll up your sleeves.” God told the Israelites to eat the Passover with loins girded and sandals on their feet, so that they would be ready to flee Egypt at any moment (Ex. 12:11). Jesus alludes to this in Luke 12:35, when he tells his disciples, “Stay dressed for action” (esv). When Peter states that our minds must be ready, he doesn’t mean the intellect in a narrow sense. The word translated “mind” (dianoia) means the understanding with its dispositions and plans. When Jesus tells us to love the Lord our God with all our heart, soul, and mind, he means that we should love God with the whole person, with all our ...

faculties (Matt. 22:37). ...

The next command, “be self-controlled” (1 Peter 1:13), develops the con- cept of preparation. The word (nephō) usually means to be sober, balanced, or self-controlled.1 Peter wants us to be realistic and clear-minded. The opposite of sobriety is drunkenness, folly, and lack of self-discipline, whether due to wine, anger, fear, or greed. Peter wants us to focus our full attention on Jesus, through whom God gives his grace. ...

His emphasis falls not on the subjective feeling of hope, nor on the inten- sity of our hope, but on the object and direction of our hope. Christians ...

Frederick W. Danker, ed., A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Chris- tian Literature, 3rd ed. (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000), 672. ...

should hope in the grace of Christ to be revealed. Hope is the principal verb in 1 Peter 1:13 and the programmatic command for the passage.2 The subsequent commands, to be holy and to conduct ourselves with fear of God, follow from it. ...

Specifically, we rest our hope on the grace that God will give “when Jesus Christ is revealed,” that is, on the day he returns. Traditionally, we focus on the grace revealed in Jesus’ life, death, and resurrection, and rightly so, since Jesus’ completion of the plan of redemption brings us peace with God. Nonetheless, Peter here says that the grace to come decisively affects the present. Our hope in the grace to be revealed prepares us for self-discipline and action today. ...

Consider, for example, a student as she toils to complete her master’s thesis in education. If she is a part-time teacher’s aide and part-time barista, she might find it difficult to motivate herself to complete the project if she constantly thinks, “What’s the point of this? I can’t even get a teaching job now. When I finish my degree, it will be even harder to get a job because I’ll fall into a higher pay bracket.” But if the student has been teaching at a fine school for ten years and knows that she will get a raise and leadership responsibilities as soon as she finishes, she has every reason to pour herself into her studies. Similarly, the promised return of Jesus motivates us to faithfulness now, since we know our labor is not in vain (1 Cor. 15:58). ...

Most of Peter’s spiritual children began life as pagans who bowed to gods who possessed greater power, but not greater virtue, than humans. The popular religions of the day, especially polytheism and emperor worship, demanded loyalty and little more. The leading philosophical or ethical systems, Stoicism and Epicureanism, aimed (respectively) to minimize pain and to realize sustainable pleasures.3 Therefore, Peter asserts, “As obedient children, do not be conformed to the passions of your former ignorance” (1 Peter 1:14 esv). This almost sounds insulting, but it’s an honest description ...

J. Ramsey Michaels, 1 Peter, Word Biblical Commentary 49 (Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 1988), ...

55. Michaels calls this a “programmatic” imperative, and puts it with other aorist imperatives that lay out Peter’s program. Grammatically, “being girded,” anazōsamenoi, and “being sober/attentive,” nēphontes, are subordinate participles modifying “hope.” Translations take them as imperatives, since participles preceding an imperative often function as imperatives. ...

For a sharp summary of Christianity’s first ethical competitors, see Ellen T. Charry, God and the Art of Happiness (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2010), 3–24. Epicureanism is more subtle than hedonism, whose motto, quoted by Paul in 1 Corinthians 15, dictated, “Eat, drink, and be merry, for tomorrow we die.” ...

他们过往生活。 他们上帝及其准则一无所知。 根据他们的神话, 那些“神明”放纵欲望,民众便也效仿。

若这听来像论断,让我们回想同一位主既说过"你们不要论断人, 免得你们论断"(马太福音 7:1),说过 "不可外貌断定是非, 总要按公义审判"(约翰福音 7:24 和合本 )。显然,指出异教多神论道德沦丧的事实并非罪过。定罪无辜、草率论断,或自己放纵罪孽却伪善地指责他人,这些才是罪。但彼得谴责初代读者曾追随的异教行径,这实为美事。

如今彼得的子民“顺服的儿女”, 因此顺服乃是他们的本性——我们的本性。 神的顺服天父,行在性情律法标明的道路上, 本是理所当然。 因此,彼得劝诫道:"不要效法从前无知放纵私欲 "(1:14esv)。" 不可效法 "命令现在时被动语态祈使句。 现在时表明彼得持续永久禁止放纵无知私欲。 彼得选择被动语态下达命令, 因为知道我们某种程度上被动屈从那些迫使我们效法它们的力量。 凡是习惯的东西似乎都是正常的,凡是正常的似乎是正确的。 但是我们必须抵制压力顺应时代。 我们抵制邪恶欲望我们曾经沉迷。 我们罪恶中回头。 文化 andinthelifestyleofmanywho grew up outside the covenant

某种意义上说, 所有邪恶的欲望如出一辙。 它们试图将人神化, 并且全都

违背上帝的律法。 然而具体邪恶形式时代地域异。 如今,美国人通常在婚前同居一段时间。我们穿着炫耀财富或性感的服饰,放纵着收入允许我们购买的物质欲望。 既然我们的行为本质上社交圈其他人行为方式一致 (况且总有表现更差存在 ), 我们自身错误几乎视而不见 。向欲望屈服总是轻而易举。

彼得认识到,一个皈依者仍会感受到情欲的涌动,但他深知门徒们抵抗这些欲望, 原因有二。 首先,宣告:"那召你们的既是圣洁,你们在一切所行的事上也要圣洁"(彼得前书 1:15)。其次, 我们必须抵抗, 因为 "你们祖宗遗传虚妄行为被赎出来"

(1:18 和合本)。让我们先思考圣洁的呼召成圣之路上的阻碍

圣之阻碍

彼得描述了通往圣洁的两重障碍。他的子民随从私欲行事,并沿袭从祖先那里继承的虚妄生活方式(《彼得前书》1 章 14 节)。 作为应对, 他们必须盼望寄托于基督, 并牢记自己作为圣洁上帝顺命儿女的身份。

彼得教导神的儿女应当效法祂的属性 耶稣教导我们上的一样完全 马太福音 5:48)。 保罗宣告:“所以你们该效法神,好像蒙慈爱的儿女一样” 以弗所书 5:1; 另见帖撒罗尼迦前书 1:6)。 我们应当 “凭爱心行事,正如基督爱我们,为我们舍了自己” 以弗所书 5:2)。 圣经有时会劝勉信徒效法其他信徒 (如帖撒罗尼迦前书 2:14), 但即便是效法最优秀的人,也存在着既学习其美德又沾染其缺点的危险。 然而我们总能效仿上帝,因为他是圣洁的。正如彼得所言:"那召你们的既是圣洁的,你们在一切所行的事上也要圣洁;因为经上记着说:'你们要圣洁,因为我是圣洁的'"(彼得前书 1:15-16)。上帝的圣洁是圣经的基本信条。《摩西五经》 中反复强调:"你们要圣洁,因为我是圣洁的"(利未记 11:44;19:2;20:7,26;参见以赛亚书 6:3;帖撒罗尼迦前书 4:7)。

圣经中的圣洁意味着一个人公义、 正直、 以及与罪分离。若一个人圣洁,他就从世界分别出来, 归于神。后来彼得强调圣洁必须通过主人、仆人、丈夫和妻子积极行为彰显 (彼得前书 2:18-3:17)。这可能导致社会动荡并给圣洁带来患难 (4:1-4)。 我们刚强

当我们懂得如何在入世的同时超脱世俗。

字军东征揭示成圣

世,易,当我们涉足世俗时,双手难免沾染污秽。若投身社会改革进程,极易被世俗观念与手段同化。为此,我将十字军东征视为涉世警训,探讨其中深意。

十字军东征的起因是多方面的。战争爆发时,北非穆斯林占据西班牙长达数世纪 并威胁法国南部。 土耳其穆斯林一路屠戮基督教王国首都君士坦丁堡城下。 据记载,他们沿途屠杀男子、 凌辱妇女、 亵渎圣所, 其兵锋甚至威胁到奥地利所在的中欧地区。穆斯林虽曾允诺基督徒前往耶路撒冷朝圣的安全通行权数百年,但不时会迫害和羞辱这些朝圣者。 从这个角度来看,十字军东征在某种程度上可以被解读为自卫或反击战争 ,针对的是一个侵占领土的入侵者 特殊性在于这场战争并非民族主义性质,而是旨在保护基督教土地和人民,无论他们身处何地。(有学者指出,当时的穆斯林统治者十字军东征视为相当常规的战争。4 十字军东征至少有一个积极特质——基督徒甘愿冒着生命危险援助信仰同胞。因此,十字军东征代表着一种介入世界的努力。

Unfortunately, the Crusades went wrong in almost every way. Historically, we think first of terrible, often indiscriminate, violence done in the name of Christ. There were also theological errors. Christian leaders inspired and supported the Crusades by mixing Christian ideas with errors—meritorious pilgrimages, indulgences, penance, and the notion that self-imposed pun- ishments could satisfy the punishments that God might inflict on sinners in this life or in purgatory.5 They also drew on completely secular concepts: the centrality of land, the blood-feud. More broadly, the Crusades accepted a militarized perspective on life: “Europe had become . . . an armed camp,” and the pope, in his promotion of the Crusades, leveraged that concept rather than questioning it.6 ...

Between the collapse of Rome in a.d. 476 and the rise of the high Middle Ages, Europe endured centuries of violence and chaos. Rulers were essentially warlords whose strength legitimated their rule. Warriors felt deep loyalty to their lords as kings, popes, and barons struggled for supremacy. Clan and ...

Efraim Karsh, Islamic Imperialism: A History (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 2007), 73–87. ...

Jonathan Riley-Smith, The Crusades: A Short History (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1987), 9. ...

Thomas F. Madden, The New Concise History of the Crusades (Lanham, MD: Rowan & Little- field, 2006), 6–7. ...

honor were paramount, and offenses against them had to be avenged. In the eleventh century, a reform movement arose in the church. Some wanted to repristinate the church, others to liberate it from the domination of local lords. In that process, popes sought knights of Christ to defend the church against lords who tried to control it. Knights were professional warriors. Because church reform had spiritual effects, the knightly class become con- cerned for their souls, as they realized that there was a conflict between the gospel and their profession as warriors who often fought fellow Christians in neighboring areas. They learned to ask whether they could do penance to cover their sins. Might their work condemn them eternally? Pope Urban had an answer, as we will see.7 ...

The desire to defend Christian lands, along with a desire to avenge affronts to the honor of Christians, combined explosively with the concerns of Chris- tian knights when, at Clermont in November 1095, Pope Urban II preached a sermon that some call the most influential speech in history. Hundreds of bishops, abbots, noblemen, and warriors heard Urban that day (and he delivered it again in many other settings). He knew his audience well and readily appealed to its faith, outrage, and warrior spirit. ...

Five summaries of the speech have survived.8 All agree on its principal themes, although the specific language differs. Each account agrees that Urban called for Christian knights to stop fighting each other. Instead, they should battle infidels who devastated Christian lands with fire and sword. In Robert the Monk’s version, Urban called the knights to liberate Christians, especially in Constantinople, and to avenge the pil- lage, fire, rape, and torture (described in lurid detail) wrought by “an accursed race,” and to free Jerusalem, including the most holy relic, the Holy Sepulchre, from their control.9 ...

This paragraph and the next follow ibid., 1–11; Riley-Smith, Crusades, 1–17, 37–40; and Edward Peters, ed., The First Crusade: The Chronicle of Fulcher of Chartres and Other Source Materials (Phila- delphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1971). I am especially indebted to private communication with medieval historian Walker Cosgrove of Dordt College. ...

All were written after the event, and after the first Crusade, the success of which may color the accounts, so that it is impossible to be certain of their accuracy. The five accounts can be found in various places; I have principally drawn on the version of August C. Krey, The First Crusade: The Accounts of Eye-Witnesses and Participants (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1921), preserved in The Chronicle of Fulcher of Chartres ....

Robert the Monk, in The Chronicle of Fulcher of Chartres, 2–3. For Robert the Monk, the translation is from Dana Munro, “The Speech of Pope Urban II at Clermont,” American Historical Review 11 (1906): 231–42. ...

In Balderic of Dol’s account, Urban appeals to knights of Christ, who should “have compassion” for their “brothers” in the east. “You should shudder . . . at raising a violent hand against Christians; it is less wicked to brandish your sword against Saracens. It is the only warfare that is righteous, for it is charity to risk your life for your brothers.”10 ...

Urban linked the campaign to liberate Jerusalem to the most popular form of penance, the “holy pilgrimage” in which travelers become holy sacrifices.11 The knights wanted to do penance, and Urban gave “whoever wishes to save his soul” an opportunity to do so.12 He told the warriors that “remission of sins will be granted” to all who go to struggle “against the heathens.”13 And they will taste “imperishable glory in the kingdom of heaven.”14 Urban’s “Letter of Instruction to the Crusaders, December, 1095,” also offers “the remission of all their sins.”15 The knights were, in essence, armed pilgrims. For separate reasons, the concept of a soldier as a knight of the church was familiar, although the notion of armed pilgrims was new. ...

Urban also tied the cause to a popular form of spirituality, monasticism. Crusaders took monastic vows so that, in theory, the forces were armed, mobile monasteries. He also appealed to offended honor. Since their Chris- tian brothers suffer and their lands are taken, the knights should, like Christ, be willing to suffer to regain their lands and the church’s holy sites. In short, every theme of Urban’s speech resonated with his listeners: pilgrimage, honor, vengeance, land, brotherhood, monasticism, knighthood, and remission of sin. Urban’s speech had unprecedented effect because it combined familiar themes in a new way—and had an initially successful result. ...

Urban claimed that warriors were “knights of Christ” who went in the way of the Lord by fighting evil. If the knights loved their souls, they should fight the barbarians who had slain their brothers. And if they perished, they died as martyrs and gained “everlasting glory.”16 Thus, warfare was viewed as a redemptive work. ...

Balderic of Dol, in The Chronicle of Fulcher of Chartres, 8–9. ...

Robert the Monk, in ibid., 2–5. ...

The Gesta Version, in ibid., 6. ...

Fulcher of Chartres, in ibid., 30. ...

Robert the Monk, in ibid., 4. ...

Pope Urban II, “Urban’s Letter of Instruction to the Crusaders, December, 1095,” in ibid., 16. ...

Baldric of Dol, in ibid., 9. ...

At a distance, the errors are obvious. But Urban drew on noble and almost undisputed themes. The cultural milieu made his appeal plausible. His argu- ments were so well suited to the perceived needs of the hour that almost every major Christian leader of the age endorsed the Crusades: Bernard of Clairvaux, Thomas Aquinas, St. Francis of Assisi, Catherine of Siena, and more. Why did the great Christians of the day so fervently support the Crusades that they sacrificed wealth, health, even life itself in a cause that they believed to be so just?17 First, there was a sliver of justice in their cause. It is right to defend one’s people and to protect the defenseless. After that, we see them legitimating themes from their culture that have no place in God’s economy. Three errors are especially prominent: the desire to avenge affronts to honor, the belief that one can advance the cause of Christ through physical warfare, and the belief that one can perform deeds or do penance to gain the remission of sins and eternal life. Historians see that once the Crusades began, Christian warriors almost immediately adopted the worst tactics of their adversaries (as so often happens in war). ...

The goal here is not to denigrate Christians past. I have tried to frame my account so that we feel the force of Urban’s plea, even if we are convinced that he was disastrously wrong. The goal is to beware lest we do the same thing. It is so easy to baptize the standards of our day: First, we accept an idea because almost everyone else in the culture does. Second, we find some link between Scripture and that cultural conviction. Third, we fail to see how valid biblical teaching or doctrine corrects the error. ...

For the Crusades, first, warfare, honor, vengeance, and meritorious deeds were in the air. Second, there is teaching on justice, love of Christian brothers, and spiritual warfare in Scripture. All three were weaponized, by assimilation to the themes above. Third, the church failed to see that salvation rests on the completed work of Jesus, received by faith alone. The church taught that excep- tional deeds either opened the gate to heaven or shortened the time in purgatory. Pilgrimages to places such as Jerusalem were already seen as aids to salvation. That made it easy to justify the Crusades as pilgrimages. It is easy to conform to the age and so to be of the world rather than being in the world but not of it. It is easy to engage the world and capitulate to it instead of separating from it. Peter stresses the need to be holy and separate (1 Peter 1:15–16). ...

Riley-Smith, Crusades, 256–57. ...

The Accountability of the Redeemed ...

Peter states three reasons why believers should be holy. First, we should be holy because the God who called us is holy (1 Peter 1:15–16). God will remake us in his image, in the likeness of the Son (Rom. 8:29; Phil. 3:21; 1 John 3:2). We should therefore be holy because it is both our obligation and our future to conform to God’s character. As we see his glory, we become like him (2 Cor. 3:18). ...

Second, Peter notes that his people should be holy for this reason: “Since you call on a Father who judges each man’s work impartially, live your lives as strangers here in reverent fear” (1 Peter 1:17). Peter here combines two concepts that we needlessly separate: God is both Father and Judge. It is a great privilege to call God Father (Matt. 6:9; Luke 11:2; Rom. 8:15). But this intimate relation hardly exempts us from obedience. On the contrary, Peter declares (to quote the esv translation of 1:17), you must “conduct yourselves with fear throughout the time of your exile.” That is, while we live as strangers in this world, we both think of God with familial love, as Father, and retain an awe of the mighty and holy Lord. C. E. B. Cranfield observes: ...

It is of God’s infinite condescension that you are allowed to call him “Father.” You are not to presume on his goodness, but rather let it make you reverent and humble. He has not ceased to be the impartial Judge of all men. The more truly, the more intimately, we know him, the more of awe and rever- ence we shall feel.18 ...

The fear of the Lord, including fear of his justice, is the beginning of wisdom (Prov. 1:7; Matt. 10:28; Heb. 4:1). Since human fathers also judge their children, this joining of intimacy and justice should not surprise us. Indeed, just as human children both respect and obey the parents who love them, so those who call God Father should love and obey him. If we seek his benefits, if we invoke him as Father, we should act like his children and meet his standards for the family.19 ...

C. E. B. Cranfield, I & II Peter and Jude (London: SCM Press, 1960), 53. ...

The niv and esv translate the Greek verb epikaleō as “call” in the phrase “you call on a Father” (1 Peter 1:17). In the middle voice, used here, it is an intense form of the typical word for call, kaleō. We render it “invoke.” ...

This leads to a third reason for holiness. God the Father also “judges each man’s work impartially” (1 Peter 1:17). He neither looks at appearances nor plays favorites. He judges our deeds, and nothing is hidden from him. Jesus states that “he will reward each person according to what he has done” (Matt. 16:27). Paul agrees: “For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, that each one may receive what is due him for the things done while in the body, whether good or bad” (2 Cor. 5:10; cf. Jer. 17:10; Matt. 12:37; Rev. 20:12). This in no way nullifies justification by faith. But God will judge and Jesus will be proved right when he says, “You will recognize them by their fruits” (Matt. 7:16, 20 esv). This is not salvation by works. It reflects the great principle that our works follow our heart commitments so that genuine faith will show itself in words and deeds. In Psalm 62, David says that the Lord is his rock and salvation and that he “will reward each person according to what he has done” (Ps. 62:12). Because David trusts the Lord, he knows his works will reflect that. God will see them and be pleased. For this reason, Peter says, “conduct yourselves”—create a way of life20— marked by reverent fear of God “throughout the time of your exile” (1 Peter 1:17 esv; the niv uses “live . . . as strangers”). The term exile is paroikia. There are two Greek words for the idea of settling in a place. One is katoikia, which signifies settling down. The other, which Peter uses here, is paroikia. It means “to settle temporarily.” Since we are sojourners, resident aliens, in this world, we never fully settle or perfectly fit here. We should neither ...

expect nor attempt to do so. ...

Two of our children have spent time abroad in college. One lived in France. Her French was good enough that the French did not recognize her as an Amer- ican, but they still knew she wasn’t French. Another knew enough Mandarin to negotiate the streets of provincial Chinese cities, but no one thought she was Chinese. Neither fully belonged. They were resident aliens, and so are we. Genesis calls Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob “aliens” (Gen. 17:8; 19:9; 28:4). Abra- ham and his family “admitted that they were aliens and strangers on earth” (Heb. 11:13). They “lived in tents” with no land of their own (Heb. 11:9). The Israelites were also strangers in Egypt. They lived there for centuries, but never fully belonged (Ex. 22:21; 23:9). Indeed, despite his power and wealth, even King David proclaims, “We are aliens and strangers in your sight, as were all our ...

The Greek noun, anastrophē (a word that Peter favored), is closer to the English word lifestyle ...

than life ....

forefathers. Our days on earth are like a shadow” (1 Chron. 29:15). If even David, the king of Israel, could call himself an alien, every believer must be an outsider in his or her age. Instead of trying to fit our times, we should look “forward to the city with foundations, whose architect and builder is God” (Heb. 11:10). We should see our life the same way, especially if we fit rather well into our culture. It seems that there is always a crisis in morals, politics, or the economy that can remind us, if we are perceptive, that this world, in its present form, cannot be our final home. Americans and others from the dominant West must recognize this. If we believe we are mighty, let history teach us that mighty nations dwindle away. Alexander the Great led his Greek and Macedonian armies to world domination. Today, Greece and Macedonia are feeble Mediterranean states. The Mongols, once the terror of Asia and Europe, now inhabit a poor and barren land. Every empire falters and falls. ...

If we admire our democracy and dynamism, our energy and invention, let us remember that we are strangers in this fallen world. ...

事实上, 我们大多数评价自身文化时显得三心二意、 矛盾重重。 我们时而将其神化, 时而妖魔化, 甚至同一场对话中出现这种反复。 如果许多值得称颂之处, 那么每种文化中存在诸多应受谴责的方面。 此刻, 正值 2014 年岁末, 正统派基督徒们正为西方世界持续迈向 id=49>家庭乱象, 如同连续同居、 轻率离婚、 以及性放纵正势不可挡地蔓延向同性婚姻、一夫多妻制和多元伴侣关系。过去岁月里, 种族主义堕胎曾激荡我们的情绪。 不出数年, 新的道德沦丧现象占据我们的视线。 然而我们难以察觉其他文化病症。 对于物质主义的侵蚀, 我们几乎视而不见。 困扰我们文化的个人主义。

倘若世界现有形态并非我们家园,让我们利益保持若即若离, 对其意识形态保持锐利审视。 让我们取悦天父而活,并时刻准备应对这个时代,我们的文化保持适当距离。 我们已经说过 信徒应当追求圣洁多个原因 首先 呼召我们圣洁 其次 同时也是审判。 第三, 既然我们从不完全属于这个世界, 就应当按照神的准则生活。 最后, 我们成为圣洁是因基督救赎我们脱离

祖先遗留的虚妄之道:

你们知道,你们得以从祖宗传下来的虚妄生活中被救赎, 不是凭着会朽坏的金银等物,

不是凭着祖宗所传贵重 乃是凭着基督的宝血,如同无瑕疵、无玷污的羔羊之血。(彼得前书 1:18-19)

如今, 救赎本质上是个宗教术语, 但在彼得所处的时代,通过支付赎金解放奴隶战俘商业用语。首先意味着我们的使我们沦为奴隶或俘虏。 其次, 我们无法自行摆脱解救自己脱离这种困境。 一位职业网球教练的基督徒朋友这样描述奴役状态: 自学成才的球员会养成某些不良习惯技术缺陷。 天赋异禀的运动员可以一个有缺陷的动作奏效,在此过程中这个缺陷成为根深蒂固的习惯。 结果, 运动员自己的缺陷束缚, 无法自我解脱。 我们需要一位救主——耶稣—— 介入, 才能使我们罪的权势后果中得释放。 这些后果包括罪疚感、 定罪, 以及肉身的永恒的死亡。

任何赎价都需要付出代价。这代价并非金钱,"不是... 金银物"( 彼得前书 1:18) 而是神的无瑕羔羊耶稣献上自己 "宝血"我们承受了当得死亡 (1:19)。因此无论处境如何,信徒永远不再是属灵的奴仆。

根据彼得前书 1:18-19, 耶稣赎价救赎了我们 (希腊文 lutroō)。 保罗则用稍有不同的意象描述,说耶稣得着买赎了我们(使徒行传 20:28;希腊文 peripoieō)。保罗还教导说,耶稣用重价买下了我们 (哥林多前书 6:20;希腊文 agorazō)。我们已得自由,理当活出相称的生命。 “你们是重价的, 不要奴仆 林前 7:23)。 所以, 门徒必须特别远离那些使人上瘾受制罪, 无论是毒品、酒精、尼古丁、色情,还是愤怒。当然,这说来容易做来难。 正因如此,我们应当保持警醒,在感到困厄之时寻求帮助 然而正如这个隐喻所示 信徒并非绝对自由 我们属于我们邪恶主宰手中解放 并将我们安置于祂家中事奉的主

基督持守盼望呼召

彼得他的子民保证他们作为被救赎的儿女的身份既非偶然也非事后才有的想法。 人类的背叛并未使上帝感到意外。 先知们早已预言耶稣的生平、出卖牺牲。 耶稣自己也预言了这一切,

重要的是,按照创世之前就已制定的计划发生的。 耶稣说他必须 「被交在罪人手里,被钉十字架,第三日复活……然后进入他的荣耀」(路加福音 24:7,26)。约翰称耶稣为「 创世以来杀之羔羊」(启示录 13:8)。 保罗解释神的旨意、 计划喜悦的,定的时候显明出来 (以弗所书 1:9-11)。 彼得沿袭这一圣经神学脉络,宣称上帝早已预见并预定耶稣的救赎之工,因耶稣"在创世以前就被[上帝]拣选"(彼得前书 1:20a)。随后上帝实现了祂永恒的旨意,使之"在这末世为你们显现出来"(1:20b)。这正是基督降临的末世,我们等候着上帝计划的最后环节——基督再临。彼得强调,这一切都是"为你们"的缘故。

We must apply “the precious blood of Christ” to ourselves, which we do when we put our “faith and hope” in God (1 Peter 1:19, 21). Hebrews teaches, “Just as man is destined to die once, and after that to face judgment, so Christ was sacrificed once to take away the sins of many people” (Heb. 9:27–28). Judas presents the clearest case of the man who rejects the One through whom we can face judgment without fear. Because Judas rejected Jesus, he comes to judgment naked and alone, holding his terrible sin in his hands. All who reject Christ will find themselves in Judas’s position when they stand before the Judge. But Christians do not come alone, in our sin, for Jesus has redeemed us and ushers us into God’s presence with our sins covered by his blood. When we believe in him, we live with him. “Through him you believe in God, who raised him from the dead and glorified him, and so your faith and hope are in God” (1 Peter 1:21). Thus, day by day, the Spirit convicts people of sin and illumines them so that they see the beauty of Jesus’ redemption and trust and hope in him. ...

This returns us to our first theme. Holiness governs 1 Peter 1:14–16, but our passage begins and ends with hope. Through Jesus, Peter says, we believe and have confidence in God. This hope is well founded, not vain, because it rests on Jesus Christ, the Lamb of God (1:20). He has redeemed us from an empty life (1:18), covered our sins (1:19), summoned us to holiness (1:15–16), and given us reason to hope, even if we feel like strangers in our own land. ...

5

Gospel Purification ...

x BeCex x:zz–z:3 ...

Now that you have purified yourselves by obeying the truth so that you have sincere love for your brothers, love one another deeply, from the heart. For you have been born again, not of perishable seed, but of imperishable, through the living and enduring word of God. (1 Peter 1:22–23) ...

y youngest daughter was a reasonably good high school tennis player. Her strokes and movement were solid, but her record surpassed expectations if an observer con- athleticism or the technical purity of her game. She won ...

because she never gave up on a point, never gave up on a match, and almost never played anyone who was tougher, physically or mentally, than she. I counseled her, “In the third set you still have energy, so keep bouncing between points. You are in better shape than your opponent, so let it show. You never wear out; make sure the other girl knows it.” The longer a match went, the more likely a victory became. ...

Peter used the same pattern of reasoning, which theologians have given the inelegant label “the indicative and the imperative.” The phrase notes the way in which the apostles move from what is to what, logically, ought ...

to be. I told my daughter, “You are in better shape [indicative], so act like it [imperative] and reap the results.” In a similar vein, Peter begins, “Now that you have purified yourselves by obeying the truth so that you have sincere love for your brothers [indicative], love one another deeply, from the heart [imperative]” (1 Peter 1:22). The next section begins, “For you have been born again [indicative] Therefore, rid yourselves of all malice [imperative]” ...

(1:23; 2:1). The final imperative, “crave pure spiritual milk,” rests on a final indicative, “you have tasted that the Lord is good” (2:2–3). ...

The indicative-imperative interplay governs most of 1 Peter 1. Earlier, Peter described the Godward responsibilities that the gospel creates. God’s elect should set their hope in God’s grace (1 Peter 1:13), be holy (1:16), and live in reverent fear (1:17). In this passage, Peter accents the manward responsibili- ties of the gospel. We love each other deeply (1:22) and put away all malice (2:1). First Peter 1:22–25 also develops his interest, seen earlier in 1:10–12, in the veracity of God’s Word. Peter says that believers are purified by obeying the truth (1:22). They have been born again by the “enduring word of God” (1:23). Further, the Word of the Lord endures forever (1:24–25). Since we are shaped by the Word, believers can rid themselves of sins such as malice and deceit (2:1). ...

Gods Word Is Truth That Brings Life ...

Peter has just told his readers that God has redeemed them “with the pre- cious blood of Christ, a lamb without blemish or defect” (1 Peter 1:19). Jesus was chosen for this task “before the creation of the world” (1:20). Through him, they “believe in God, who raised him from the dead and glorified him” (1:21). Now, therefore, Peter tells his people, “you have purified yourselves by obeying the truth” (1:22). The phrase “obeying the truth” is important. Peter does not say that we obey a command; he says that we obey the truth.” For Peter, “the truth” is neither abstract nor general. In this setting, “the truth” means “the gospel.” The closest parallel to 1 Peter 1:22 is Galatians 5:7, where Paul asks the Galatians, “You were running a good race. Who cut in on you and kept you from obeying the truth?” In the context of Galatians 5:1–6 and the entire epistle to the Galatians, “the truth” means “the gospel.” First Peter 1:25 also mentions “the word of the Lordthat was preached ...

你。” 在别处,约》 使用平行短语

真理的道。”在以弗所书 1:13 中,保罗将“真理的道”等同于“福音”:“你们听见真理的道 就是你们得救福音 ,也信了基督。” 这里再次表明“真理的道”完全等同于 福音”。歌罗西书 1:5-6 也如此记载:“这福音传到你们那里 传到普天之下,并且结果增长”(ESV 译本)。最后,雅各书 1:18 指出,神定意藉着“真理的道”使祂的儿女得着属灵的生命或重生(参约翰福音 14:17;提摩太后书 2:15)。

id=44>again,notofperishableseedbutofimperishable,throughthelivingandabidingwordofGod;for‘Allfleshislikegrassandallitsgloryliketheflowerofgrass.Thegrasswithers,andtheflowerfalls,butthewordoftheLordremainsforever.’Andthiswordisthegoodnewsthatwaspreachedtoyou.” 因此当彼得宣告我们"因顺从真理"得以洁净时,所指的我们因信被称作 " 真理之道"福音洁净。 虽然全部圣经都是真实的话语,其中使徒们特别称某些内容为" 真理"(彼得前书 1:22) 和" 道"(1:25)。我们将彼得前书 1:23-25 合并来看,含义便清晰可见:" 你们蒙了重生, 不是由于能朽坏的种子, 乃是由于不能朽坏的,借着活泼常存道; 因为 '有血气的尽都如草, 他的美荣上的花。枯干,凋谢, 惟有主的永存的。'就是你们福音。" id=44>再次, 不是出于会朽坏的种子, 而是出于不朽坏的, 藉着那永活长存的道, 就是神的道。就是传给你们福音

所传你们的。1

在新约的其他地方,顺服真理(彼得前书 1:22)就是相信真理。点在保罗引用以赛亚书罗马书 10 章时最为明显,他惊叹道:“‘那传福音之人的美!’没有音。以赛亚说:‘主啊,传的有谁信呢?’”(罗 10:15 下-16合本)。注意保罗将二者等同:我们相信福音就是顺服福音。相信即是顺服。“顺服福音”这一表述也出现在帖撒罗尼迦后书 1:8 和彼得前书 4:17 中。 在这两段经文中,作者都告诫那些"不服从福音"的人。也就是说,他们不认识神,不背负神的名,也不属于神的家。简而言之,每一次关于主耶稣其人其事的宣告,都意味着听者应当信靠并追随他。因此使徒们说我们应当"顺从福音"。

我们遵从真理 我们相信彼得所宣告的福音: 耶稣上帝受膏者, 救世主。受难, 流尽无辜的血, 死而复活,应许复兴万物 彼得前书 1:3-9)。 我们遵从真理,我们相信耶稣献上自己祭, 上帝 “叫他从死里复活,荣耀”(1:21)。我们的 “信心盼望”(1:21)在于耶稣基督,“亲身担当我们的罪,木头上受死, 使我们既然在罪上死,就得以在义上活”(2:24)时,我们就是顺从了福音。

这里译作 “传”动词 euaggelizomai 意思是 “宣扬好消息”“带来喜讯”。

我们能够遵行福音 因为神的话语明白易懂具有权威。 我们应当信靠这福音, 因它呼召人作出回应—— 即顺服。 有些门徒认为用被动语态谈论信仰显得尤为虔诚, 他们说:“我蒙了拯救; 向神降服。” 诚然, 信仰确有被动的一面—— 我们安息在基督里。 但信仰同样需要主动。 约珥书 2:32 说:“凡求告主 都必得救。” 这种主动呼求表达方式新约频繁出现 (使徒行传 2:21;9:14-21;22:16; 罗马书 10:13; 哥林多前书 1:2; 提摩太后书 2:22)

我们应当积极呼求我们呼求 便是违背福音 将招致后果:“凡顺从福音..... 遭受 远离权能荣光惩罚 帖撒罗尼迦后书 1:8-9RSV 译本)。 此处保罗福音神的荣耀相连。还在 《罗马书》1:16福音神的大能联系起来:福音本是的大能,要救一切相信的人。」由此可见,福音就是神的真理 神的大能荣耀带给所有信靠之人 福音也使信徒成为圣洁:"你们既已洁净自己你们既以遵行真理 所以 你们有了 诚信 真诚的你的兄弟、 深爱一个另一个 心"(1 彼得 1:22).恢复、 彼得福音使道德改变、 特别是心中爱我们的兄弟 。" 既然" 最重要的 anthro--

拓扑学术语"圣经中,这绝非微不足道的主张。2

所罗门告诫道:“你要切切保守你的心, 因为一生的果效是由发出(箴 4:23;23:19)。筹算 (16:1,9)支配全身各部位(4:23-27;6:16-19),甚至掌控我们的面部表情 (15:13)与言语(12:23)。心或追求智慧(15:14),或追随愚妄冲动 (6:25)。信靠(3:5), 作出抉择,确立人生方向(出 14:5;民 32:9;撒上 13:14;列王纪上 12:27;18:37)。3 人心比万物都诡诈,坏到极处(耶 17:9),除非神施行重生之工——这正是祂所应许的(耶 31:33)。正如以西结书 36:26 所言:"我也要赐给你们一个新心,将新灵放在你们里面。又从你们的肉体中除掉石心,赐给你们肉心。"肉心。本段经文中, 彼得阐明藉福音改变人心,使我们洁净并能"从心里彼此切实相爱"(彼得前书 1:22)。

布鲁斯·K·沃克,与查尔斯·余合著,《旧约神学》(大急流城:桑德凡出版社,2007 年),225-27 页。

The Hebrew term for heart (leb or lebab) appears in each verse above. ...

Love is both a feeling and a way of life.4 Peter says that the gospel both purifies the heart and teaches us to love. This challenges a common belief. Many Christians think of the gospel as the starting point of Christian life, the first step in the journey, but something we surpass in time. Yet the gospel isn’t the first step of many; it is the core of the faith, the hub of the wheel. The gospel is not for outsiders and beginners, something that insiders supersede as we grow in knowledge and obedience. No, the gospel is “the word of his grace, which can build you up” (Acts 20:32; see also 20:24). Grace makes us strong. From it all action radiates. ...

About twenty years earlier, Peter learned this the hard way. He enjoyed full fellowship with Gentile Christians in Galatia until some Christian legalists passed through. They apparently chided people for eating with Gentiles who didn’t follow Jewish food laws. Peter caved to their pressure and stopped eating with his Gentile brothers. Paul called this hypocrisy and a failure to act (literally, walk) “in line with the truth of the gospel” (Gal. 2:14). That is, the gospel should have taught Peter not to separate from fellow Christians over matters of food. ...

This point implies that we can solve many of life’s questions by ask- ing, “What action is in line with the truth of the gospel? What decision is consistent with the gospel?” Suppose someone wrongs you. What response is consistent with the gospel? Anger? Self-pity? Revenge? Forgiveness? A conversation? ...

If your career is uncertain, if you lose your job or lose income, what response is in line with the gospel? Panic? Shame? Despair? Anger? Or is there a better way to walk in line with the gospel and obey it? The gospel says that we are beloved of God, regardless of our achievements. What response follows that? ...

We should always seek the path that is in line with the gospel. Looking at life through the lens of the gospel is part of “obeying the truth.” We “obey the truth” when we know we are justified by grace and sanctified by grace. We get right and stay right with God the same way: through the gospel, not works. ...

Both religious and irreligious people can disobey the gospel. Moral people can be just as far from God, just as antagonistic to the faith, as immoral ...

We will consider love in more detail in chapter 10, as we comment on 1 Peter 3:8–12. ...

people and atheists. Revelation 11:7–8 points out that Jerusalem, the city of religion, murders the prophets. Religious leaders insisted on Jesus’ crucifix- ion. A secular man wants to be his own lord, but a moral, churchgoing man can be just as far from Jesus. If he hopes to earn God’s favor by religious activities and moral goodness, he trusts himself, not Jesus. He might admire Jesus the teacher and holy man, but if he thinks God must reward his piety, he does not obey the truth of the gospel. ...

Religion says, “If I obey, God will love me.” The gospel says, “Because God loves me, I will obey.” When Peter says that “you have purified yourselves,” he uses a perfect participle, signifying that this purification is an ongoing state. By obeying the truth, the gospel, we are purified in a definitive way, even though we must yet grow into it. As Hebrews 10:14 notes, “by one sacrifice [Jesus] has made perfect forever those who are being made holy.” To be made perfect forever is the definitive element; to be made holy is the progressive element. Both are true and essential, and both rest on the gospel. Peter asserts that this gospel grants life. “You have been born again, not of perishable seed but of imperishable, through the living and enduring word of God” (1 Peter 1:23). Some Christians balk at the phrase “born again” because certain people use it as a shibboleth. The Greek could be translated “born anew” (nrsv), but the concept is clear. By his Spirit, God grants his people a new and second life. The theological term for this is regeneration. Paul says that we “were dead in our transgressions and sins,” but that God “made us alive with Christ” (Eph. 2:1–5). Because they care nothing for God and his truth, the unregenerate are compared to the deaf and the blind (Ps. 38:13; Prov. 28:9; Isa. 43:8; Rev. 3:17). Humans are not deaf as a rock is deaf. We hear but rebel. Our “being is intact,” but our “nature is corrupt.”5 In regeneration, God quickens the mind, opens the eyes, and renews the will. The renewed person comprehends the gospel (1 Cor. 2:14–15) and is ...

被吸引而来,使他能自由且甘心地归向耶稣。6

重生神的决定作为 (约翰福音 3:1-8)植根于耶稣的复活 (彼得前书 1:3)一个新生的阅读神的话语,福音时, 圣灵会赐予 “悟性的光照”意志罪的捆绑中释放,洁净人心 赐予新的情感,

亚伯拉罕·凯波尔,《圣灵的工作》,亨利·德弗里斯译(纽约:芬克与瓦格- 纳尔斯出版社,1900 年;重印版,大急流城:厄尔德曼斯出版社,1979 年),304 页。

概念源自 《威斯敏斯特信条》 第 10 章第 1 节,“论有效呼召”。

驱散旧日欲望。7 托马斯·查尔默斯在其常被引用的布道文《新情感的驱逐力》中指出 我们无法仅凭 " 证明世俗轻重 "停止爱慕世界 。人心总要有所爱慕,因此直接根除对世俗之爱是不可能的。心灵需要"更具吸引力的新对象"和"更值得倾注的另一种爱"。唯有如此才能孕育新生与新活力。若没有上帝这番作为,无人能真正信服并遵从福音。8

通常, 神的重生人的灵,一个男人、 女人孩子阅读聆听神的话语时。 彼得说:“你们蒙了重生, 不是由于能坏的种子, 乃是由于不能坏的种子, 是借着活泼常存的道。” 彼得前书 1:23 彼得主要关注的福音, 然而宣称传扬福音的圣经,永不朽坏、 活泼、 长存的, 永远具有赐予生命的大能。9

福音作为圣经的特殊部分,与人类不同, 永远存活且长存。对此,彼得前书 1:24-25a 引用了以赛亚书 40:6-8:

有血气的尽都

一切荣华皆似草上花。

枯干,

残,

惟有主的长存。 和合本

因圣经是神的话语,故与神同具永恒属性——永远长存。 人生至多如花草,绚烂一季便转瞬凋零。 生命的短暂或许让我们陷入绝望,伍迪·艾伦给出了另一种可能—— 他始终推崇 「分心之力」通过沉浸于艺术、 喜剧事物, 暂时忘却终将死亡的宿命。 抑或听听那位夸夸其谈的无神论者

辛克莱 ·B. 弗格森,灵》(伊利诺伊州唐纳斯格罗夫: 校园出版社,1996 年), 第 118–23 页。

托马斯 ·查默斯, 新情感的驱逐力》, 收录于 布道论述》 第三版全美版(纽约:罗伯特·卡特出版社,1846 年),2:271–75。

在希腊语中,彼得前书 1:23 的最后一句话是 dia logou zōntos kai menontos。逐字翻译为"藉着永活上帝的道而长存"。我们倾向于将"永活""上帝" 关联, 因为众所周知的短语 "永活上帝"。这样会使 menontos——"长存"——显得毫无意义。由于"永活"有时与"道"相关联(希伯来书 4:12), 且这种解读使句子更通顺,因此共识是"永活"修饰的是"道"而非"上帝"。

伯特兰 · 罗素曾言:“我相信 死亡降临 肉体终将腐朽, 而我的自我意识不会留下任何痕迹。”他更进一步认为

人类不过是……原子偶然排列的产物;任何火焰、任何英雄主义、任何思想与情感的强度,都无法让个体生命在坟墓之外延续;世世代代的劳作、全部的热忱、一切的灵感、人类智慧如日中天的光芒,终将随着太阳系的寂灭而永远消逝……

人类生命短暂而脆弱;无情而黑暗的厄运缓慢却必然地降临在他及其整个种族身上。漠视善恶,肆意毁灭,全能的物质沿着冷酷无情的轨迹滚滚向前; 对于人类, 今日注定失去至爱,明日自身亦将穿过黑暗之门,唯余厄运降临前, 珍视那些使其短暂岁月变得崇高的高尚思想。10

生命短暂并未使彼得陷入绝望。 尽管 “凡有血气的尽都如草”, 神和他的话语却永远长存。 “而这,”彼得继续道,“就是传讲给你们的道” 彼得前书 1:25 下)。 因我们信这福音真道,因这道使我们与复活的主联合,永不朽坏、 永不衰残的产业,保守, 正为我们存留 (1:3-4,9)。创造了罗素笔下飘忽不定的原子,它们以浩繁之数编织成体, 又定意使其归于虚妄与死亡, 因叫人知晓自身虚妄, 强过浑噩度日不知终局。 如此, 人若圣灵更新, 方能尝到永生滋味。

真实的信心会带来行为的改变。 彼得再次说道:“你们既因顺从真理,洁净了自己的心,以致爱弟兄没有虚假,就当从心里彼此切实相爱”(彼得前书 1:22)。这就是说,当人顺服福音时,就会产生“从心里......爱弟兄没有虚假”(1:22)的生命特质。我们将在研读彼得前书 3:8-12 时探讨爱的情感层面。此处我们注意到既包含情感因素, 也包含意志因素。 我们

伯特兰·罗素,《一个自由人的崇拜》(1903),收录于 《我为什么不是基督徒》(纽约: 西蒙与舒斯特出版社,1957 年),第 107、115-116 页。

感受爱并决心去爱。爱是皈依的结果,因为信徒成为上帝充满爱的家庭中的一员。

一种生活方式。成全了律法 (马太福音 22:34-40)。我们他人,就会尊重他们、促进他们的生命、尊重他们的财产、告诉他们真相,并寻求他们的益处而非财物。

Peter describes this love in three ways. First, it is sincere and deep, affec- tionate and heartfelt—earnest, unfeigned, and without pretense. Second, it is brotherly and filial, not calculating. It has no thought of gaining something in return. It is natural, when we help a brother, to be aware that the friend might return the favor in our own time of need. Indeed, James says that believers have a duty to assist their brothers and sisters in the faith whenever any of them needs food or clothing. Yet genuine Christian love does not calculate a return on acts of kindness. Third, love is deep. The term trans- lated “deeply” can mean “earnestly” or “unremittingly.” The root is a verb that means “stretch out” and can describe a man or animal running at full speed. Thus, love should be strenuous and enduring.11 ...

Ideally, sincere, brotherly, and earnest love come together, and we gladly help each other in the hour of need. We stick with each other when the need lasts for weeks or months. We never begrudge our labor. Love is sincere and earnest when we invite a stranded family to stay with us, and the welcome stays warm even if a dish breaks or a carpet is stained. ...

The End of Malice, Envy, and Slander ...

The indicative-imperative structure continues to guide Peter’s commands in 1 Peter 2:1–3. In this case, however, the indicative comes last, in 2:3: “now that you have tasted that the Lord is good.” Logically, however, our experi- ence of the Lord’s goodness comes first. Because we know that God is good, we are good, and it must show in our attitudes and actions. ...

“Rid yourselves” of sin, Peter exhorts us in 1 Peter 2:1, using a verb (apotithēmi) often used when someone takes off or lays aside clothes (cf. Acts 7:58). When Peter says that we “rid” ourselves of (niv) or “put away” (esv) these sins, he imagines our taking them off, as if they were soiled garments. ...

C. E. B. Cranfield, I & II Peter and Jude (London: SCM Press, 1960), 57. ...

The sins that Peter names are not the “gross vices of paganism” but “com- munity destroying vices” so often tolerated by the church: malice, deceit, and hypocrisy or insincerity.12 It is worthwhile to define them. ...

Malice signifies evil or wickedness in the broadest possible sense, ill-will to all, perhaps for its own sake. Or it can signify the bad blood and nursing of grudges that seem to motivate some people. Joseph Stalin embodied all sides of malice. With callous indifference, he issued political and economic decrees that led to the deaths of millions of his own people. He also murdered his underlings, with his own hand, in public, with a laugh, as if he enjoyed it. Hypocrisy can also be translated “insincerity.” While hypocrisy signifies deliberate deception in English, the Greek term does not necessarily have that sense. It includes ordinary inconsistency between belief and practice, between one’s inner and outer life. It includes self-deception as well as deception of others. The hypocrites of Matthew 23 seem quite sincere—they travel land and sea to make one convert (Matt. 23:15, 27–28). If we reflect a moment, we see that one can be both sincere and hypocritical. If we first deceive ...

ourselves, we will readily deceive others. ...

Peter links malice with envy. Malice easily leads to envy, which is the gnawing sorrow we feel when someone else has something that we think we deserve. Immanuel Kant said that envy is a wretched vice because it hurts everyone. It torments the subject, who envies, and it hopes to destroy the happiness of the one envied.13 Envy’s apologists claim that envy can at least spur achievement, but most observe that envy is that rare state that brings no good to anyone. Vain as it is, almost everyone succumbs to envy at some point. The envious compare themselves to others and, for some perverse reason, always decide that they come up short. To quote Bertrand Russell with favor, “If you desire glory, you may envy Napoleon. But Napoleon envied Caesar, Caesar envied Alexander, and Alexander, I dare say, envied Hercules, who never existed.”14 ...

In his monograph Envy, Joseph Epstein confesses that his childhood was ...

filled with it. He envied “boys who were better looking . . . with wealthier parents, brighter, more popular, and physically more courageous than I.” He envied boys who were “more attractive to girls, . . . better athletes, more ...

Peter H. Davids, The First Epistle of Peter (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1990), 80. ...

Joseph Epstein, Envy (New York: Oxford University Press, 2003), xxi. ...

Bertrand Russell, “Conquest of Happiness,” in Why I Am Not a Christian, 57. ...

adept and more at ease in the world.” His eyes were quick to detect friends with more freedom, more spending money, and cooler parents, so that he lived in a faint cloud of envy.15 ...

Malice and envy readily lead to deceit and slander. The envious want to bring other people down; they will slander or malign others to do so. Deceit, like malice, is a wide-ranging vice. It includes all dishonesty, whether in words or deeds. Yet deceit and slander are both primarily sins of the tongue. When we deceive, we shade the truth, ordinarily to someone’s face. Slander is bald opposition to the truth, ordinarily behind someone’s back. The deceiver hides the truth. The gossip sometimes tells the truth, but delivers it to the wrong people. The slanderer boldly lies, pretending to deliver the truth. ...

Slander can be the child of envy. In the Middle Ages, Europe had one church but many reform movements. When a reformer became too popular or powerful, church officials typically accused the reformer of financial corruption or unchastity in order to undermine the reformer’s credibility. Peter tells his readers to “rid yourselves of . . . deceit . . . and slander” ...

(1 Peter 2:1) because he knows that God’s people don’t always tell the truth. I still recall a day, decades past, when I hid the truth to avoid a perceived danger. I didn’t lie, but I skirted the truth in order to evade the consequences of truthfulness. A simple domestic scene suggests how we are tempted to deceive. ...

假设一位妻子她的丈夫提出那个令人胆战心惊的问题:“你记得吗?” 这个问题。 你记得了吗? 记得垃圾了吗? 记得蛋糕烤箱拿出来了吗? 不,忘了,等等, 就在问起时突然想起来了, 于是可以故作镇定地回答:“嗯, 记得。” 紧接着又追问:"所以你把蛋糕拿出来了?"

此刻这位心虚的丈夫扔下手机, 抓起防烫手套, 猛地把蛋糕烤箱里拽出来。重新拿起电话说道:"抱歉亲爱的, 我刚刚不小心掉了手机。 是的, 蛋糕已经从烤箱取出来了。" 妻子追问了

问题:“那么这件衣服酷吗?” 丈夫再次面临一个选择。最终会说出那个直白的真相:“不, 一点都不酷”? 还是再次回避:“不算特别酷,但比刚才好些了”?

欺骗私下交谈中总是充满诱惑, 尤其我们听到令人尴尬的问题时, 比如 “你什么?” 或者 “你还记得吗?”

爱泼斯坦,《嫉妒》89-91 页。

欺骗同样具有公共层面的表现。政客们通过歪曲对手的记录实施欺骗。 商业报告通过隐瞒问题夸大资产与机遇进行欺骗。

既然教会里充斥着罪人,自然也满是骗子、伪君子和诽谤者。人们刚说完一套,转头就自相矛盾,若有人指出这点,他们还会装出困惑不解的样子。对某些人而言,言语不过是实现目标或满足欲望的工具。于他们来说, 真相就是能帮他们得到所求之物的任何说辞,谎言则是任何阻碍他们达成目的言语。

当我们信徒脱去诡诈、虚伪与诽谤,就能越来越恒常地说真话。但我们不仅要说真话,更要诚实话,建造人, 使听见恩典(弗 4:15,29)。必须述说令人痛苦的真相, 我们温婉相告。必须传达消息,就当谨慎避免伤害或贬低他人。若述说令人振奋的真相,则要杜绝自夸与谄媚。

彼得连。举的诸罪中,冲。念, 便善。伤,恨。

福音将我们从这些罪中释放出来。上帝将他的爱浇灌在我们心里,驱散我们的恶意,使我们能够真诚地爱人,发自内心 (《 彼得前书 》1:22)。 福音教导我们承认自己的罪,驱除虚伪与欺骗。 对主的信仰将我们从嫉妒中解放,因为我们知道赐予美好恩赐他的儿女 (路加福音 11:13) 嫉妒恩典的反面 攫取而非爱背道而驰,因为嫉妒者眼中只有自己痛苦的欲望。难怪保罗称嫉妒为"肉体行为"之一(esv),与纷争、猜忌和自私野心为伍(加拉太书 5:19-21)。

但福音打破了这罪的循环,使我们能弃绝罪恶。我们脱去罪孽、渴慕灵奶,因我们"已经尝过主恩的滋味"(彼得前书 2:3)。虽然这是我们这段经文的最后一句,但品尝神的美善正是宣告性的根基 —— 在逻辑上先于所有命令。 正因为我们已经品尝过(亲身经历)祂的恩慈, 我们才能

除去恶毒和嫉妒等罪。神爱我们,并将祂的爱浇灌在我们心里; 这爱当然应当驱散一切对他人的恶意。 我们又何必嫉妒他人?"主是良善的",祂必按我们所需、按对我们最有益处的赐给我们。

彼得深知我们无法通过一次决断单凭意志力彻底摆脱所有罪孽。罪恶成为习以为常的习惯, 我们的进步可能缓慢, 实际行为也令人沮丧。 但我们仍要竭力洁净自己 (彼得前书 1:22)。 彼得告诫道:“要像新生的婴孩那样, 渴慕纯净的灵奶, 好叫你们在救恩中成长”(2:2)。

从语法上讲,“渴慕纯净的灵奶”《彼得前书》2:1-3 中唯一的命令式。新约时代,“奶” 可以象征教导初信者的基本要道 (《哥林多前书》3:1-2;《希伯来书》5:13), 也可指任何属灵滋养。 它包含基督徒初信时所需的一切, 使我们能 “在救恩上长进”(《彼得前书》2:2)。

注意彼得并未我们追求美德清单来对抗恶行清单——恶意、 欺诈、 以及其他恶习。相反,他命令我们要渴求一样东西, 就是上帝纯净的灵奶。灵奶纯净的 (字面意思是不欺瞒的 )。不含任何腐败的谬误外来的添加物。 因此, 门徒渴慕上帝的真理,如同婴孩渴慕母亲的乳汁。

人类必须汲取养分才能成长。我们渴慕上帝的乳汁与灵命成长,因我们"尝过主恩的滋味" 彼得前书 2:3)。 我们并不渴求 "宗教" 及其虚妄幻想—— 以为只要遵守规条就能换取神的恩宠。宗教催生骄傲与自义——若我们恪守规条; 亦滋生自我厌恶绝望——我们力不能及。我们始终渴慕神的真理与恩典。

彼得在《彼得前书》2 章 1 节列举了一系列罪恶和罪恶的态度,但他将改革的呼召首先围绕在福音的召唤上,其次是在上帝家中的生活。用彼得的话说,如果我们顺服真理,相信福音, 我们就会真话, 通过弃绝诡诈诽谤。 我们已经尝过主恩的滋味,知道我们属于他的家。上帝喂养我们,赐予我们彼此真诚、发自内心的爱,使我们远离罪恶,在救恩中成长。

6

x BeCex z:e–x0

经上记着说:“看哪,我把所拣选、宝贵的房角石安放在锡安, 信靠他的羞愧。” 所以, 他在你们宝贵,有话说:“匠人所弃的石头,已作了房角的头块石头。”(彼得前书 2:6-7)

有人 我们应当谨慎对待"我是" 开头句子结尾方式 我们永远不该"我是失败者" 因为我们不该自身弱点定义自己 同样不该说 "我是有权势的高管",因为

我们通过成就定义自我。 有人会问:"如果不能用优缺点定义自己,那还剩下什么?"稍作停顿便会发现,我们不该用技能和力量定义自我,因为它们随时可能改变。问题依然存在: 我们究竟该如何定义自己?

I身份认同社群

西方世界通常以"我"开头的陈述来定义自我,但在某些文化中, 人们会以 "我们" 开头的陈述确立一个人所属的城镇、

家庭和公会。我们注意到以色列人在《路加福音》4:22 和《马太福音》13:55 中将耶稣定义为"约瑟的儿子"" 木匠的儿子" 路加 4:22马太 13:55。《彼得前书》2:4-10 从基督的品格转向信徒的身份。 对彼得而言, 身份始于诸如以下问题:"谁我的神?信靠谁? "我的归属在哪里?"这个问题"我属于谁"比"我是谁"更为重要。《彼得前书》2:4-10 指出我们的信仰定义了我们。 因为耶稣上帝的房角石, 我们就成为活石。 既然拣选了我们,我们便是被拣选的族类。

由于彼得前书 2:4-10 是这封书信的关键段落,我们需要将其置于上下文之中。 神的选民乃是 "世上的客旅"(1:1)。 父神拣选了我们 (1:1-2), 耶稣救赎我们脱离"虚妄的生活方式"(1:18-19), 圣灵使我们成圣 (1:2)。 因此, 我们得着天上基业, 由神亲自保守。 我们凭信心领受上帝的救恩, 圣洁的父神呼召我们停止效法从前外邦人时随从的"邪情私欲"(1:12-16) 我们应当那样圣洁 (1:16)" 敬畏的心" 度日(1:17-19)。圣洁意味着一种新的生活方式 尤其外邦人而言—— 他们曾经远离 如今成为祂的子民 (2:4-10)。 彼得前书第一章1节至第二章12节的首段,开篇与结尾都描述了信徒的身份。我们是"神的选民",是他所拣选的人。因此,我们成了"世上的客旅"(1:1),不再属于原有文化(2:10-11)。因我们跟随耶稣并脱离了从前的生活方式,就被诋毁作恶者(2:12),以致"基督徒"这个标签

几乎一种诅咒 (4:16).

彼得前书 1:1-21 为整封书信奠定了神学根基。经文中指出上帝是圣洁的,并通过基督的宝血在审判意义上遮盖选民的罪 使他们成为圣洁 (1:2,15-19) 同时藉着 " 圣灵的成圣之工 "(1:2),在道德层面使教会圣洁。当彼得描述圣洁的具体形态时,基督徒团契的图景尤为突出。 一旦我们通过 “顺从真理”——即福音—— 得以洁净自己, 就会“弟兄们” 怀有 “真诚的爱”, 从而 “从心里彼此切实相爱”(1:22)。1

彼得接着告诫我们远离一系列恶行。新约中许多其他罪行清单类似, 乍看之下他的列举似乎随意,仔细研读便会发现每项恶行都在摧毁群体。"所以, 你们除去一切恶毒

斯科特·麦克奈特,《彼得前书》NIV 应用注释 (大急流城:Zondervan 出版社,1996 年),84-85 页。

“一切诡诈、虚伪、嫉妒和各样毁谤的话”(彼得前书 2:1)。随后,彼得又颂扬了诸如怜悯、温柔、谦卑、 以及好客 (3:8;4:9) 这些经文,2:4-10, 阐述了基督教团契的基础。

1 彼得 2:4–10 中, 这位使徒他所建立的教会“被拣选的族类,... 神的子民”赋予他们以色列地位。 通篇经文, 彼得强调归向基督就是加入这个群体:“你们来到主面前, 就像活石,建造成为灵宫,圣洁祭司, 借着耶稣基督奉献神所悦纳的灵祭”2:4–5)。 彼得告诉我们,我们的一切都建立在耶稣的本质之上。

我们归向基督——石, 我们成为石(2:4-5)。

耶稣是房角石(2:6),神将我们建造在他之上,成为"属灵的殿宇"(2:5)。

耶稣拣选者 (2:4), 我们成为拣选的人(2:9)。2

Some theologians speak of the elect as individuals, but Scripture typically calls Israel “the elect” or “chosen” of God.3 Isaiah says that the Servant of the Lord, the Messiah, is the Chosen One, in whom and by whom all others are chosen (Isa. 42:1; 49:7). At the transfiguration, the climactic revelation of Jesus’ glory, the Father declares, “This is my Son, my Chosen One” (Luke 9:35 esv), a truth that Israel’s rulers mocked at the crucifixion (23:35). ...

In 1 Peter 2, the descriptions of Jesus are singular and the descriptions of his people are plural. From this we learn that following Christ entails joining his community, the church. “To accept the Redeemer means also accepting the people whom he has redeemed.”4 The freelance Christian, who follows Jesus but is too good, too busy, or too self-sufficient for the ...

The Greek is eklektos, meaning “elect” or “chosen,” in 1 Peter 1:1; 2:4; 2:9. ...

The Old Testament occasionally regards individuals such as David and Solomon as God’s elect, but that is the exception, not the rule. ...

C. E. B. Cranfield, I & II Peter and Jude (London: SCM Press, 1960), 62–63. ...

church, is a walking contradiction. In the old covenant, God set his people apart from the nations. In the new covenant, he sets us apart as we live among the nations. But all of Scripture testifies that believers cannot be godly or fruitful without joining God’s family and realizing some form of separation from the world. ...

Above all, the church is Christ’s community. Peter begins: “you come to him (1 Peter 2:4). Apart from Jesus, there are religious and moral commu- nities, but the church is the one community centered on Jesus rather than morality or spirituality. In both Psalm 118 and Isaiah 28, God declares that he will lay down a foundation stone and build on it (1 Peter 2:6–7 quotes verses from both texts). ...

Jesus claimed to be this foundation stone in his climactic conflict with the chief priests, elders, and Pharisees. Jesus compared them to tenants who take a well-prepared vineyard, but refuse to deliver the owner’s share of the crop to him. They expand their rebellion when they mistreat the master’s servants and then kill his only son, hoping to seize the inheritance (Matt. 21:12–46). As Jesus explains the parable, he quotes Psalm 118:22–23: “The stone the builders rejected has become the capstone; the Lord has done this, and it is marvelous in our eyes” (Matt. 21:42). ...

The imagery evokes a specific scene. Before erecting a building, stone- masons search piles of rocks for boulders with the size and shape to become foundation stones, cornerstones, and capstones. Jesus depicts them as dis- carding one after another. They finally see the perfect stone, which represents the Messiah. But when they examine it, they reject it, too. So Israel’s putative leaders searched for their Messiah, but when they found him, they judged him a false prophet (or worse) and killed him. Peter heard Jesus’ teaching; he remembered and found additional “stone” sayings.5 In Isaiah 28:16, quoted in 1 Peter 2:6, God declares, “See, I lay a stone in Zion, a chosen and precious cornerstone.” ...

Peter twice refers to Jesus as being chosen and precious, highly valued, or honored (“precious” was a sound translation, until it began to imply weakness).6 When we come to this living stone, we become living stones, incorporated into God’s “spiritual house.” ...

See Acts 1:15–20 for an early instance of Peter’s searching Scripture to good effect. ...

The Greek adjective entimos is traditionally translated “precious,” that is, “of great price or value.” But “highly valued,” “honorable,” or “distinguished” is a better translation, since “precious” ...

Peter’s teaching also has roots in the Gospels, where Peter confesses to Jesus, “You are the Christ, the Son of the living God” (Matt. 16:16). Jesus replies, “I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church.” This line contains a play on words (16:18). The name Peter means “rock” or “rocky” in Greek. Jesus makes subtle use of this, for when he continues, he uses a slightly different word when he says that “on this rock I will build my church.” The Greek (transliterated) reads, “You are Peter [petros], and on this rock [petra] I will build my church” (petros and petra have nearly the same sense, roughly like rock and stone). ...

We wonder what Jesus means by this small shift. In a sense, Peter is the rock of the church, and yet not quite. Observe that Jesus did not tell Peter, On you I will build my church,” but on this rock I will build ...

If Jesus had wanted to refer to Peter, who is standing right there, there would have been a less convoluted way to do it.7 We conclude, therefore, that Peter is not, in himself, the rock of the church. Instead, Scripture says that Jesus is the church’s cornerstone and foundation. Thus, when Peter confesses Jesus, he continues to build a foundation that has Jesus himself as the chief cornerstone (Eph. 2:19–20; Matt. 21:42; cf. Matt. 18:18). Peter himself is not the rock, because he is too unstable. Indeed, a few minutes later, Peter rebuked Jesus and told him that he must never go to the cross. Later, he denied Jesus three times. Later still, his bout of legalism, mixed with fear, caused a crisis in the Galatian church (Gal. 2). A church built on Peter would be shaky indeed. But Peter did have a pivotal role as the spokesman for the apostles. He testified to Jesus in Matthew 16, then at Pentecost, and then in other moments in the life of the church. ...

So Peter’s status depends on what he says. When he forbids Jesus to go to the cross, he is a stumbling stone, but when Peter, eyewitness and apostle, proclaims that Jesus is Christ the Savior and Son of God, he is a rock. His confession is foundational for the church. When pas- tors proclaim the apostolic message, they build on Jesus, the prophets, and the apostles. If anyone hears this testimony and believes, he or she becomes a living stone, part of a living temple. Yet we are more than ...

often means “cute,” pejoratively, in recent use. For uses of the Greek, see Luke 7:2; 14:8; Phil. 2:29. ...

Alan McNeile, The Gospel according to St. Matthew (London: Macmillan, 1915; repr., Grand Rapids: Baker, 1980), 151. ...

a temple; we are also “a holy priesthood, offering spiritual sacrifices” (1 Peter 2:5). ...

In the Old Testament, the break between priests and people was sharp. God had set apart the priests to offer sacrifices and forgiveness, to pray for the people, and to instruct them in his truth (Jer. 37:3; Mal. 2:7; Heb. 5:1–5). But now we are all priests (cf. Rev. 5:10). We all pray and ask forgiveness. We have access to God, without intermediaries or permission slips (Rom. 5:2). We can understand God’s Word because we know God and he leads us into all truth (Jer. 31:33–34; 1 John 2:27). ...

As priests, we offer “spiritual sacrifices” that are “acceptable to God through Jesus Christ” (1 Peter 2:5) As we know, God accepts perfect sac- rifices, and ours are flawed; therefore, we offer them through Christ, who forgives and perfects them. ...

Still, Scripture suggests how our sacrifices can approach his standard. Peter has already defined holiness as a way of life, not a series of singular events (1 Peter 1:15–16). Long ago, Asaph and David called prayer, thanks- giving, and a repentant heart a sacrifice (Ps. 50:14, 23; 51:17). Paul calls the dedication of mind and body a “living sacrifice” (Rom. 12:1). In Peter, spiritual sacrifices are first “something offered up to God as worship . . . and, second, a pattern of social conduct.” The worship always precedes conduct.8 So Peter’s sacrifices are the daily devotion of obedience and praise to God, as well as “practical ministry to the needs of men (Heb. 13:15–16).”9 ...

A Message That Divides ...

As Peter said, Jesus is God’s chosen stone, set in Zion, so that “the one who trusts in him will never be put to shame” (1 Peter 2:6b). This is an eschatologi- cal promise. Because of our union with Jesus, believers can recapitulate his life pattern. We may, like Jesus, endure rejection and shame, although God won’t let that last. God proclaims, “Those who honor me I will honor, but those who despise me will be disdained” (1 Sam. 2:30). Peter applies this to Jesus. He identifies Jesus as God’s chosen and honorable cornerstone, and states that we must respond to him correctly: ...

J. Ramsey Michaels, 1 Peter, Word Biblical Commentary 49 (Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 1988), 101. ...

Alan M. Stibbs, The First Epistle General of Peter (London: Tyndale, 1959), 100. ...

Now to you who believe, this stone is precious. But to those who do not believe, ...

“The stone the builders rejected has become the capstone,” ...

and, ...

“A stone that causes men to stumble ...

and a rock that makes them fall.” (1 Peter 2:7–8) ...

Jesus is the cornerstone of God’s work on earth, but humans may either trust or reject him. If we trust him, we will share in his honor and never bear lasting shame. In Jesus’ day, many rejected him. Today, both the religious and the godless do the same because he fails to meet their criteria: he is too harsh, too demanding, too supernatural. But those who reject him will fall (1 Peter 2:8). Jesus says that when they stumble over him, he falls on them and crushes them (Matt. 21:44). ...

Of course, all believers stumble momentarily. John the Baptist and the Twelve faltered when Jesus’ life took unexpected turns (e.g., Matt. 11:2–3; 26:56). But we do not stumble so as to fall. The Lord steadies us (Ps. 37:24). Indeed, Peter warns his people of impending trouble, so that they will not be surprised and falter. In democratic lands and in nations with a Christian heritage, tolerance and pluralism are widespread, so it is safe to be a Chris- tian. But cultures change, and subcultures (e.g., research universities) can have their own spirit. We should be prepared to suffer rejection and shame with Christ if the day demands it. ...

If we are unprepared, we may falter, as the disciples did at Jesus’ arrest. But those who permanently reject the gospel fall permanently, “which is also what they were destined for,” Peter concludes (1 Peter 2:8b). Jesus states that people reject his kingdom for several reasons, such as satanic activity, distraction, self-righteousness, and blindness. The decision is theirs, yet God’s sovereign hand stands behind all (Matt. 13:1–16; 23:13–28). ...

Some say that the idea that some were “destined” to fall gives us an unjust God. Paul addresses this charge in Romans 9. Drawing on Genesis and Exodus, he relates that God told Moses, “I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion” ...

(Rom. 9:14–15). Mercy is God’s gift. He does extend his favor to one (Jacob) over another (Esau). But the accusation of injustice rests on a false definition. God always gives everyone what he or she deserves in the sense that he never punishes the innocent. He is perfectly fair in his retributive justice. It is true that he does not treat everyone the same way by giving identical gifts to all. Some are born strong, intelligent, or beautiful; others are not. ...

Some have loving parents; others do not. Still, the Lord never gives anyone less than he or she deserves. ...

Suppose a teacher gives a fair but difficult test in mathematics. Out of fifty students, none pass the test. The teacher could give everyone the grade that he or she earns. Or he could give everyone a low but passing grade. Again, he could give a high grade to some students as he wished, perhaps favoring the poor or the hardworking. If he let the other students keep the grades they earned, there is no injustice. Everyone received what he or she earned; some received more. The term for that concept is mercy, not injustice. ...

In election, God does something like the math teacher. Humanity stands before God like a class of failing students. Not one is righteous. Not one seeks God. But God sends his Spirit to the elect, regenerates them, convicts them of sin, and leads them to Jesus. Westminster Confession of Faith 3.5 explains that God, according to his eternal purpose and good pleasure, predestines some to life. He does this by his free grace, not even because he foresees our faith or good works. ...

When God sees sinners such as Jacob and Esau, neither deserves his favor. Neither seeks God. If God lets one (Esau) go his way and pursues the other for salvation (Jacob), he has shown mercy to the latter, but has done no injustice to the former. God is never unjust. Indeed, his person defines justice. If we say, “I want justice,” we ask for condemnation. His mercy is our sole hope. Further, anyone who knows enough to debate the question of God’s justice in salvation has heard the gospel promise and should call on Christ, for “everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved” (Rom. 10:13), and no one who trusts in him will be put to shame (10:11; cf. 1 Peter 2:6). ...

A People for God ...

We have seen that 1 Peter 2:4–10 shows how the identity of Christ estab- lishes the identity of believers. But two of Peter’s statements press deeper ...

into the Christian’s identity. Because Jesus chose us, Peter informs us, “You are a chosen people, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people belonging to God” (2:9a). ...

These honorary titles come from Exodus 19, when God constituted Israel as a nation, and Isaiah 43, when God promised to reestablish Israel after the exile. These are foundational statements about Israel. By applying them to his church, Peter tells Gentiles that the privileges of Israel are now theirs. They may be aliens and exiles, cast out and rejected by their former people, but God has taken them in. They are “a chosen people” (1 Peter 2:9). The phrase “a chosen people,” derived from Isaiah 43:20, also takes us to 1 Peter 2:4 and 2:6. As God chose Jesus, now he has chosen us. All of God’s people, whether Jew or Gentile, are one community by faith. ...

The phrase “a royal priesthood” may well be translated as “the king’s priesthood.” We are priests (1 Peter 2:5) who belong to the King and there- fore share in Jesus’ sovereign rule. We stand before God in strength as we serve and represent him. ...

God called Israel his “holy nation” in Exodus 19:6, since he had conse- crated Israel for a life with him. He ordered physical distinctives in food, clothing, and circumcision. These indicated and promoted Israel’s spiritual distinctives. Israelite culture was not totally different, but it was appreciably different, and that helped to set the “holy nation” apart from “the nations,” that is, the pagan world.10 ...

Peter also called the church “a people belonging to God” (1 Peter 2:9). The Greek is literally “a people for possession.” The phrase is from Isaiah 43:21, where God calls Israel “my chosen people, the people whom I formed for myself (esv). People is almost a technical term for Israel in its dedication to God. This “possession” is more than mere ownership. God possesses his people because he redeemed them. He exhorts them, “Fear not, for I have redeemed you; I have called you by name; you are mine” (Isa. 43:1). ...

The privileged state of God’s people leads to privileged action. Because God has redeemed us and we are his, we are heralds who “declare the praises of him who called [us] out of darkness into his wonderful light” (1 Peter 2:9b). It is striking that Peter calls Gentile converts a “people” and a “holy nation.” These were labels that had distinguished Israel from the Gentiles. ...

See Christopher J. H. Wright, Old Testament Ethics for the People of God (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2004). ...

Now Peter applies the same labels to the Gentiles. They had practiced a pagan polytheism that Peter calls “the empty way of life handed down to you from your forefathers.” For them, debauchery, carousing, and idolatry were so common that it seemed strange when anyone departed from them (1 Peter 1:18; 4:3–4). But things have changed: “Once you were not a people, but now you are the people of God; once you had not received mercy, but now you have received mercy” (2:10). Let the contrasts resonate: once dark- ness, now light; once alone, now in God’s family; once awaiting judgment, now receiving mercy. ...

We see that 1 Peter 2:4–10 is filled with quotations and allusions to the Old Testament. This shows that Peter assumes that his people, former polythe- ists and largely illiterate, will know key Old Testament terms and promises. It is now their book, their story and rule. Since no ordinary person in that day could dream of owning a copy of Scripture, this knowledge came in one way: by coming to church and listening as leaders read the Law and the Prophets. If Peter expected his new converts to gain this knowledge of Scripture, how much more should we lay hold of it. Many of us grew up in the faith, and many of us swim in a sea of Bibles and aids to its understand- ing. Let us therefore read, use the resources that enhance understanding, and apply what we learn to ourselves. ...

The Question of Identity ...

In other times and cultures, questions of identity did not have the urgency, the need for regular review, that many experience today. At one time, a man or woman belonged to a certain city and family, a certain social group and guild. Today, most of us live far from our hometowns and families. At one time, roles and livelihoods were set from birth or adolescence. Today, we have multiple jobs, even multiple careers. All of this erodes confidence in our identity. ...

In Western nations, the educated live in a meritocracy, so that our identity and our achievements are confused with one another. We define others—and let others define us—by our strengths, weaknesses, and accomplishments. So we live with the pressure to perform. We are measured and measure ourselves by this, even though so much rests on forces far outside our control. Immi- gration patterns raise or lower wages. The careless acts of distant financiers ...

and governments create environments where profits come easily one year and disappear the next. What happens then, if our earnings and titles define us? ...

In Peter’s day, identity came from externals: town, occupation, lineage, and gender. That is more stable, but not necessarily better, than our way. It was espe- cially painful for Gentile converts who were reviled for leaving old customs and associations; they lost much of their identity.11 Further, in following Jesus, the Gentiles chose a leader of dubious paternity from an impoverished city. He was a landless artisan and untrained itinerant preacher who died by public execution. But the Father reversed all that and crowned Jesus with honor by raising him from death. Now, Peter says, those who follow Jesus receive his honor.12 ...

The traits of Jesus (1 Peter 2:4, 6) ...

The traits of Jesus’ followers (1 Peter 2:5–12) ...

A living stone ...

Living stones (2:5) ...

Rejected by humans ...

Exiles, aliens (2:11) ...

In God’s eyes, chosen and elect ...

In God’s eyes, chosen and elect (2:9) ...

In God’s eyes, valued, honored ...

In God’s eyes, royal, beloved (2:9, 11) ...

Table 6.1 Traits of Jesus and his followers ...

I write during a season of economic turmoil, when so many individuals have lost their jobs and seen the value of homes and investments plummet. It is tempting to feel rejected, ashamed, even worthless. Some Christians even say things such as “I’ve lost half my net worth.” Nonsense! Financial reversals cannot deprive us of a scintilla of our worth. Our financial assets fluctuate, but our real worth never changes. If we build on Christ, our worth cannot change, since it rests on his unchanging honor, imputed to us. ...

It is foolish to find our identity in uncertain things such as wealth. Rather, as Paul directs, “If we have food and clothing, we will be content with that” (1 Tim. 6:8). If we get away from the city, from the advertisements and the crowds, and walk in the wilderness for a day, it’s easy to see. Warm, dry clothes, water, a sandwich, and an apple are enough. ...

Joel B. Green, 1 Peter (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2007), 56–58. ...

Adapted from ibid., 59–60. ...

I once received a promotion to a position that some Christians consider prestigious. A fine Christian man thrust his hand into mine and said, “Con- gratulations; now you are an important person.” I understood his motive and sentiment, but he was wrong. Because we belong to Jesus, we are important whether we have a title or not. ...

John Calvin wisely observed that we are most teachable when most miser- able, for “our ruin compels us to look upward” to God. Further, “our very poverty better discloses the infinite benefits of reposing in God.” We know ourselves and our worth when we look into God’s face.13 A disciple’s identity begins with Jesus. God has chosen Christ, valued and loved him eternally for his person and his work. Faith unites us to him, so God treasures and loves us as his restored people. ...

It is Peter’s style to move constantly from indicatives to imperatives, from God’s actions to our response. If we review the commands of 1 Peter 1–2, we see that they address our attitudes more than our behavior: ...

Because we are redeemed, we should “hope fully on the grace to be given you when Jesus Christ is revealed” (1 Peter 1:13). ...

Because God judges everyone impartially and redeemed us with Jesus’ blood, we should live “in reverent fear” of displeasing him (1:17–19). ...

Because we have been born again by God’s Word, we “crave pure spiritual milk,” God’s truth, which stands forever (1:24–2:2). ...

Our passage adds that Jesus is the cornerstone, rejected by men, but honored by God. When we trust him, we share his honor and join his fam- ily. That is where we must find our identity. Let us define ourselves as God does. It is more true and secure, and it liberates us from self-inflicted shame. Let us remember, finally, that each calling and privilege comes from faith in Christ. We are God’s chosen ones, living temples, royal priests because he is all these things first. He is God’s elect, the Priest “who combines in His person royalty and priesthood.”14 All his privileges become ours as our faith unites us to him. ...

John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, trans. Ford Lewis Battles (Philadelphia: West- minster, 1960), 1.1–2. ...

Stibbs, First Epistle General of Peter, 105. ...

7

Pilgrims and Citizens ...

x BeCex z:xx–x7 ...

Dear friends, I urge you, as aliens and strangers in the world, to abstain from sinful desires, which war against your soul. Live such good lives among the pagans that, though they accuse you of doing wrong, they may see your good deeds and glorify God on the day he visits us. (1 Peter 2:11–12) ...

ince humans are social beings, we long to “fit” our surround- ings in ways great and small. Consider parties: no one wants to come dressed formally to a casual event or casually to a ent. Even if we are dressed correctly, some of us worry about ...

the theme of the evening. A sports enthusiast might hesitate to attend a poetry-and-lute-themed soiree. Academics will avoid a party hosted by a celebrity-gossip monger. And almost everyone quails at the thought of an event held at the home of a theologian. The social man hates to be out of place, yet everyone has walked through a door and felt, like a punch to the belly, “These are not my people, and I don’t belong here.” In our passage, Peter tells us that the “I don’t belong here” sensation is endemic to the experience of Christians in this world. ...

The Life of a Pilgrim ...

In the first sentence of this letter, Peter told his churches that they are “strangers” (niv) or “exiles” (esv) in this world. First Peter 2 repeats the principle that God’s people do not fully belong in this world. We are “aliens and strangers” (niv) or “sojourners and exiles” (esv) because Jesus redeemed us from a futile life and gave us a new one. By repentance and faith, we became God’s people, his prized possession. By the same act, we necessarily became—and ought to remain—partially estranged from this age. ...

First Peter 2:11–17 occupies a pivotal place in Peter’s epistle. The author tells his readers in 1 Peter 1 that they have been purified by the Word of truth, that is, the gospel. He then presents a theology of the Word of God, which concludes with the central exhortation to “crave pure spiritual milk” (2:2). After presenting a concise theology of the Word, Peter turns to a theology of the Christian’s identity in 2:4–10. We are living stones in God’s spiritual house. Further, we are a holy and royal priesthood, a chosen people, a holy nation (2:5, 9). ...

First Peter 2:11–17 does not present the gospel, but assumes and builds on the message that we are “redeemed from the empty way of life handed down to you from your forefathers . . . with the precious blood of Christ” (1:18–19). Because we belong to Jesus, because he is our Judge and King, Redeemer and Lawgiver, we have become “aliens and strangers in the world” (2:11). We belong to a Ruler who transcends this world’s rulers and follow him, so we inevitably experience a partial alienation from this age. Because Jesus is Lord (1:3), all earthly lords take second place. ...

Nonetheless, we must live beautiful lives “among the pagans” (1 Peter 2:11–12). To fashion a beautiful life, we must know how to live as free men operating in a hierarchical world (2:13–17). Thus, 1 Peter 2:11–17 reviews the status of believers (2:11–12) and then moves to their right conduct in this world—a way of life that is consistent with our identity and follows our convictions (2:13–17). ...

Never Fully at Home ...

Given his status as apostle and elder, Peter could have commanded his readers to behave a certain way. Instead, he appeals to them as “dear friends,” saying, “I urge you, as aliens and strangers in the world, to abstain ...

from sinful desires, which war against your soul” (1 Peter 2:11). The “alien” is a long-term resident, someone not born where he now lives, yet someone who has lived in the new land for a long season. The “stranger,” by con- trast, is a temporary resident, the traveler whose stay is shorter.1 But both terms suggest that believers belong elsewhere. When Peter calls disciples “aliens and strangers,” he means that we are never fully at home in this world. Strangers have no permanent residence. Aliens rarely hold posi- tions of power and privilege. Indeed, there is no sign that Peter’s people ever held special rank. ...

彼得观点挑战了某种关于基督徒其文化之间关系的既定观念 。 数十年前,理查德·尼布尔将基督徒对待周遭社会可能采取的态度进行分类,并宣称 ——某种合理—— 加尔文主义者的立场是"基督改造文化"2。这意味着我们既不逃离也不回避"世俗世界"。我们相信自己应当批判文化、 参与文化, 甚至 "创造文化"3。加尔文主义者颇为自豪地确认他们的信念——借用理查德·尼布尔的话说——"基督改造文化"。那些相信基督徒能够改造文化的人, 不会抵制 "世俗世界"。 我们抗拒关于疏离感无力感的论调。 我们察觉并摒弃任何否定现世思想的苗头。 我们旨在通过忠实存在于文化中,来参与并改变文化。4

但彼得称我们为"客旅与寄居者"的宣告,召唤我们追溯圣经对文化的观点,并评估我们对待文化的自信态度。起初,亚当在这个世界完全自在,因为上帝将世界塑造成人类完美的家园。终有一天,天地将在"死后之生后的生命"中合而为一。5 但在创世与堕落之间,和谐已然消失。无论迷失者是否感到疏离,他们确实与上帝的世界隔绝。保罗解释道,得救之人已脱去 "从前行为旧样式"(以弗所书 4:22)。 正如

彼得 ·H.· 戴维斯,《彼得前书注释》 大急流城: 伊尔德曼斯出版社,1990 年), 第 95 页。

H.· 理查德 · 尼布尔,《基督与文化》1951 年初版; 重印本, 纽约: 哈珀 & 罗出版社,1975 年)。

安迪·克劳奇,《文化创造:重寻我们的创造使命》(伊利诺伊州唐纳斯格罗夫: 校园出版社,2008 年)。

詹姆斯 · 戴维森 · 亨特, 改变世界: 后现代社会中基督教的反讽、 悲剧可能性 纽约:牛津大学出版社,2010 年),第 243–52 页。

N.T. 赖特, 喜出望外: 重新思考天国、 复活教会使命 纽约:哈珀柯林斯出版社,2008 年),第 148–52 页。

因此,按照彼得的说法,我们不可避免地会与那些仍然沉迷于偶像崇拜、纵欲和酗酒的家人邻居产生冲突(彼得前书4:1-5)。

信徒们因此都会经历至少某种程度的所处时代疏离, 无论那个时代如何。 亚伯拉罕自己迦南地" 寄居的作客的 "(创世记 23:4)。 同样, 彼得子民之所以成为 " 客旅 ", 是因他们 (字面上)" 住在外邦人中 "(彼得前书 2:12)。惊人的宣告。 我们不禁疑惑: 彼得子民就是外邦人, 且在信主前完全浸淫外邦生活, 如何在外邦人中客旅?他们信靠耶稣时,归属一个崭新国度——国度没有疆界,种族国籍界定。 信徒不再属于 " 外邦 "; 我们神的子民, 神的国度 (2:9)。 因为我们来自异乡,在自己的文化中常感格格不入。我们走进一场对话,读到一篇关于新潮流的文章,常会对所见所闻感到惊诧。 我们观看一部热门电影时,惊讶地发现它突然变得低俗或放荡,不禁疑惑:"谁会认为人们喜欢这个? 怎么可能他们对的, 居然大批观众愿意接受叫好?" 听到一个下流笑话时我们诧异:"究竟什么样才会觉得好笑?" 有时我们不禁追问,

“这真的我的土地, 我的文化吗?”

但请注意, 彼得既没有主张绝望, 也没有提倡逃避。 在经历令人失望的选举结果后, 美国人总会发出要搬去加拿大塔希提岛的空洞威胁。 但事实上, 我们并不会真的搬去加拿大, 因为加拿大并不比美国好多少。 我们当然不会去斐济、 塔希提岛、 或是法属波利尼西亚的其他任何岛屿。 那些岛屿距离太远, 气候过于炎热, 而且(最重要的是)即便那里的污染类型有所不同, 污染程度也丝毫不会更轻。

彼得提出了两种应对方式面对这个充满诱惑嘲弄那些抵制诱惑之人世界 第一 我们战斗 第二 我们活得漂亮

准备迎接战斗

首先,彼得劝诫我们这些客旅和寄居的人,"要禁戒肉体的私欲" 这些私欲灵魂争战 " 彼得前书 2:11 和合本 )。 作为寄居者, 我们努力远离文化中呈现的罪恶道路。 事实上, 每个社会迎合某些 "罪恶的欲望" 呈现特定的

罪孽如同看似合理极易沉溺。 信徒既要戒绝这些罪孽, 也要与之抗争,因为它们在与我们为敌。

本杰明·富兰克林在自传中写道,他年轻时曾一度坚持素食主义,拒绝食用任何肉类。 某日乘船时,风突然停了。百无聊赖的水手们开始钓鱼,捕获了不少鳕鱼。当煎鱼的香气伴着饥饿感袭来时,富兰克林动摇了。素食原则与生理欲望在他意志中激烈交锋。这时他注意到渔民处理鱼时,发现有些鳕鱼腹中还有小鱼。于是他得出推论:既然鱼可以互相吞食,人为何不能吃鱼呢? 富兰克林对自己的逻辑很满意,便吃了一些鱼,并补充道:"作为理性生物真是方便了, 因为任何找到编造一个理由。"6 富兰克林生活奉行这一原则,总能为自己想做的事巧妙地找到理由或借口。可悲的是,这种合理化行为在人类中很普遍,并非富兰克林独有。

但门徒既不为自我放纵寻找借口,也不轻易向诱惑屈服。我们与肉体争战,因为它也在与我们争战。

It behooves us to define what both Peter and Paul call the “passions of the flesh” (1 Peter 2:11 esv). Paul, using the same language, lists fifteen “desires” or “works of the flesh” in Galatians 5. He starts with sexual immorality and debauchery and ends with drunkenness and orgies, yet the bulk of the list looks more like sins of mind, will, and emotions: idolatry, hatred, discord, dissension, jealousy, rage, and selfish ambition (Gal. 5:19–21). Thus, we commit sins of the flesh with all our faculties, physical or mental. Therefore, while we resist physical lusts, we also wage war against idolatry, discord, rage, selfish ambition, and even sins such as despair. Peter knew his culture was corrupt, but he never let his people blame the culture for their problems. There are evil desires in us (James 4:1–3). Therefore, we must “abstain from sinful desires,” whether they be physical or spiritual (1 Peter 2:11). Sins that begin in the mind and the body are equally evil, equally troublesome. The apostles suggest this by labeling both classes of sin the same way: “passions ...

Benjamin Franklin, Autobiography (New York: Henry Holt, 1916), 68. ...

of the flesh.” And we wage war against all of them because all wound our spirit and grieve God’s Spirit. ...

Since Peter says that the Christian life is like war, we should be prepared for battle. We should be ready to fight our misdirected physical appetites and to combat bad moods, evil ambitions, and unruly emotions. As they sit in the counselor’s chair, pastors see too many people who are surprised by desires that entice them to forsake wedding vows and duties to children, friends, and relatives. We must endure in the contest with our unruly desires, lest we grow weary of battling sin and surrender to it. ...

For centuries, Christian leaders, including the Reformers and the Puritans, maintained that it is not beneficial for men and women to get whatever they want too readily. If we are always warm, comfortable, and well fed, we come to expect it. If we always have comfortable clothes and good food at regular intervals, it adds to our happiness in certain ways, but after a while we expect comfort and complain, perhaps bitterly, when it is missing.7 Custodians and administrators expect complaints if the temperature in their buildings falls to 67º (freezing!) or rises to 73º (boiling!). How absurd. In days past, kings could not conceive such comforts; today, woe to all who let the temperature escape our notion of the comfort range. Too much ease makes us soft and selfish. In his album of that name, David Byrne (of Talking Heads) said that we need some “sand in the Vaseline.” It might make us tougher and more prepared for battle, even with sin. ...

Leading a Beautiful Life ...

A good, holy life is desirable intrinsically, for its own sake. We should also be holy because God is holy (1 Peter 1:16). But Peter also thinks of the good life instrumentally: “Keep your conduct among the Gentiles honorable so that whenever [or in case] they speak against you as evildoers, they may see your good deeds and glorify God on the day of visitation” (2:12 esv).8 ...

Joel Kupperman, Six Myths about the Good Life: Thinking about What Has Value (Indianapolis: Hackett, 2006), 16–19. ...

This is the esv, except for the term whenever. The phrase hina en katalalousin humōn can be rendered several ways. If we read it temporally, then “when they slander”; if concessively, then although they slander”; if conditionally, then if they slander. But if in the phrase hina en we give the relative pronoun its weight, the translation must be “in a case in which” or “whenever.” See ...

J. Ramsey Michaels, 1 Peter, Word Biblical Commentary 49 (Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 1988), 117; ...

J. N. D. Kelly, A Commentary on the Epistles of Peter and Jude (New York: Harper & Row, 1969), 105; ...

When we lead a beautiful life among secular people, we can anticipate a positive result, at least occasionally. In chapter 3, Peter teaches that pagan men “may be won over without talk by the behavior of their wives” (3:1, 4–5). But Peter, knowing that slander “is always a favored weapon of perse- cutors,” expects that pagans will commonly (not constantly) vilify Chris- tians.9 Whenever pagans do resort to slander, the believer counters with good deeds, a life so attractive that the pagans will at least glorify God for it one day—on the day of visitation. This is a dense statement, and several ...

subpoints merit notice. ...

First, Peter expects us to stay in this world, living “among the pagans” (1 Peter 2:12a). We may be strangers in this world, but we don’t flee from it. Second, Peter says that “the pagans . . . accuse you of doing wrong” ...

(1 Peter 2:12), rightly assuming that Christians would often be slandered. Tacitus and Suetonius were leading Roman historians who wrote around ...

a.d. 100. Tacitus said that Christians were “loathed for their vices.” Nero blamed Christians for the great fire of Rome because they were “hated for their abominations” and adhered to a “pernicious superstition.” After the fire, Christians were arrested and slain “not so much on the count of arson as for hatred of the human race.”10 Suetonius stated that Nero punished Christians as a sect professing a new and impious “superstition.”11 Their crimes? Some accused them of cannibalism, in a pernicious, possibly will- ful misconstrual of the Lord’s Supper. The charge of “hatred of the human race” grew from their refusal to join in worshiping the emperor or local patron deities. We would simply say that they refused to compromise their faith. But if refusal to worship false gods is hatred of humanity, then false charges are inevitable. ...

Third, however, the believer must live so well that the pagan can make no valid accusations. An excellent life shines as an alternative to pagan ways. The antidote is (literally) a beautiful way of life. The Greek behind the phrase “live such good lives” in 1 Peter 2:12 is literally “having a beau- ...

Max Zerwick, Grammatical Analysis of the Greek New Testament, 3rd ed. (Rome: Editrice Pontificio Istituto Biblico, 1988), 707. ...

C. E. B. Cranfield, I & II Peter and Jude (London: SCM Press, 1960), 73. ...

Tacitus, The Annals, trans. John Jackson (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1962), 4:283–85 (bk. 15, para. 44). ...

Suetonius, “Nero,” in The Twelve Caesars, trans. Robert Graves (Baltimore: Penguin, 1962), 217 (para. 16). ...

tiful lifestyle.” Peter’s term for good (kalos) typically means “beautiful” or “attractive,” rather than “morally good” (for moral goodness, the New Testament typically uses agathos). And his word for life is not the common bios or zōe but anastrophē, which denotes a way of life.12 The Christian life entails more than law-keeping. It is a way of life, a style that slowly attracts people to its beauty. ...

Christians should have a beautiful life. Such a lifestyle might include a good supply of social graces, since kindness and politeness can be tokens of genuine love, not mere social conventions. But the beautiful life tran- scends law, personality, and manners. Secular friends might notice that we have a good time and laugh hard without needing alcohol. At a restaurant, our server hears us talking about our faith; she also notices that we treat her with dignity and leave a generous tip. There is a beauty in the way in which some godly women always seem to have a friendly meal for the hungry and a soft bed for the weary. There is a beauty in the life-affirming response that so many Christians have when they learn that their unborn child has Down syndrome. Medical personnel often offer such parents a genetic counselor who presents “options.” At such times, we are glad to be aliens. We belong to another homeland, one that has another code, a code that extends love to every unborn child. All these things are beautiful, although we might not recognize it, since our style is often more visible to others than it is to us. ...

At best, we perform acts of kindness and grace automatically, just as we automatically make the turns on the familiar road heading home. These habits seem to be a factor in the happy surprises that await us on the day of the Lord. Then Jesus will bless his people, saying, “Come, . . . take your inheritance, the kingdom prepared for you For I was hungry and you ...

gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink.” God’s people will wonder, “When did we do these things?” We will not remember because they became our way of life. We fed the hungry as a matter of course (Matt. 25:34–39). ...

Jesus points out that this lifestyle is the result of our union with him. The life he gives becomes “a spring of water welling up to eternal life” (John 4:14; cf. John 15). Paul says that these changes are also the fruit of the Spirit. ...

The word anastrophē is a Petrine favorite. Eight of its thirteen uses in the New Testament are in 1–2 Peter. ...

According to Peter, a beautiful life is also the result of our battle against sin (1 Peter 2:11). ...

A noble life can inspire others by giving them a model of righteousness that incarnates God’s wisdom (James 3:13). Peter promises that our good life will be recognized, even if not in this life. The pagans may glorify God for us “on the day he visits us” (or, literally, “the day of inspection”), that is, judgment day (1 Peter 2:12). Then the Lord will review mankind and reveal all that we have done and all that it means. The pagans might glorify God for the beautiful lives of Jesus’ disciples before then, but at least it will happen on the last day. ...

A Sober View of Culture ...

Since we are “aliens and strangers in the world” (1 Peter 2:11), we can- not fully approve the triumphalistic-sounding motto “Christ transforms culture” without caveats. Calvinists do rightly stress the lordship of Christ over all of life. Fallen as our culture is, we prefer to critique it rather than condemn it. We prefer to engage it and to transform it if we can, rather than flee from it or accommodate ourselves to it. In Culture Making, Andy Crouch persuasively argues that cultural engagement is more than criticism of secular worldviews. Worldviews must be embodied in things as hard to pin down as language and high art, and in concrete things such as houses.13 Historically, the Reformed view of culture is optimistic. ...

But Peter’s comments, in 1 Peter 2:11–12 and later in 4:4–6, should adjust our view. He warns against too much optimism and too much familiarity with the world. This world can be an implacable foe, steadfastly opposed to the influence of Christ. We will never fit perfectly in this age. We cannot laugh at some jokes, cannot enjoy some parties, cannot take some books seriously. We may never fully agree about what is funny, what constitutes a good topic of conversation, and what counts as a good argument. Peter, writing during a time of persecution, may see this better than we do. We want our light to shine, but we must accept that some do not want to see it. So, then, our goal is to live a good life whether any human recognizes it or not. The great English architect Christopher Wren operated on this prin- ...

Crouch, Culture Making, 53–64. On possible approaches to culture, see 78–98. ...

ciple. He had his workmen polish the back of the heads of the sculptures that ornamented a great cathedral. Someone asked him, “Why all this work for something that no one will ever see?” Wren answered, “God will see it.” ...

The Life of a Resident14 ...

因为基督徒是世上的客旅,所以永远不会完全属于这个世界。然而我们确实居住于此,我们的行为至关重要。因此彼得教导门徒应当如何公众场合行事为人 "你们为主的缘故,要顺服人的一切制度:或是在上的君王,或是君王所派、 罚恶赏善臣宰 "(彼得前书 2:13-14)。

寄居者的首要责任: 顺服在上掌权者

我们顺服权柄神的缘故。设立世上的权柄, 因此我们应当顺服设立的人间权柄。 我们顺服一切权柄: 首先君王皇帝, 因为至高的权柄,(理论上) 一切权柄他而出(参太 8:8-9)。15 在君王之后, 我们还需顺服总督,那些地方各级行政官员, 包括财政官、 行省总督、 以及基层执法官。 每个国家都有最高基层治理者, 我们必须顺服他们, 甚至包括那些管理道路、 商贸、 军队、 市场, 乃至 (现今) 停车排水系统的地方专员。 最直接统治我们的权力机构往往是地方性的。这些权力存在于工作场所、学校、家庭,甚至教会之中。

民主国家, 人们很容易对此产生抵触, 尤其自己支持的候选人落选时。 但每个人都可以"为主缘故"(彼得前书 2:13)顺服。 至少, 我们应当尊重职位本身, 并为执政者祷告。彼得写下这些话时, 尼禄正担任皇帝。 很少有人比他更不配得这个位置。 除了他的残暴行径外, 他在统治期间大多时间治理不善 其他皇帝热衷于自封为神 既然彼得命令教会尼禄臣服 那么我们的执政者采取我们认为错误的立场时 ,我们当然也该顺服。

人们很容易想用公民这个词,因为它比平淡的居民更显尊贵。公民一词暗含着特权阶层和归属感,这与彼得的初衷相悖。 我们是客旅,不是归人。

希腊语中的 basileus 原意为"国王"彼得所处的语境中 它指的是"皇帝"。

"屈服"许多来说刺耳词。日常用语中, 我们往往在被压制甚至羞辱时才会屈服。在某些对抗性体育项目中,摔跤手格斗者被对手可能造成伤害锁技控制时,就会选择认输。

顺服圣经时代语言中并不带有强烈的负面含义。 顺服 (hupotassō)确实传递了掌权者可以下达命令 他人应当遵循的意思,二者存在差异。 提交可以一个服从温和术语 提交意味着他人权威指导安排自己生活 也就是说 一个提交的人仍然拥有一定的自由 因为可以决定如何跟随领导者 16 在圣经中,信徒对人类权威的服从始终是部分且有限的;从不要求盲目服从。 早期基督徒践行公民抗命,"当社会的要求"试图凌驾于"主的要求"之上时。基督徒在原则上时刻准备反抗,面对邪恶命令时敢于说不,因为"我们必须顺从神,而不是人"(使徒行传5:29)。沃尔夫冈·施拉格总结我们的立场时说,基督徒"在掌权者面前是自由的,通常这种自由表现为...顺服"。

尊荣”(参 1 林前.7:17–24)。19

一位州长对其人民的职责

治理者肩负着双重使命:" 惩治作恶之人 褒扬行善之士" 彼得前书 2:14)。 通过惩处犯罪维护社会秩序 举世公认的政府职责。 即便存在严重缺陷的统治者 也能维持秩序," 保持某种符合异教良善标准的表象,这总比陷入混乱要好"20。我们或许不认同他们 方法,政府确实行善。 存在刑事法律

莱昂哈德·戈佩尔特,《彼得前书注释》,约翰·E·阿尔苏普译(大急流城:埃尔德曼斯出版社,1993 年),174–76 页;斯科特·麦克奈特,《彼得前书》,NIV 应用注释系列(大急流城:宗德万出版社,1996 年),143–45 页。

麦克奈特,《彼得前书》144 页。

因此,敏锐的统治者总是以忧虑——即便不是怀疑——的眼光看待基督徒。 他们深知基督徒效忠于高于国家的存在,并且原则上愿意为这份忠诚受苦。 参见康拉德·罗素,《英国内战原因》(牛津: 克拉伦登出版社,1990 年)。

沃尔夫冈·施拉格,《新约伦理学》,大卫·格林译(费城:堡- 垒出版社,1988 年),第 278 页。

戴维斯, 彼得前书》 第 100 页。

约中, 第 21 章彼得与保罗一同主张 异教统治者权利义务惩罚恶行 (《罗马书》13:1-4)。

尽管我们很少留意这一点 当局常常特别表彰那些为社区提供特殊服务的人。布鲁斯·温特指出,碑铭和文献证据表明"统治者不仅会赞扬和嘉奖那些为城市谋福利的善举......他们还承诺会同样公开表彰未来从事类似公益事业的人"。22 彼得认为掌权者应当嘉许良善之事 因此 无论我们掌握的是政治、经济、学术还是家庭权力,都应当用它来褒奖得体的行为。

其他经文提到统治者还有更多职责。他们必须保护民众免受敌对势力的攻击。他们应当遵守当地律, 因为他们应当自己人民中的一员(申命记 17:14-20;对照列王纪上 21 章)。

Justice is “God’s primary demand on human authorities.”23 They must judge fairly, shunning bribes, so that they may be impartial in their judg- ments. They must protect the rights and property of all, but especially of the poor, the needy, and the weak (Deut. 16:18–20; Ps. 72:1–4; Jer. 22:2–5). Rulers must not become too fond of the privileges of their office, lest they betray their calling. Isaiah chastises judges who are better at mixing drinks than providing justice (Isa. 5:22–23). Jeremiah denounces King Shallum, son of Josiah, for building great houses and pursuing dishonest gain rather than administering justice (Jer. 22:13–17). Ezekiel flogs rapacious “shepherds” who attend the flock only to plunder it, while ignoring their wounds and hunger. Proverbs warns rulers of the somewhat milder problem of distraction: ...

It is not for kings . . . to drink wine, not for rulers to crave beer, ...

lest they drink and forget what the law decrees, and deprive all the oppressed of their rights. . . . ...

Christopher J. H. Wright, Old Testament Ethics for the People of God (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 2004), 289–92. ...

Bruce W. Winter, “The Public Honouring of Christian Benefactors, Romans 13:3–4 and 1 Peter 2:14–15,” Journal for the Study of the New Testament 34 (1988): 87ff.; W. C. van Unnik, “A Classical Parallel to 1 Peter 2:14 and 20,” New Testament Studies 2, 3 (1955–56): 198–202. ...

Wright, Old Testament Ethics, 269–75; the next two paragraphs follow Wright. ...

Speak up for those who cannot speak for themselves, for the rights of all who are destitute. ...

Speak up and judge fairly; ...

defend the rights of the poor and needy. (Prov. 31:4–5, 8–9) ...

Failures notwithstanding, even flawed governors do much that is good. The threat of punishment of evil prevents anarchy. Governors defend a nation’s borders, build roads, and promote public order. Even if we disap- prove of a governor’s goals or methods, even if a government is corrupt, we should respect it (1 Peter 2:17). In a democracy, political activity is a duty as well as a privilege. At a minimum, we vote in elections, carefully considering the candidates and the issues, comparing all to God’s will. ...

The next verse, 1 Peter 2:15, summarizes the result of obedience to the previous commands: “For it is God’s will that by doing good you should silence the ignorant talk of foolish men.” Peter is well aware that believers might suffer because of persecution and false condemnation. Still, we do good as much as we can. This includes obedience to civil law (unless it requires sin), but there is more. We should “do good” in ways small and large, from picking up trash to volunteering in homeless shelters. Peter knows that accusations will never finally disappear, but hopes that good deeds may silence the most ignorant and foolish slanders. If we live well enough, people simply refuse to believe the lies. ...

Using Freedom Correctly ...

Peter anticipated that some of his readers would object that the demand of submission to human rulers vitiates the principle of the freedom that believers have in Christ. They might say, “But I am a free man, liberated by Jesus. How can I submit to human rule?” To this Peter replies, “Live as free men, but do not use your freedom as a cover-up for evil; live as servants of God” (1 Peter 2:16). We are free from sin, from the law, and from death, but that is no excuse for insubordination. The Christian is free from sin, but is the slave of God: “For he who was a slave when he was called by the Lord is the Lord’s freedman; similarly, he who was a free man when he was called is Christ’s slave” (1 Cor. 7:22; cf. Rom. 6:22). As Martin Luther observed, “A Christian is a perfectly free lord ...

of all, subject to none. A Christian is a perfectly dutiful servant of all, subject to all.”24 ...

There are many ways to abuse freedom. In Peter’s day, some wanted to rebel against Rome, an idea that was doomed to fail and lacks biblical warrant. Others simply wanted to follow their own ideas or desires. Some Corinthians adopted the slogan “All things are lawful for me” (1 Cor. 6:12a esv). They considered themselves liberated from all laws and plunged into an array of sexual sins (1 Cor. 5–6). Paul retorted that even if, in some unusual sense, “all things are lawful,” it is also true that “not everything is beneficial” (6:12b). Some “freedoms” hurt others. Some freedoms enslave the one who exercises that freedom (6:12c). We must use our freedom correctly: to love neighbors and to serve God. He brought us out of slavery for something more than self-indulgence. ...

The Duty of Honor: Love the Brothers, Fear God, Honor the King ...

Finally, Peter says, “Show proper respect to everyone: Love the brother- hood of believers, fear God, honor the king” (1 Peter 2:17). Thus he reiterates the summons to honor the emperor and governors, but rearranges it as four commands that govern many relationships. Structurally, honor comes first and last, while love and respect (literally, fear) stand in the middle. (Thus the commands have the simplest chiastic structure: ABBA. The first and last commands are cooler, commanding honor. The interior imperatives are warmer, requiring love and fear.) First, we “honor all men,” treat everyone with a respect they deserve, if only because they bear God’s image. Second, we love the brothers, showing affection and offering aid to all within the family of faith. Third, we fear God. This is affectionate fear, not cringing or servile terror, that we owe to a person we respect. We revere the Almighty. Fourth, we honor the king—or the emperor, president, or prime minister. ...

The particular way we apply the political commands will vary from nation to nation. If we live in an autocratic nation, the duties of submission and honor are clear enough. Today, many Christians live in democracies where submission and honor take gentler forms because of the nature of our form ...

Martin Luther, Martin Luther’s Basic Theological Writings, ed. Timothy Lull and William Russell (Minneapolis: Augsburg Fortress, 2005), 393. ...

of government. If the constitution and the authorities tell us that we have a right and duty to choose our leaders by examining the qualities of the can- didates and the content of their policies, then it is right for us to choose. If our critical analysis leads us to reject a governor’s policies, we should vote him (or her) out of office. But we must still honor that authority, even while we protest or vote against it. ...

In a democracy, governors themselves say that we need not adopt every policy or yield to every government plan. We can resist. Civil disobedience is even an option, although we must bear the consequences of rebellion. Indeed, our governments often invite us to get involved, individually and collectively. This is a right that Peter’s poor and powerless people never enjoyed, a right that should increase our desire to honor our governors. Sadly, in democracies, too many people (even Christians) take pleasure in the harshest criticism of the authorities. ...

Our political order allows, even recommends, candid disagreements, especially when great issues of the economy and justice, war and peace, life and death, are debated. But we must disagree honorably, respectfully. We may think of Martin Luther King’s protests against racism and segregation. His people ignored some laws, including laws about who sits where on a bus. Rallies swelled to vast numbers, but the protests were nonviolent and respected the authorities even as they opposed those same authorities. We, too, can speak and work to reform the ills of our society, remaining peaceful, loving our foes through accurate critique and respectful talk. ...

Meanwhile, we should remember that the greatest forces are not politi- cal and economic but personal, mental, and spiritual. For that reason, the church of Christ is a force in this world, even if we never fully belong here. Better yet, we are a force precisely because we have a dual citizenship. So let us give honor, respect, justice to all, always submitting to the Lord Jesus first, and to every human authority as we then can. In this way we silence slanderers, live as servants of God, and honor the King of kings, even Jesus. ...

8

A Life Shaped by the Crucified Christ ...

x BeCex z:x8–z5 ...

Slaves, submit yourselves to your masters with all respect, not only to those who are good and considerate, but also to those who are harsh. For it is commendable if a man bears up under the pain of unjust suffering because he is conscious of GodTo this you were called, because Christ suffered for ...

you, leaving you an example, that you should follow in his steps. (1 Peter 2:18–19, 21) ...

rom 1 Peter 2:11 to 4:11, the apostle Peter constantly instructs the faithful in their social obligations. Peter insists on giv- ing this sustained attention for both pragmatic and intrinsic matically, his people were a tiny and nearly defenseless minor- ...

ity, a group of aliens and exiles in their own culture (2:11–12). Further, a pagan convert to the faith found that his contemporaries were surprised at his departure from their way of life and maligned him for it (4:1–6). So Peter foresaw that believers would be increasingly exposed to persecution in coming days and wanted to help them to minimize their exposure to ...

trouble (3:10–17; 4:12–16). Perhaps that is part of the reason why Peter tells his people to submit to some authority five times in just thirty-five verses (2:13, 18; 3:1, 5, 22). But the call to submit is more than a survival strategy. God has woven authority structures all through society, indeed through all creation, and we needlessly harm ourselves and miss the bless- ing of walking in his ways if we ignore those structures. Social ethics are essential both to Christian living and to the cause of Christ. If a fleet is about to sail, the sailors need to know how to avoid bumping into each other.1 Peter’s social instruction enhances both the public reputation and the inner peace of the church. ...

Peter’s social teaching emphasizes submission to masters and governors. Because Peter’s people were aliens in their own culture and because they refused to worship the emperor, it was imperative that they submit to govern- ing authorities wherever they were. Thus, they could “silence the ignorant talk” of their accusers (1 Peter 2:11–17). Still, apart from the social benefits, it is intrinsically good to yield to the authority that God establishes, “for he is God’s servant to do you good” (Rom. 13:1, 4). ...

The Duty of a Christian Servant ...

After describing the social obligations of all disciples in 1 Peter 2:11–17, Peter commands, “Slaves, submit yourselves to your masters with all respect, not only to those who are good and considerate, but also to those who are harsh” (2:18). This is necessary “because Christ suffered for you, leaving you an example, that you should follow in his steps” (2:21). ...

In order to apply Peter’s message, we need to know the status of slaves in the empire. Their life differed both from that of ordinary laborers today and from that of the slaves in the Americas in prior days. Roman slavery was not race-based. Slaves did not look, talk, or dress in a distinct way. Most slaves were poor, but almost everyone was poor. ...

The term translated “slaves” in 1 Peter 2:18 denotes household slaves.2 There were several kinds of slaves in the empire. People became slaves through war, poverty, or birth to enslaved parents. Slaves could be well educated. A slave might be a doctor, teacher, shipbuilder, or even city trea- ...

Peter Kreeft, Three Philosophies of Life (San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 1989), 17. ...

First Peter 2:18 uses oiketēs, the term for household slaves, not doulos, the generic term for slaves. ...

surer.3 But nobler tasks were exceptional. Most were household slaves, and their lot varied with the status and character of their masters and mistresses. Field slaves worked hard, and house slaves lacked freedom. ...

American slavery was worse than Roman slavery in most ways. Roman slaves could own property and follow their traditions. Although a slave’s life expectancy was short, many slaves gained their freedom eventually.4 American slavery was race-based, had limited paths to freedom, and rested on kidnapping, which is a sin—and a capital crime in Moses’ law (Ex. 21:16; Deut. 24:7). While the Mosaic law tolerated slavery, it regulated potential abuses. For example, if a master so struck a slave as to cause major injury, the slave went free (Ex. 21:26). The law also had several paths to manumission. For example, all slaves normally went free every seventh calendar year (Deut. 15:12–18). Roman slaves also had several paths to freedom. ...

Still, the life of a slave was difficult. Aristotle opined that slaves were inferior by nature. Since they were unable to govern themselves, Aristotle claimed, they were better off under a master, just as domestic cattle were better off than wild cattle. Further, he said, it was impossible to mistreat a slave, because slaves were mere property.5 This was the consensus, although Seneca observed that men “of distinguished birth” sometimes became slaves through war. Social rank, he said, “is only a robe that clothes us.” So someone could have slave status while “his soul . . . may be that of a free man.”6 But Seneca was the exception. ...

Legally speaking, slaves were not persons. They had virtually no rights. A slave was the property of his or her master. Therefore, a master could sell a slave at will, separating him or her from family and home. People said that “a slave is a living possession,” a “talking tool,” and “property with a soul.”7 ...

In Matthew 25:14–15, a master entrusts one to five talents to his slaves. One talent equaled twenty years’ wages. ...

S. Scott Bartchy, Mallon Chrēsai: First-Century Slavery and the Interpretation of 1 Corinthians 7:21 (Missoula, MT: Society of Biblical Literature for the Seminar on Paul, 1973), 66. ...

Aristotle, Politics, in The Basic Works of Aristotle (New York: 1941), 1131–35 (bk. 1, chaps. 4–6). ...

Seneca, “Epistle 47, On Master and Slave,” in Moral Epistles (Epistulae Morales), trans. Richard Gummere (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1967), 1:307, 311. ...

Richard Horsley, “Slavery in the Greco-Roman World,” Semeia 84 (2001): 41–55; M. I. Finley, Ancient Slavery and Modern Ideology (New York: Viking Press, 1980), 93–122; P. R. C. Weaver, Familia Caesaris: A Social Study of the Emperor’s Freedmen and Slaves (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1972), 205. ...

A household slave could hope for economic security, decent treatment, and a position as a leading slave in a great house.8 But a slave’s body belonged to his master. Demosthenes reported that slaves were “answerable in their body for all offences while freemen . . . can protect their persons.” That is, slaves were liable to a beating for all offenses.9 A master or mistress could take any slave, male or female, to gratify the owner’s sexual desires. How often this happened, we don’t know.10 We do know that some slaves endured terrible privation to buy their freedom.11 ...

Given that slaves were barely regarded as human, we see that Peter elevates slaves simply by addressing them. Although some slaves were literate, most Greco-Roman writers thought it pointless to address them, since they didn’t see them as responsible moral agents. ...

Clearly, the status of contemporary employees is not the same as that of Roman slaves. Today’s workers can feel trapped by social and economic forces. While we should not minimize the resulting distress, our rights and freedoms keep us far from slavery. Nonetheless, millions are still enslaved throughout the world today. Most live in lawless countries, but they are scat- tered across the continents. Further, some people live in situations akin to slavery, even in the West. Children who suffer hidden abuse at the hands of violent parents and immigrants with no knowledge of their rights are like slaves if they are defenseless, powerless, and trapped. ...

Peter’s first word to slaves is: “Slaves, submit yourselves to your masters with all respect” (1 Peter 2:18). Peter is not endorsing or blessing slavery. Rather, he tells believing slaves how to live within a pervasive, entrenched institution. Peter commands slaves to submit “with . . . respect”—literally, ...

Finley, Ancient Slavery, 101–7; Dale B. Martin, Slavery as Salvation: The Metaphor of Slavery in Pauline Christianity (New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1990); Bruce Winter, “St. Paul as a Critic of Roman Slavery in 1 Corinthians 7:21–23,” Pauleia 4 (1998): 1–20. A curious indicator of this appears in the name Secundus in a list of men who accompanied Paul in Acts 20:4. Secundus was a popular slave name that essentially meant “second-ranking slave.” The assumption is that it was an honored position in a large household. ...

Demosthenes, “Against Androtion,” trans. J. H. Vince, in Demosthenes III, Loeb Classical Library (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1935), 22.55; Horsley, “Slavery,” 41–44. ...

Bruce W. Winter, After Paul Left Corinth: The Influence of Secular Ethics and Social Change (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2001), 110–13, 122–23; Albert A. Bell, A Guide to the New Testament World (Scottsdale, PA: Herald Press, 1994), 234–37; Horsley, “Slavery,” 44–45. Winter notes two limits on sexual activity with slaves: (1) social disapproval of excess and (2) a consensus that a free man must not be passive in homosexual acts with a slave. ...

霍斯利,《奴隶制》,48-52 页。 温特 作为批判者的圣保罗》描绘了一幅相对温和的奴隶制图景。

“怀着敬畏”虔诚。 最终, 信徒敬畏的上帝, 而非世人, 彼得指出 (3:14-15)。但上帝设立所有人间权威,因此我们为上帝之故而顺服他们。我们对主人的尊重,归根结底是对上帝的尊重——正是祂设立并授权一切权柄(罗马书 13:1-4)。

即便当今奴隶自由劳动者之间不存在精确类比关系 彼得训导适用于所有服侍严苛乖戾主人之人 。邪恶当权者虽非奴隶主 下达有害命令 惩罚所有违抗者 我们应当这样思考: 倘若上帝 既然奴隶都能遵从更严苛的命令,对残暴的主人恭顺服从,那么我们当然也能忍受苛刻的上司,毕竟他们的权力更为有限。

然而,我们仍觉得这道命令令人却步,或许并未完全意识到其中缘由。我们遭遇一位暴躁不公的上司感到受其压制时,很容易以怒制怒,以无礼回敬无礼。 然而彼得要求信徒以敬重之心顺服家中职场中难以相处的领导者。 我们可将这一原则延伸至学校、 教会政府机构。可遵行之处当顺服;必须违抗, 也当存谦卑敬重之心承担后果(使徒行传 5:17-33)。

西方国家多数公民抗拒彼得的教导。 我们珍视独立精神, 惯于批判权威,推崇叛逆者。 除非认为领导者德才兼备,否则我们不愿顺服。

大学期间,我在一家度假酒店工作,担任"乔治"的助理,他负责监管所有餐饮运营。 乔治是个勤奋、精明、机智,但有缺陷的人。可能聒噪挑剔,身上带着笨拙感, 衣着总是过时,区别对待。世界划分为两个阵营: 朋友与敌人,对后者始终怀有戒心。 面包房主管就是他的敌人。 无论做什么无法取悦他。 某天她做了苹果肉桂煎饼。 乔治派我去要一点面糊尝尝 舀了 突然怒吼 "不够甜 " 命人退回 匆忙面糊送回面包师那里 随后带回加糖的版本。"太甜了!"他火冒三丈,"再送回去。"第三次,面包师灵机一动。她故意把空罐子摇得哗啦响,拿着勺子装模作样搅拌,原封不动送回面糊。老板再次品尝时,竟眉开眼笑:"完美。要不是我盯着,那女人什么都做不好。"

乔治能力出众待人大多公正 他的过失

不过是些无伤大雅的小冒犯琐碎烦扰 远非严重伤害 学生们

认为他不够酷,专业人士则觉得他夸夸其谈。正是这些细微的缺陷 让人们一想到给予尊重浑身不自在 他们似乎在想:"如果换成我做他的工作,我会更善待他人,大家工作起来也会更愉快。"

乔治这类人的不满根源在于一种根植于我们文化而非圣经的工作观念。我们认为工作不应仅提供任务和收入,更应成为我们成长、 获得成就感、 发掘发展自身天赋场所, 从而实现个人价值。 道格拉斯·舒尔曼在其专著《天职》中写道,大学生将工作视为"实现自我的领域"和"最佳的自我实现途径"。通过勤奋工作和咨询职业专家,学生们认为自己理应找到令人满足的职业。因此,他们认为自己永远不会为乔治那样的人工作。

Schuurman 将这种现象称为一个只适用于那些天生聪慧、 拥有支持性成人社交网络、 并能获得精英教育 (以全球标准衡量) 人群的神话 即便西方, 中产阶级底层民众鲜少拥有这样的机会。 近年来 (截至本文撰写时), 美国最常见的职业收银员和零售销售助理,这两种岗位都无法提供特别有意义的工作体验。 即便是上流社会的成年人容易夸大自己的选择权 显然 我们需要重新思考职业观。

事工者

所有这些并不意味着工作应该痛苦的。 上帝赐予祂的子民才能,我们运用祂所赐的能力服务他人时, 理应施展技能获得快乐。《罗马书》12:6-8 教导我们要自由喜乐地运用恩赐,这似乎暗示着工作中应当充满喜乐。

但彼得和保罗,连同马丁·路德与约翰·加尔文,都将我们的工作、 以及我们的家庭关系, 视为 "非自由选择的领域, 而是天意为每个人安排的命定"。 社会学家称这种现象为先赋主义 。也就是说,一个人重要的社会关系主要不是"个人选择"的结果, 而是基于阶级、 出身因素赋予的。

道格拉斯·J·舒尔曼,《职业:辨明人生使命》(大急流城:埃尔德曼斯出版社,2004 年), 第 117-121 页。

性别。 一个人与其说主动选择自己的天职, 不如说关系网络发现自我。” 天职的真谛不在于选择完美的配偶、工作、 朋友居所,在于这些人际关系视为 " 上帝安排来服务神与邻舍的神圣位置"。13

Of course, God still grants us freedom to escape oppression, if we can. Paul told slaves, “If you can gain your freedom, do so” (1 Cor. 7:21). Jesus told his disciples, “When you are persecuted in one place, flee to another” (Matt. 10:23). But sometimes we can’t move. Then, Peter says, “submit your- selves to your masters with all respect” (1 Peter 2:18). Each word is instructive. First, everyone must submit. The concept of submission assumes that this world has God-given structures and authorities. We must organize our lives within those structures. Even if we suspect that our leaders are wrong, we should subordinate ourselves to legitimate commands. We should yield to ...

the authority and defer to it. ...

The niv, like some other translations, uses a verb and reflexive pronoun to translate a one-word Greek participle in the phrase “submit yourselves” in 1 Peter 2:18. The participle (hupotassomenoi) has the middle voice, which can be reflexive. The middle voice makes perfect sense in this case. It sug- gests that we act on ourselves: we tell ourselves to submit.14 Regardless, our submission should be voluntary. We should yield to leaders, rather than making them force their will on us. We yield to people, laws, and institutions that have authority because the Lord placed them over us. He ordains the leaders, teachers, and parents who govern the world under him. ...

We submit with respect. When people feel trapped at work, they obey the boss because they need to keep their jobs. But respect is more than obedience. We should respect leaders even when we disagree with their decisions. We should respect and pray for political leaders even if we voted against them, disagree with their policies, and doubt that they can govern well. ...

The early English Puritans lived in a hierarchical society, under often- hostile bishops and kings. They reflected deeply on the duties of subor- dinates to flawed superiors. All agreed that leaders gain their authority through their God-given positions, not superior character or achievements. ...

Ibid., 117. ...

Nigel Turner, Grammar of New Testament Greek (Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark, 1963), 53–57. Yet some scholars see “submit yourselves” as overtranslation, since the middle voice generally lacked the full reflexive sense in New Testament usage. ...

William Perkins observed that master and servant may be equal in Christ, in the inner man, yet in the “civil order,” masters rule and servants “must be subject.”15 Speaking of marriage, William Gouge said that the principle holds even if the husband was “a beggar” before marriage and is, after mar- riage, “a drunkard, a glutton, and a profane swaggerer.” Even if the wife is sober, wealthy, and religious, she must respect her husband because of “the civil honor which God hath given unto him.”16 Further, her outward submis- sion must be matched by an inward reverence. The mantle of authority for husbands, ministers, parents, and masters is bestowed by God, not earned, although a wise leader will strive to enhance his authority by using it wisely.17 The term submit (hypotassō) requires definition. Submit ordinarily means “to subject, subordinate, or bring under control” (Acts 19:35; Phil. 3:21; Heb. 2:5, 8). Yet to submit is not precisely to obey. To obey is to do what is commanded, willingly or not. Submission can also be willing or unwilling, but the concept can be more nuanced. In Paul’s teaching, children obey their parents, and slaves obey their masters, but wives submit to their husbands (Eph. 5:22; 6:1, 5; Col. 3:18–22). To submit, in that setting, entails more freedom or latitude than obedience. Submis- sion can include freedom to arrange affairs under general directions or principles, not necessarily under precise commands. So wives have freedom to consider how to follow their husbands, especially since mar- riage is a close relationship that is essentially parity-based. A worker, similarly, may have freedom in the way he gets things done, even while ...

fulfilling tasks given by the authority. ...

The word submit implicitly refers to authority structures. The Romans believed that authority structures stretch up and down in a chain. In the chain, lower authorities had to yield to higher ones, ending with the emperor and the gods above him; a Roman centurion expresses this concept in Matthew 8:8–9. ...

Scripture says that all authorities are answerable to God, and must there- fore be disobeyed if their commands contradict his. Because no human authority is absolute, no summons to submit to it is absolute. If an authority ...

William Perkins, Works (Cambridge, 1616–18), 3:698. ...

William Gouge, Of Domesticall Duties (London, 1622), 272–77, 355, passim. See also Thomas Gataker, Certaine Sermons (London, 1635), 2:190. ...

Gouge, Duties, 273. ...

gives a wicked command, it must be refused. Peter himself made this point during a crisis in the first days of the church: “We must obey God rather than men!” (Acts 5:29). The call to submit always has this caveat: We obey the authorities unless they contradict God. ...

Nonetheless, rulers have real authority. Peter tells slaves to submit to mas- ters. Elsewhere, Scripture commands all believers to submit to authorities. If the term authority (exousia) refers to humans, it typically has the nuance of legitimate rule (Rom. 13:1–3).18 If we yield to authorities, we yield to rulers ordained by God. By contrast, we do not have to submit to every power, for a power can have brute strength—a gun, for example—and no legitimacy (Heb. 2:14). There is no moral obligation to bow to brute force. ...

Some people quickly ask, “So when is it time to rebel?” The question is common in nations born in rebellion against colonial powers and in nations that currently suffer oppression. People ask, “Did God really appoint all authorities?” Authorities and powers take their place by many means. Emperors claim power through conquest, intrigue, murder, and inheritance. A master might gain his place by inheritance, bribery, or merit. If an author- ity was hired or appointed, we can ask whether the decision was based on skill and training or favoritism. ...

But in the final analysis, the Lord appoints all authorities. He even has purposes for evil leaders. Consider the words of Daniel, who long served a flawed monarch: “The Most High is sovereign over the kingdoms of men and gives them to anyone he wishes and sets over them the lowliest of men” (Dan. 4:17). Paul stated, “He who rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgment on themselves” (Rom. 13:2). ...

Calvin said that there is a magistrate who is “a father of his country, . . . ...

[a] shepherd of his people, guardian of peace, protector of righteousness, and avenger of innocence—he who does not approve of such government must rightly be regarded as insane.”19 We must submit to deserving authorities. We should resist the inclination to second-guess everyone and everything. It is easy to criticize and hard to remember how readily we err. ...

The Greek term most often translated “authority” (exousia) refers to human authorities relatively rarely. It often refers to spiritual powers and authorities or to legal rights. ...

John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, trans. Ford Lewis Battles (Philadelphia: West- minster, 1960), 4.20.24. ...

Some authorities are careless, self-indulgent, and corrupt wastrels. These, too, are ordained by God. Speaking through the prophet Daniel, God told ruthless, egotistical Nebuchadnezzar, “The God of heaven has given you dominion and power and might and glory; in your hands he has placed mankind and the beasts of the field Wherever they live, he has made ...

you ruler over them all” (Dan. 2:37–38; cf. 5:18–19). ...

Other Scriptures teach that there is a time to resist evil authorities. If possible, the Reformers knew, the righteous will not simply rebel, but ally themselves with other authorities, with “lesser magistrates,” whether civil or ecclesiastical. If we must stand against “the fierce licentiousness of kings,” we should do so not as private individuals, but through the authority of “magistrates of the people [who were] appointed to restrain the willfulness of kings.”20 Thus, the Christians who attempted to assassinate Hitler did so in allegiance with faithful German military leaders.21 So there is a place for godly rebellion, but too many people are quick to doubt authorities and to declare that they have a right to rebel. ...

Peter declares, “It is commendable if a man bears up under the pain of unjust suffering because he is conscious of God” (1 Peter 2:19). The phrase “it is commendable” literally reads “this is grace.” Grace here does not mean “unmerited favor,” but “that which counts with God” and with which he is pleased. (Jesus said something similar in Luke 6:32–34. There the Greek word grace is usually translated “credit” [niv, rsv, nasb].)22 ...

No one likes to suffer unjustly. Still, the Lord is pleased when we endure unjust suffering, for it is a form of imitation of Christ. But there is no glory or praise if a slave endures punishment for doing evil: “How is it to your credit if you receive a beating for doing wrong and endure it?” (1 Peter 2:20a). Peter does not say that anyone deserves a beating. (Scripture tells masters that they should not threaten. If it is evil to threaten violence, surely actual blows are a greater evil [Eph. 6:9].) Peter is simply stating the obvious: We have no right to complain if we are punished for misdeeds. God is not ...

Ibid., 4.20.31. ...

Eric Metaxas, Bonhoeffer: Pastor, Prophet, Martyr, Spy (Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 2010), 380–500, passim. ...

J. Ramsey Michaels, 1 Peter, Word Biblical Commentary 49 (Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 1988), 139; Frederick W. Danker, ed., A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, 3rd ed. (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000), 1079, states in a note under the definition of charis that it can mean “that which brings someone (God’s) favor.” ...

impressed when we endure well-deserved punishment. It is praiseworthy if we, like Jesus, quietly endure injustice. ...

The Model of Christlike Service ...

彼得主要关注的并非正当反抗的特殊案例。 罗马人早已基督徒拒绝崇拜皇帝对他们心存疑虑。 倘若基督徒普遍造反, 只会加剧所有基督徒都是叛乱分子的猜疑。更重要的是,反抗行为忽视了耶稣生平的重要教诲。

根据彼得所言, 奴隶能忍受 "不公的苦难"(《彼得前书》2:19), 便能取悦上帝。 为何如此? 因为信主的奴隶并非活在主人会改过天真幻想中, 而是追随耶稣的生平与教诲。

奴仆当忍受虐待:"你们蒙召原是为此,因基督也为你们受过苦,给你们留下榜样,叫你们跟随他的脚踪行。'他并没有犯罪,口里也没有诡诈'" 彼得前书 2:21-22)。 这里包含两个教导。 首先, 几乎令人难以承受的是, 彼得告诉那些遭受虐待的人要效法耶稣的"榜样"或模式,并"跟随他的脚踪行"。23 我们应当循着他的足迹前行, 如同默默承受那不可言喻的仇恨与暴力。

其次, 耶稣成为我们的榜样, 是因 没有犯过罪” 彼得前书 2:22)。彼得耶稣朝夕相处长达三年之久。 倘若耶稣为自己私藏鲜美的鱼肉, 或对愚钝的门徒大发雷霆,彼得必会知晓。 然而彼得从未目睹耶稣言行上有任何过失。 他从不无理动怒,从不决策失误,更不以他人痛苦取乐。 他正当的自我追求从未被自私所玷污。 呼应诗篇 34:13以赛亚书 53:9, 彼得口中 “毫无诡诈” 彼得前书 2:22)。 因此耶稣即使在人类最难保持圣洁的领域——言语上(雅各书 3:8)——圣洁的。

彼得聚焦于耶稣典范性受难。 那些盲目、 怀恨在心的权贵杀害了耶稣。路人们也加入嘲弄辱骂的行列,即便他在承受惨烈的死亡时。 然而 “他被辱骂,还口;时候,威吓的话,将自己交托公义审判人的主” 彼得前书 2:23)。 耶稣忍耐

“榜样”一词 hupogrammos,指的是孩子们学习写字时临摹的标准字母形态。“脚步”一词 ichnos,则指代足迹。

在苦难中保持平静是我们的楷模。平静接受应得的惩罚毫无荣耀可言,默默承受侮辱,自己交托天父审判为我们伸冤, 这才真正的荣耀。 这正是耶稣所做的, 也是我们应当追求效法的。

法利赛人指控耶稣侍奉魔鬼(马太福音 12:22-26)。在十字架上,耶稣遭受嘲弄:“他救了别人……却救不了自己!现在十字架下来 我们(27:42)。 然而默默忍受 并将自己交托天父来为他洗清冤屈。

这个希腊语动词被翻译为 “他将自己托付” 原文是 paradidōmi 该词常见的含义是“ 交付”经常用于描述耶稣 值得注意的是, 耶稣恶人一次一次,将自己交托天父,直到永远:

犹大贪婪耶稣出卖祭司长 (马太福音 26:14-49)

祭司长嫉妒自义耶稣交给彼拉多 (马可福音 15:10)

彼拉多怯懦兵丁 (马太福音 27:26)

在十字架上,耶稣忍受嘲弄者的讥讽(彼得前书2:23),并期待复活时最终的昭雪(罗马书1:4),将自己交托给神以证清白。

对门徒而言,耶稣是因信靠上帝而忍耐苦难的至高典范。如同大卫,我们会遭遇轻率的赞美; 如同主, 我们也会承受无端的诋毁。 教会领袖常因无法完全辩解的明智决定遭受批评——为避免泄露机密事项;人们谴责我们说出他们需要却不愿听的逆耳忠言 ;他们责怪我们未能挽回破裂的婚姻。一位牧师曾说:"我一半时间都在为从未说过的言语从未采取行动道歉。" 维护声誉确有必要("美名胜过财富",箴言 22:1),但我们也当甘心信靠审判的上帝为我们伸冤。

让我们注意 效法基督新约一个普遍主题

一些新教徒对此谨慎态度 他们担心过分强调

效法耶稣的生平可能导致忽视他救赎性的死亡。24 但耶稣反复将自己作为一个榜样, 尤其忍受不公苦难方面:“要记念我对你们所说话:‘仆人不能他的主人。’ 他们逼迫了我,逼迫你们”(约翰福音 15:20;参马太福音 10:24-25;路加福音 6:40)。 保罗告诉我们,要像耶稣那样去爱 (弗 5:2)那样宽恕 (弗 4:32)如他那样以他人为先(腓 2:3-8)。彼得则教导长老们要"作群羊的榜样"(彼前 5:3)。

然而耶稣不仅一个榜样。 由于我们既不遵从神的诫命 ,也不效法耶稣的榜样,我们在神面前都是有罪的。但彼得说,耶稣"为你们受过苦"(彼前 2:21)。不仅如此,"他被挂在木头上,亲身担当了我们的罪,使我们既然在罪上死,就得以在义上活;因他受的鞭伤,你们便得了医治"(2:24)。

Jesus’ suffering is unique, for his death, and his death alone, is an atoning sacrifice, a penal substitution for sin. First Peter 2:24 quotes (and slightly rephrases) Isaiah 53, taking readers to the Old Testament prophecy that so clearly foretells Jesus’ substitutionary sacrifice: ...

But he was pierced for our transgressions, he was crushed for our iniquities; ...

the punishment that brought us peace was upon him, and by his wounds we are healed. ...

We all, like sheep, have gone astray, each of us has turned to his own way; ...

and the Lord has laid on him ...

the iniquity of us all. (Isa. 53:5–6) ...

Perhaps Jesus himself pointed the apostles to this passage after his resurrec- tion, when he “opened their minds to understand the Scriptures” that fore- told his suffering and resurrection (Luke 24:44–46 esv). The Westminster Confession of Faith 11.3 summarizes: “Christ, by his obedience and death, did fully discharge the debt of all those that are thus justified, and did make a proper, real, and full satisfaction to his Father’s justice in their behalf.” ...

Daniel M. Doriani, Putting the Truth to Work: The Theory and Practice of Biblical Application ...

(Phillipsburg, NJ: P&R Publishing, 2001), 201–6. ...

The concept of penal substitution is under attack today from liberals and even from so-called evangelicals. They claim that it is barbaric for God to punish sin by death. Worse, it is “cosmic child abuse” for God to kill his Son for the sins of others. These criticisms pervert both the problem of and the cure for sin. Sin leads to death intrinsically, not arbitrarily, because it separates us from God, the Author of life. Further, the principle of substitu- tion is not strange or cruel; it is a common element of human life. Lawyers speak on behalf of others. Family members offer to pay each other’s debts. And Jesus offered to pay our debt to God. God’s justice requires that sin be punished, and Jesus chose—as an abused child cannot—to pay for our sins, as 1 Peter 2:24 makes clear. ...

Above all, Jesus is not an arbitrary substitute. There is a real relationship ...

between us. If a member of my immediate family fails another person, it is sensible, not arbitrary, for me to pay what my spouse or child owes. Simi- larly, it is sensible, not arbitrary, for the traits of one family to be ascribed to another. For example, people regard me as a warm person, even if I might convey a touch of professorial detachment, because my wife is so warm. Similarly, people assume that she can answer almost any question about the Bible because she is united to me. By faith, the Christian is united to Jesus. Because of our relationship, it is sensible to ascribe his traits to us. ...

First Peter 2:21–24 is one highly structured, quasi-poetic sentence.25 A series of dependent clauses explore the master concept: “Christ suffered for you” (2:21). Peter says that he “committed no sin When he was reviled, ...

he did not revile in return [but] bore our sins in his body” (2:22–24 esv). ...

See how the passage interweaves truths about the person and the work of Christ. In his person, he is sinless and morally perfect. In his work, he atoned for sin. His work brings us salvation. Jesus is our trailblazer; he opened the path to life. By the same work, Jesus redeems us and sets us an example. ...

Everyone needs Jesus the Redeemer. Slaves—and all others who feel trapped by toxic masters—need Jesus’ example. Whenever anyone in power makes life difficult, Jesus shows the way. He never returned insult for insult. He trusted God to vindicate him. There is a place for justice, and everyone ...

Structurally, verses 22–24 form three dependent clauses. The first word in each clause and in each verse is hos—roughly, “the one who.” To paraphrase, Christ suffered for us, leaving an example, and “he is the one who committed no sin, and the one who, when reviled, did not revile in return, and the one who bore our sins.” ...

deserves dignity and protection. But it can be futile to seek our rights. (If a public figure decided to defend himself from all false accusations, he might finally do nothing else.) Jesus’ example teaches us that it can be best to absorb a blow. Imagine the result if we laid down our rights. Marriage disputes would fade. How can two people quarrel if both give up their rights and live a cruciform life? Church life would improve if people refused to become angry when they (or their child) did not get their way. Peace would flourish if we refused to take offense. ...

The lessons are clear. First, let us submit to all God-given authorities. Almost everyone has spent time under someone who seemed to lack the qualities essential to good leadership. It seems natural to balk at the prospect of submitting to the unworthy. Besides, humans are prone to rebel, even against noble authorities. Notice, then, that Peter does not say, “Submit to good leaders.” If we follow leaders only if we concur with their directions, the descriptive term is agree, not submit. ...

Peter exhorts us to submit “with all respect” (1 Peter 2:18). Authorities deserve respect for the sake of God, who placed them in their role, if not for their merit. Sadly, it is typical, in Western cultures, to criticize a leader even as we obey, and to disobey if we can. Even if we labor under a flawed authority, Peter says that we should be governed by our obligations, not the putative qualities of the leader. Remember, Jesus submitted to his parents despite their limitations. When we honor flawed leaders, we follow Jesus. The Father notices when we yield to masters who seem neither wise nor good. In 1 Corinthians 7, Paul encourages us that we can be content wherever we are, without changing marital status, ethnic status, or economic status. We can remain in our place if we remain with God, since he provides for us there (7:1–24).26 This principle neither denies that some authorities are evil nor excuses their misdeeds. God’s capacity to override evil cannot remove their culpability. On the contrary, because the Lord cares for the poor, lesser lords should, too. All who exercise authority should recall that they have an ...

authority and a Judge over them. ...

Gordon D. Fee, The First Epistle to the Corinthians (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1987), 29, 306–13; C. K. Barrett, A Commentary on the First Epistle to the Corinthians (New York: Harper & Row, 1968), 167–71; Gregory Dawes, ‘But If You Can Gain Your Freedom’ (1 Corinthians 7:17–24),” Catholic Biblical Quarterly 52 (1990): 691n32. See also Gustaf Wikgren, The Christian’s Calling, trans. Carl Rasmussen (Edinburgh: Oliver and Boyd, 1958), 1–7. Against these, S. Scott Bartchy argues that “calling” refers to salvation, not a life situation. See Mallon Chrēsai, 129–57. ...

It is possible to live well under a bad master. Besides, everyone belongs to someone, and everyone is enslaved to something. Seneca observed that one man “is a slave to lust, another to greed, another to ambition, and all men are slaves to fear.”27 Believers, whom God “bought at a price” (1 Cor. 7:23), now belong to Jesus, and that is liberating. So our first thought is not to change masters or jobs but to remain faithful, whatever our bonds may be. Jesus carries us through suffering under unjust masters. He set an example and, through his sacrifice, offers forgiveness when we fail. By his wounds we are healed, so we may live for righteousness, under the care of the Lord, ...

the Good Shepherd and Overseer of our souls. ...

Seneca, “On Master and Slave,” 311. ...

9

Beautiful Wives, Considerate Husbands ...

x BeCex 3:x–7 ...

Wives, in the same way be submissive to your husbands so that, if any of them do not believe the word, they may be won over without words by the behavior of their wives, when they see the purity and reverence of your lives. (1 Peter 3:1–2) ...

Vignettes of Marriage Today ...

Not long ago, I officiated at four weddings in the span of a month. Every bride and groom was a dedicated Christian. None had cohabited, all were young, and four of them had just completed college. With one exception, the eight sets of parents were happily married and supportive. We might call these weddings “normal,” and they are, in the sense that they adhere to God’s norms. But in Western society, the norm has become rare. ...

While the four brides prepared to marry, a popular television show detailed the spectacular wedding of a celebrated model/actress and a hand- some professional athlete. The program followed the newlyweds until they divorced after just ten weeks. They cited irreconcilable differences, but the program showed nothing worse than petty selfishness and insensitivity. ...

Why did millions watch? The typical fascination with beauty and wealth played a role, but many viewers were glad to see that however faulty their relationships might be, at least one couple looked worse. ...

Sadly, it’s hard to know whether my four weddings or the “reality” show is more typical today. At present, over 40 percent of all American babies are born outside marriage, with the percentage rising in every ethnic and social group. Despite a slight drop in recent years, over 40 percent of all marriages still end in divorce. While 72 percent of all adults (defined as anyone over eighteen years of age) were married in 1960, barely half are married today. That is, nearly 50 percent of adults are never married or formerly married (whether through divorce or the death of a spouse). The number of adults who never marry keeps rising, as does the number of women who never become mothers. Most couples now cohabit before they marry (a recent survey said that 70 percent cohabit before marriage), and many cohabit but never wed. Those who cohabit indefinitely want some kind of relationship, but nothing as strong as marriage. Many shun marriage because they fear divorce. People want to protect themselves, and marriage seems risky. Perhaps the great trauma of their childhood came the day that their parents announced, “We’re getting a divorce.” In their pain, they vowed, “I will never put my children through that.”1 Some stay married, no matter what happens, for the sake of the children. But some decide that the surest way to avoid divorce is to refuse marriage altogether.2 I pray that these sad statistics have reversed themselves and that my concerns are outdated by the time anyone reads my words. But whether Western society is recovering or plunging toward greater chaos, the woes of this century have something in common with the social set- ting of Peter. ...

The Contexts of 1 Peter 3 ...

The message of 1 Peter 3:1–7, with its double call to submission (3:1, 5), might strike the casual reader as chauvinistic or degrading. The passage lacks symmetry, since it has six parts instruction for women to one part ...

Susan Gregory Thomas, “Divorce Generation,” Wall Street Journal, July 9, 2011. ...

For analysis of trends and statistics, see Andrew J. Cherlin, The Marriage Go-Round: The State of Marriage and the Family in America Today (New York: Knopf, 2009). ...

for men. First Peter 3 says that wives should submit to their husbands, beautify themselves with good deeds rather than fine garments, and imitate godly women like Sarah, who called her husband “lord.” What shall we make of this? ...

Above all, we can’t dismiss Peter’s message as a temporary command, a concession, or an adaptation to the times that the church would outgrow. The message of Scripture always transcends its occasion. Furthermore, the text has no hint that it is temporary counsel. Still, a firm grasp of this pas- sage’s occasion—its historical, cultural, literary, and canonical contexts—is vital. First, historically, while Peter’s message applies to all, he addresses Christian women who are married to unbelieving men. He teaches these wives how to conduct themselves, that they might win their husbands to the faith (1 Peter 3:1). ...

Second, culturally, Peter draws on norms admired by Greco-Roman moralists as he counsels wives in winsome behavior. Ethicists often urged women to be chaste and respectful, to shun gaudy clothes and hair, and to show a meek and quiet spirit.3 Wherever biblical and Greco-Roman norms agree, Peter urges Christian women to behave in ways that both God and their pagan husbands would approve.4 Furthermore, that age assumed that wives would adopt the religion(s) of their husbands. A Christian woman, upon conversion to the faith, could no longer participate in pagan worship rituals. Since the Greco-Roman wife was expected to share her husband’s faith, that refusal would seem subversive. Thus, Peter tells godly wives to conduct themselves in ways that demonstrate respect for their husbands and so to mitigate the potential tension caused by their faith. ...

Third, from a literary perspective, we recall that 1 Peter taught Christian converts how to be faithful disciples in a pagan world. Peter opens by call- ing his people “strangers in the world” (1 Peter 1:1). In the long section on social behavior, he adds that they are “aliens and strangers” in the world and therefore must “abstain from sinful desires, which war against your soul” (2:11). But, he continues, Christian virtue has an apologetic function: “Live such good lives among the pagans that, though they accuse you of doing ...

None but the elite could afford the elaborate headdress and gold that Peter mentions, but others imitated as they could. See Craig S. Keener, The IVP Bible Background Commentary: New Testament (Downers Grove, IL: InterVarsity Press, 1993), 715–16. ...

In the same spirit, when Paul commends hospitality and self-control to church elders in 1 Timothy 3, he names traits that Greco-Roman moralists admired. ...

wrong, they may see your good deeds and glorify God on the day he visits us” (2:12). So the good conduct of the believer is missional or pre-evangelistic. A good life silences accusers. ...

Yet Peter also knows that Christian conduct will seem disruptive, since, at least in principle, it undermines the hierarchical relationships that structure society. The thinking person knows that every Christian is a potential rebel or subversive. When the Christian calls Jesus Lord, he or she denies that title (in its fullest sense) to all others—whether kings, husbands, fathers, or masters. The Christian seems to disrespect the emperor by refusing to worship him. The Christian wife appears to dishonor her husband because she refuses to join the worship of his deities, whether the emperor or the local gods that allegedly sustained the social fabric. ...

Because Christian conviction can always foster dissident behavior, Peter stresses the need for respect. He has already told his churches to submit to every human authority, including the emperor, whom they also honor (1 Peter 2:13, 17).5 The believing slave or servant also submits (same verb) to the master “with all respect [or fear],” whether the master deserves it or not (2:18).6 The word to wives begins the same way, with a call to submit with respect or fear (3:1–2).7 In each case, Peter commands the social sub- ordinate to show honor, respect, and obedience to the social superior. That is how they silence accusers, as Peter said they should (2:11–12). ...

It might seem that Peter’s instructions burden women and excuse men. But it is more accurate to say that Peter aimed to guide Christian women who were married to pagan men. Further, simply by addressing them, Peter honored the women of his churches. The literature of the day normally ignored the subordinate partner in a relationship. Authors addressed gov- ernors, masters, husbands, and fathers and overlooked ordinary men, plus slaves, wives, and children, who were judged unworthy or incapable of receiv- ing instruction. By guiding wives, children, and slaves, Peter (like Paul in Ephesians 5:21–6:9) has already elevated them. ...

Fourth, we locate Peter’s message in canonical context when we examine ...

how he applies general biblical principles for marriage to the union of Chris- ...

The verbs are hypotassō, which Peter repeats in 1 Peter 3:1, 5, and timaō, the principal verb for “honor.” ...

The verbs here are hypotassō, “submit,” and phobeō, literally, “fear.” ...

The verb is hypotassō again. Fear is now a noun, but the root is the same as in 1 Peter 2:17. ...

tian women and pagan men. Peter assumes that the wife will aim to preserve the marriage, because even a mixed marriage is good (cf. 1 Cor. 7:1–16). Marriage is a creation mandate, ordained for mankind in our innocence, to provide companionship and partnership as we bear children and govern God’s creation for him (Gen. 1–2). Divorce was well known in Israel and in the empire, but because marriage is a covenant, the law, prophets, and apostles oppose divorce (Deut. 24:1–4; Mal. 2:14–16; Matt. 19:3–12; 1 Cor. 7:10–13). Since marriage is a covenant, husband and wife commit to each other. By contrast, Solomon says that the unfaithful woman “forsakes the companion of her youth and forgets the covenant of her God” (Prov. 2:16–17 esv). And Malachi condemns the man who arbitrarily divorces his wife, since “she is ...

your partner, the wife of your marriage covenant” (Mal. 2:14). ...

Both Peter and Paul understood the problem for the wife who converts to Christianity when her husband does not. Neither said that a lack of faith is the basis for divorce. Paul stressed that marriage is permanent and the bonds hold, unless the unbelieving husband or wife abandons the marriage (1 Cor. 7:10–16). Peter focused on wives, since they implicitly challenged cultural norms by adopting a faith that kept them from joining their hus- bands’ religious practices. ...

To summarize, 1 Peter 3 applies enduring biblical principles to an urgent contemporary issue. The apostles often did this. Today’s church leaders should follow that strategy by applying teaching to the challenges of our day. In that spirit, a preacher might tell young, unmarried Christians to resist cohabitation and to embrace marriage and childbearing as essential elements of God’s plan. He might exhort them to commit, without fear, to intentional relationships that could lead to early marriage and parenthood. But now we turn to Peter’s message for his day and strive to lay aside our preconceptions so that we may hear his message. ...

A Countercultural Wife ...

Peter’s command “Wives, . . . be submissive” (1 Peter 3:1) will divide, even offend, contemporary readers. When Peter tells wives to obey their husbands and call them “lord” (3:6 esv), skeptics groan. Sadly, men have fueled the critics by abusing their God-given authority and physical strength. If husbands loved their wives as they should, this passage would not be ...

controversial. It is controversial, yet we will not read Peter accurately if we let contemporary gender debates become our lens for interpretation. It is better to acknowledge our preferences and let Scripture test them (1 Thess. 5:21), since God’s Word is infallible and we are not. The prevailing mind-set of our age does influence us. Therefore, if our Bible-reading never challenges us, we probably aren’t reading well. A faith that never upsets us is a designer faith, with the self as designer. ...

So, then, hear Peter as he begins and (nearly) ends with an exhortation to submit (1 Peter 3:1, 5). He begins, “Likewise, wives, be subject to your own husbands, so that even if some do not obey the word, they may be won without a word by the conduct of their wives, when they see your respectful and pure conduct” (3:1–2 esv). While the command has a purpose—the winning of unbelieving husbands—it has no restriction. Peter commands all wives to “be subject to your own husbands,” not men in general. Thus, all wives submit, and some have a distinct circumstance and goal—to win an unbelieving husband. ...

The idea of submission, as we saw in chapter 7, did not have the nega- tive connotation that it has today. Submission does entail the concept that authorities give orders that subordinates follow, but submit is milder than obey for two reasons. First, a wife who submits to her husband’s guidance may still decide how to follow his direction. Second, a believer’s submission to human authorities is always qualified, never blind. If a husband com- mands his wife to do evil, she is to heed the Lord, not the man. ...

Peter addresses all wives, but especially Christian women whose husbands “do not obey the word” (in this case, to “obey the word” means to believe the gospel, 1 Peter 3:1 esv). As we have seen, since wives were expected to adopt their husbands’ religion, Christian women could seem rebellious if they abandoned familiar gods. Because that culture assumed that adults could subscribe to multiple religions, wives could adopt new religions in addition to the faith of their husbands. And some women, attracted to the ethic of Judaism, adopted it as a second religion. But when the gospel came to the synagogue and wives believed, dual allegiance became impossible. It was vital, therefore, that believing wives submit whenever possible, since they seemed rebellious in religious affairs. (If a man converted, he had a greater chance of carrying his pagan wife with him, and if not, he at least did not disrupt the social order when he practiced his chosen religion.) ...

Again, Peter commands wives to submit to their own husbands, not to all men. Submissiveness manifests itself in several ways: in reverent and pure conduct (1 Peter 3:2), in modest clothing and inner beauty (3:3–5), and in respectful speech (3:6). ...

Unbelieving husbands will be won by observing their Christian wives’ respectful, pure conduct (1 Peter 3:2).8 Wives should conform to social conventions and fulfill expected duties in order to win their pagan husbands “without words” (3:1). One can be relatively silent yet not mute; there are clear cases of this in Scripture.9 So Peter doesn’t mean that the wife never speaks. Nor does he mean that speech is pointless. She does not speak because Peter did not expect her words to be helpful in that context. He knew that others might be more persuasive. Even today, a believing wife often finds it best to be (relatively) quiet and let others engage a skeptical husband. The same often holds for Christian children who want to convert unbelieving parents. They need to hear the gospel, but perhaps from someone outside the family. As a believing woman longs for her husband’s conversion, Peter tells her how best to proceed. C. E. B. Cranfield notes: “Of course, she must be ready to speak about Christ. But to persist in talking to someone who does not want to listen only hardens.” The gentle and quiet way may be more effective than what seems like nagging. And “those whose hearts are proof against preaching may at least be softened by . . . behavior.”10 Whether this results in a conversion or not, godly wives can please the Lord (1 Peter 3:3–4) and follow the footsteps of godly Sarah (3:5–6). ...

Spiritual Beauty ...

彼得劝勉女性追求至高的美:"你们的美丽不应源于外在的装饰,比如编发、佩戴黄金首饰华美衣裳。 相反, 这种应当来自你们内在品格。"

多数译本中译为 "看见"这个ekopteuō 一个罕见动词, 通常表示 "作为旁观者观看"。

例如,《哥林多前书》14 章 34 节说"妇女在教会中要闭口不言",尽管 《哥林多前书》11 章 5 节要求妇女进行祷告说预言。 显然,14 章 34 节沉默要求部分性与情境相符的。结合上下文,希腊动词 sigaō 通常指将某事藏在心里,或说话后保持沉默(路加福音 9:36;使徒行传 15:13;林前 14:34)。参见丹尼尔·M·多里亚尼所著 《女性与事工:圣经的教导》(伊利诺伊州惠顿:Crossway 出版社,2003 年),81-84 页。

C.E.B. 克兰菲尔德,&II 彼得犹大 (伦敦:SCM 出版社,1960 年), 第 89 页。

温柔安静的心灵所散发的不朽之美,这在神眼中极有价值。因为古时仰赖圣洁妇女正是以此妆饰自己」(《彼得前书》3:3–5a)。 保罗在《提摩太前书》2:9–10 中给出类似教导:「我愿女人......以端正的衣裳为装饰...... ,不是用编发、黄金、珍珠或昂贵的衣裳,而是行。希腊人犹太人而言, 奢华的服饰可能意味着放荡漠视丈夫的权威。11“摒弃外在装饰女性顺服丈夫的表现。”12 端庄是根本原则。 问题不在于编发黄金本身。 A 黄金婚戒承诺的一个简单象征。繁复的发型需要数小时打理,因此成为彰显财富与地位的标志。真正重要的是内在美。"美德是每位女性都能骄傲披戴的华服。"13 彼得特别强调一种温柔宁静的心灵。赞许和善的友善、平和的安宁,以及拒绝争吵或显露坏脾气的品质。 作为对彼得原理的验证,我们不妨自问:每天花在外表上的时间有多少,而用于提升心智精神力量时间多少 倘若我们发型衣着的关注思想心灵 显然存在问题 初识他人时 我们注重外在形象无可厚非 面容、 发型、体态、 身高、 体重、 比例、 衣着声音让我们判断这位陌生人性别 年龄、自信还是拘谨、 友善抑或疏离 愈久 外在形象重要性

在神的眼中,"温柔安静的心灵"才是真正的美丽。

现存的雕像、浮雕以及希腊罗马文献关于发型的记载 14肖像画 (石雕, 通常只有富人才能负担) 显示成年女性 (多为已婚妇女)将头发卷曲或编辫

尤维纳利斯在对女性奢侈品的冗长抱怨后补充道:"与此同时,她完全不关心自己的丈夫。"参见尤维纳利斯《讽刺诗》第六首,收录于 《尤维纳利斯与佩尔西乌斯》,C·G·拉姆齐译(马萨诸塞州剑桥: 哈佛大学出版社,1965 年),第 121-25 页。

大卫·斯科勒,《女性的装饰:对新约经文的一些历史与释经观察》, 载于 《莎拉的女儿们》 第 6 卷第 1 期(1980 年),第 5 页。

彼得· 戴维斯, 彼得前书注释》 大急流城: 厄尔德曼斯出版社,1990 年), 第 118 页。

辛西娅 ·汤普森,《发型、 头巾保罗: 罗马哥林多肖像研究》,《圣经考古学家》 第 51 卷 (1988 年):99-115 页; 大卫·吉尔,《罗马肖像艺术对哥林多前书 11:2-16 中头巾问题的重要性》,《廷代尔公报》 第 41 卷第 2 期(1990 年):244-260 页;詹姆斯·B·赫尔利,《圣经视角下的男人与女人》

(大急流城: 宗德文出版社,1981 年),66-68 页,168-171 页,254-271 页; 克雷格

S. 基纳,《保罗、妇女与妻子:保罗书信中的婚姻与妇女事工》(马萨诸塞州皮博迪: 亨德里克森出版社,1992 年),22-30 页;本·威瑟林顿三世,《早期教会中的妇女》(剑桥: 剑桥大学出版社,1988 年),81-83 页; 杰罗姆 ·墨菲 ·奥康纳,《哥林多前书中的逻辑

并且他们头上。15丈夫妻子共同出现时, 女性通常布质披肩遮盖头部 (而非面纱)。16 少女、未婚女子与不贞洁的妇女则保持露发。17成年人而言, 任何偏离常规行为都可能具有特殊含义。 短发可能象征卖淫女同性恋倾向。 剃光散落头发可能表示哀悼。 长发披散也可能意味着对丈夫权威的抗拒或性行为不检。18

彼得特别指出头发、 黄金、 珠宝华美衣裳, 因为人们常以这些彰显财富。 如今, 人们更多通过豪宅、名车和度假而非服饰来炫耀财富。另一些人则注重面容发型或雕琢从颈部到膝盖的完美身材,但核心道理依旧不变。 保罗说,“要操练自己达到敬虔。 因为身体的操练固然有益, 但敬虔凡事上都有益处, 带着今生来世应许” 提摩太前书 4:7b-8)。 彼得也勉励门徒追求 “温柔安静心灵永不朽坏的美德。”19

倘若精神美德不朽肉体力量终将消逝, 我们便该少费光阴于躯壳,多付心血滋养心智与灵魂,追寻仁爱、正义与真理。 当然,我们应当成为上帝赐予我们身体的好管家,我们花费时间的记录揭示什么才是我们重视的事物? 艾伦· 斯蒂布斯指出, 基督徒妻子应当通过行为而非衣着来取悦上帝, 尤其培养一种温柔的灵性。“这表明她的行为受制于新的价值标准”,即上帝而非世人“ 所珍视品格特质”。20

11:2–16,” Catholic Biblical Quarterly 42 (1980): 482–500; Jerome Murphy O’Connor, “1 Corinthians ...

11:2–16 Once Again,” Catholic Biblical Quarterly 50 (1988): 265–74. ...

See photographs in Thompson, “Hairstyles, Head-coverings,” 101–11; Bruce W. Winter, After Paul Left Corinth: The Influence of Secular Ethics and Social Change (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2001), xviii–xx. ...

Gill, “Importance of Roman Portraiture,” 252–54. ...

Witherington, Women in the Earliest Churches, 82. ...

Keener, Paul, Women and Wives, 30; Winter, After Paul Left Corinth, 123–26. ...

So translates J. Ramsey Michaels, 1 Peter, Word Biblical Commentary 49 (Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 1988), 161. “Quality” seems a better translation than “beauty” (per niv, esv), since the word beauty is not present in the Greek. Rather, Peter has the neuter adjective aphtharton (also used in 1:4, 18, 23), with the definite article, so the whole functions as a substantive, which suggests the quality of incorruptibility. See Friedrich Blass and Albert Debrunner, A Greek Grammar of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, trans. and rev. Robert Funk (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1961), 138 (sec. 263.2). ...

Alan M. Stibbs, The First Epistle General of Peter (London: Tyndale, 1959), 124. ...

Ordinary human wisdom suggests that we should work on our charac- ter, if only because a beautiful spirit lasts a lifetime and a beautiful body lasts a few decades. Even if the rate of decline varies, the body does fail and finally die, but the spirit need not. Time inexorably weakens and slows the body. Entropy dulls, then erases, the differences between strong and weak, swift and laggard, vibrant and torpid, beautiful and plain, but time spent with God’s Spirit increases the capacity to love, to show mercy. Even a self- interested person should therefore tend the spirit. ...

A believer is especially pleased to learn that a beautiful spirit “is of great worth in God’s sight” (1 Peter 3:4). We should long to please God more than to gain applause or admiring glances. We should pursue God’s favor more than human favor, since his appraisal is more accurate, generous, and gracious. As Peter exhorts women to cultivate inner beauty, he assures them that this is the proven path for godly women: “For this is how the holy women who hoped in God used to adorn themselves, by submitting to their own husbands, as Sarah obeyed Abraham, calling him lord. And you are her children, if you do good and do not fear anything that is frightening” (1 Peter 3:5–6 esv). With this statement, Peter repeats that godly women should pursue spiritual beauty and submit to their husbands. But he adds that while they might be exiled from their culture of origin, they now belong to a new family. They hope in God, like holy women past. They are Sarah’s daughters, beautiful women all, for they, like Sarah, adorn themselves with righteousness and good deeds. Yet they (literally) do not fear terrors, that is, the things that terrify others, for they trust God (cf. 2:23; 3:14–15). Some ...

women are afraid of submitting to their husbands. ...

While this sense of belonging surely cheered the godly woman of Peter’s day, the verse troubles the secular and perhaps even godly woman today. Perhaps her husband, or another man, has acted sinfully or foolishly, so that she hesitates to trust him. Or perhaps she simply wants the freedom that is so highly valued in this age. Yet Peter not only commends submis- siveness, but also notes, “Sarah obeyed Abraham, calling him lord” (1 Peter 3:6 esv). If wives balk at submission, how will they react to Sarah’s authori- tative example? Calling a husband “lord” seems heavy-handed. But lord is not Lord. In that culture, viewing her husband as “lord” meant that a wife must acknowledge him “with due deference, as her husband and master.” ...

That is how Sarah used the term in Genesis 18:12.21 More importantly, this recognition of Abraham’s leadership did not keep Sarah from speaking her mind to Abraham. And with God’s approval, he complied (Gen. 21:8–13). Obviously, Sarah was submissive to a believing husband, so that her duty was lighter. But Peter argued by analogy: if Sarah, a forceful woman (Gen. 18:12), obeyed Abraham and called him “lord,” all women should ...

respect their husbands. ...

Husbands ...

Peter began to name the social duties of believers in chapter 2 by direct- ing, “Be subject for the Lord’s sake to every human institution” (1 Peter 2:13 esv). As he worked through social relationships, he repeated the call to subjection or submission. Residents submit to governors (2:13–17), servants to masters (2:18–25), and wives to husbands (3:1–7). Later, Peter says that young men must submit to church elders (5:5). ...

His commands to husbands, and later to elders, round out the discussion. Peter commands leaders to serve others, but not in reciprocal language. He does not instruct husbands to submit to wives, or elders to submit to the church. Rather, they must be tender and respectful. Peter tells elders that they should lead from beside, not from above, “not domineering . . . , but being examples to the flock” (1 Peter 5:3 esv). Peter models his own point by calling himself a “fellow elder,” even though he is an apostle and could claim superiority. Husbands should be even more tender: “Likewise, hus- bands, live with your wives in an understanding way, showing honor to the woman as the weaker vessel, since they are heirs with you of the grace of life, so that your prayers may not be hindered” (3:7 esv). Four vital points emerge from this statement. ...

First, husbands “live with” their wives. Peter expects husband and wife to live in the same house. It also means that they should sleep in the same bed, since the verb “live with” (sunoikeō) was used for sexual relations in the Septuagint (Deut. 22:13; 24:1). Peter assumes that physical intimacy is an element of married life. Sadly, it is necessary for pastors to spell out the implications: Husbands love their wives by living in one house, sharing one ...

Ibid., 126. If we review Genesis 18, we see that Sarah’s demeanor was hardly submissive, but she did call Abraham “lord” or “master” (Hebrew adon), which is Peter’s sole point. ...

bed, in physical intimacy. It tears the fabric of a marriage when husband and wife deprive each other of physical love. We are accustomed to the principle that sexual union seals the love and covenantal commitment that leads to marriage. But we must also know that husband and wife can drift apart, and when they do, sexual love can rekindle our emotional attachment and commitment. Sexual union both seals and strengthens a marriage. Separa- tion weakens affection. ...

Second, husbands live, literally, “according to knowledge.” Peter expects husbands to know their wives. Men occasionally excuse careless leadership by pleading ignorance: “I don’t understand women.” But a man doesn’t need to understand women; he needs to understand his wife. Husbands are scientists with a narrow field of inquiry. A man should know the preferences, moods, needs of his beloved, so that he can love and care for her. ...

This is important because, third, “the woman is the weaker vessel.” The Greek word translated “vessel” (skeuos) is used for sundry material objects, especially jars and vessels, but sometimes for the human body.22 Peter simply means that women are, generally, physically weaker than men.23 There are many exceptions, but taken as a whole, men are larger and stronger than women. Some say that women are more vulnerable emotionally, although that is disputed, and in most societies women are economically dependent on their husbands. In Peter’s age, Jews and Greeks commonly also viewed women as being weaker morally and mentally. But Scripture never says that, and no part of Christian tradition promotes it. ...

On the contrary, a Christian husband must honor women, and especially his wife. Physically, she is probably weaker, but spiritually she is a joint heir of grace. At a minimum, husbands must never bully, threaten, or strike their wives, nor should they demean their wives for being weak or slow-footed. Marriage is a union of two weak and sinful people, even if we are weak and sinful in different ways. ...

Fourth, married believers are joint heirs of the life-giving grace of Jesus (1 Peter 3:7b). Grace is the first and last word of 1 Peter (1:2; 5:12). The ...

Readers can survey a Greek concordance for a sense of the term. It is debated, but most dic- tionaries and lexicons say that skeuos can be a euphemism for the human body in its sexuality (e.g., 1 Thess. 4:4). See Frederick W. Danker, ed., A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, 3rd ed. (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2000), 927–28. ...

Peter does not here use the most common word for an adult female, gunē, which normally means “wife.” He uses gunaikeos, which is an adjective that means “feminine” or “the feminine [one].” ...

prophets predicted a gracious salvation (1:10), and the Lord Jesus fulfilled the promise when he suffered for us: “He himself bore our sins in his body on the tree, so that we might die to sins and live for righteousness; by his wounds you have been healed” (2:24). The cross of Christ is the great equal- izer. How sweet it is for both husband and wife to know that their comfort in life and hope in death is the sacrifice and resurrection of Jesus. Respect makes prayer easier, but how can a harsh husband pray well, except in repen- tance? When husband and wife both know Jesus, prayers flow freely. Each is humble over his or her sin, each gives thanks for God’s grace. Both present requests confidently, for if the Father “did not spare his own Son, but gave him up for us all—how will he not also, along with him, graciously give us all things?” (Rom. 8:32). ...

The challenge of marriage and the challenges to marriage are numerous ...

enough that we should take the opportunity to label Peter’s abiding lessons. ...

Peters Principles for Marriage ...

First, the believer should hope to convert an unbelieving spouse if he or she has one, not by lecturing fervently, but by living well. There is a time to talk, but pushing and harping hardens people. Peter knows that an unbeliever can have misgivings about his or her spouse’s faith. Peter says, in essence, “Live so well that he is glad that you follow Jesus.” Submission, a fairly prominent theme in Peter, is one part of living well. Submission to authority is one way in which we do good and so “silence the ignorant talk of foolish men” (1 Peter 2:13–15). When we submit to proper authorities, freely, actively, and willingly, it is harder for them to slander the faith. ...

Second, we must comment on submission. Sadly, the command to submit has been abused by men who attempt to justify selfish demands. But “doing whatever I’m told” is not the biblical concept of submission. To submit does mean that one person ordinarily yields to the will of one in a position of authority. A submissive wife accepts her husband’s leadership in general. She listens. She expects him to lead and does not chafe under the burden of following. She understands that submission does not undermine her dignity but expresses it. This is her unique opportunity to model Jesus, who submitted to the Father in the plan of redemption, even though Jesus is coequal and coeternal with the Father. We could mention again the need ...

for husbands to lead with Christlike love and sacrifice. Instead, let’s con- sider how the contemporary zeal to prevent abuses of authority can cause a different problem. ...

Today, our culture constantly laments the absence of strong, marriageable men. But men need to be stronger within marriages, too. For every home that is crippled by male abuse of authority, several suffer from husbands and fathers who refuse to lead. For every man who dominates, several abdicate. They come home, flop down, plug in, and ignore everyone. The sins of domination are more catastrophic, especially if they include violence, but sins of passivity are more common. Pastors know: more wives lament an absentee husband than a domineering husband. ...

Of course, there are limits to submission. It is reasonable, and no sign of disrespect, to question our leaders. Moreover, we don’t obey wicked com- mands or endure boundless oppression. Paul told slaves, “If you can gain your freedom, do so” (1 Cor. 7:21). Yet in general, it’s right to follow leaders and obey authorities. Loving leadership is a common path to blessing. Happy the nation with just governors, blessed the home with a Christlike husband, peaceful the worker who trusts a fair supervisor. ...

Third, we must locate Peter’s counsel within the biblical understanding of marriage as a covenant. He doesn’t urge wives with pagan husbands to escape them but to win them. This, of course, is contrary to contemporary Western culture, in which too many people think of divorce if their dreams are not realized. Sound theology serves us well here. Marriage is difficult and disappoint- ing because it unites two sinners. As Stanley Hauerwas notes, we imagine that there is someone “just right” for us to marry. We dream that “if we look closely enough we will find the right person[But] we always marry the ...

wrong person.” If we pause, we know that we are the wrong person, too. Furthermore, “We never know whom we marry; we just think we do. Or even if we first marry the right person, just give it a while and he or she will change.” If nothing else, marriage itself will change us. In short, no two people are compatible. Flaws that once seemed tiny, even endearing, loom large. The crucible of an intimate relationship, where everything matters, reveals the fault lines of character. Hauerwas concludes, “The primary problem is learning ...

how to love and care for the stranger to whom you find yourself married.”24 ...

Stanley Hauerwas, “Sex and Politics: Bertrand Russell and ‘Human Sexuality,’ Christian Century (April 19, 1978): 417–22; Timothy Keller, with Kathy Keller, The Meaning of Marriage: Facing ...

What happens when married strangers dash each other’s expectations and make each other unhappy? Many think divorce will restore their happiness. But the sociological study “Does Divorce Make People Happy? Findings from a Study of Unhappy Marriages” concludes that “divorce . . . appeared to reduce adult happiness and increase adult depression in the majority of cases.”25 On the other hand, the study found that “most unhappy spouses who avoided divorce ended up happily married.” Specifically, 64 percent were “happily married five years later.” Surprisingly, the success rate was higher (78 percent) if a marriage had been rated very unhappy. The study found that the essential element was what it called endurance, which Christians might call covenantal commitment: ...

许多目前婚姻幸福的夫妻都曾经历过长期的婚姻不和谐,原因往往相当严重,包括酗酒、不忠、 言语暴力、 情感忽视、 抑郁、 疾病为何这些

婚姻得以维系其他婚姻走向终结? 婚姻忍耐伦理起到了关键作用。夫妻们表示,他们的婚姻变得更幸福,并非因为解决了问题,而是因为他们顽强地熬过了困境。随着时间的推移...许多冲突和痛苦的根源逐渐消弭。26

需要明确的是, 我们追求的目标并非仅仅维持婚姻, 而是重建一段真正的婚姻关系。 彼得并不提倡那种契约式的安排,双方仅维持功能性的、 缺乏情感连接的婚姻关系。我们渴望的远不止是合租室友般的相处和育儿搭档。我们想要的不仅是快乐的孩子、漂亮的房子,或是派对和度假时的伴侣。我们渴望的是恒久的爱。

婚姻意义 提姆·凯勒指出圣经中的圣约融合了律法与爱,既具法律效力又充满个人情感。27 圣约既是个人化的又是法律性的。它们建立在爱的情感基础上,同时也具有约束力且无条件。 彼得教导妻子们努力赢得她们丈夫的心

智慧应对承诺复杂性 纽约: 达顿出版社,2011 年),37-43 页。

琳达·J·韦特等,《离婚会让人幸福吗?——不幸福婚姻研究》(纽约:美国价值观研究所,2002 年),第 12-14 页。我们注意到该研究所创始人兼主席大卫·布兰肯霍恩支持同性婚姻,并曾为多配偶制辩护,因此可排除保守倾向的可能性。详见 www.americanvalues

.org/UnhappyMarriages.pdf.

同上, 第 6 页、 第 30-31 页。研究指出, 婚姻暴力改变这一状况。

凯勒,《婚姻的真谛》 第 80-87 页。

重申了婚姻的契约观。他在婚姻的个人层面和法律层面之间取得平衡。传统婚姻往往具有法律性和契约性。在传统婚姻中,家族会安排一桩对家族和未来配偶双方都有利的联姻。父母会从体面的家族中寻找配偶,以获得能巩固宗族的人脉关系。传统婚姻的理想状态是一个强壮的男人女人结合也能两个强大的家族联姻, 使所有人受益。 与此相反, 浪漫婚姻追求的是完美伴侣, 那个能点燃我们激情、升华我们灵魂的灵魂伴侣。 (无需赘述广为人知的浪漫模式)可悲的是,完美的浪漫并不存在,而契约婚姻可能沦为乏味的物质交易。 浪漫模式诱使夫妻激情消退时通过离婚退出婚姻。若传统婚姻出现裂痕,社会期待枷锁或许能让夫妻在法律上维持关系,他们可能过着同床异梦的生活。

婚姻一份誓约, 我们追求不是完美浪漫亦或

关于这份契约性安排。 盟约一种爱为纽带终身承诺, 通过誓言缔结, 并以上帝为见证。 事实上,公开立誓本身就是爱的行为。当有人说"我爱你,但不想和你结婚"时,其潜台词很可能是:"你并非我理想中的伴侣,我对你的爱还不足以让我为你结束寻觅。"有人认为婚礼誓言和盟约承诺会让浪漫与激情掺杂责任而变质,声称唯有自由无拘、不受承诺约束的爱才能茁壮成长。但若没有忠贞的誓约,当感情生变时该如何维系?当年华老去、疾病缠身或双方成长步调不一时,又该如何面对伴侣日渐衰弱的模样?

有人注意到 两个相爱时 他们不会只是简单地

表达爱意。他们会说:"我永远爱你。"他们谈论着一起老。渴望能够持久。 正如所罗门所言:"爱坚强 众水不能熄灭爱情 洪流也不能

"淹没它"(雅歌 8:6-7esv)。神的立约信实是我们的标准和准则。 耶稣并非因为教会纯洁无瑕它;洁净教会正是为了使之成为无瑕。 同样, 丈夫应当像基督爱教会那样爱妻子—— 即便她们有瑕疵,而非等到她们没有瑕疵时才爱(以弗所书 5:25-27)。

我们看到, 因此, 彼得圣经中关于婚姻的伟大原则应用教会中一个紧迫的问题: 一位基督徒女性应当如何与非信徒丈夫婚姻关系忠实地生活?给出的答案是, 她必须活出美好的生命,用忠实的行动而非言语来赢得丈夫。 彼得强调顺服是有原因的:选择跟随耶稣这一行为本身就会让妻子对丈夫的忠诚受到质疑。彼得这番劝诫的根基在于圣经中关于上帝与圣约的观点。主已通过圣约关系向我们立下承诺。 他始终信守圣约, 即便我们背弃之时。我们信靠主, 让祂的生命塑造我们, 那么我们自己的配偶忠贞不渝, 哪怕对方是未信者。 唯有如此, 方能彰显主那信实恒久的救赎更新我们的生命。

10

,

x BeCex 3:8–xz

凡想要享受人生、看见好日子的人,就要禁止舌头不出恶言,嘴唇不说诡诈的话;要离恶行善,寻求和睦,一心追赶。(彼得前书 3:10-11)

彼得前书 3:8-12 的开篇语句听起来像是作者正在总结某些内容:"最后, 你们众人都要同心,怜悯,弟兄相爱之心,温柔的心,谦卑的灵"(彼得前书 3:8 和合本)。 确实, 彼得正在总结某些内容—— 并非

his entire epistle, but his survey of the principal duties of Christians, which he began in 1 Peter 1:13. Peter has moved from general duties to specific obligations and back to general duties. Because God is holy, we are to be holy (1:16). Because Jesus ransomed us from a vain life and because we tasted his goodness, we put away specific sins, such as malice and deceit (1:18–2:3). Because of God’s redemptive work, we are his chosen people, a holy nation that abstains from the passions of the flesh and maintains good conduct (2:4–12). Holiness also manifests itself in life’s several social structures. ...

Every believer submits to governing authorities, whether local or global (2:13–17). Servants submit to masters, whether they merit respect or not, for Jesus submitted in the same way (2:18–25). Finally, husbands and wives live together in grace and mutual honor (3:1–7). ...

Attractive Christian Traits ...

If we act in these ways, Peter says that we can ordinarily expect to live well and enjoy God’s favor. He asks, “Who is going to harm you if you are eager to do good?” (1 Peter 3:13). The next section admits that it is possible to suffer harm for doing good (3:14–17). If we live by God’s standards, we will never quite fit into any human culture. This was true in the empire, where the Christians’ allegiance to Jesus as Lord and refusal to worship the emperor could be taken as a sign of dissent. Today, there is always a moral cause, often involving sexual ethics, in which evangelical Christians take the minority view. To the secularist, the Christian position might sound judgmental, intolerant, or bigoted, so we court disfavor. ...

Nonetheless, 1 Peter 3:8–13 states the norm. A good life allows peace. Whatever we may say about life in an alien culture, under hostile authorities, the greater part of the Christian life concerns the character and disciplines that shape daily actions and our universal responsibilities. So Peter describes the virtues that bless everyone: harmony, sympathy, love, compassion, and humility. Later he mentions forgiveness, hospitality, and generosity (4:8–10). Earlier Peter said that holy women used to adorn themselves with the “unfad- ing beauty of a gentle and quiet spirit” (3:4–5). Now he mentions the traits that make everyone attractive. ...

平安

We pay great attention to appearances when we first meet someone. With a glance, we assess gender, age, height, weight, and facial characteristics. We judge whether the person is confident or reticent, friendly or hostile, open or closed. We assess social status and strength by glancing at clothing, hair, and posture. Visual cues are vital at first. Yet as we discover the person’s skills and character, appearances matter less and less. Much more, the Lord looks at the heart and assesses our character. Peter says, “Finally, all of you, ...

have unity of mind, sympathy, brotherly love, a tender heart, and a humble mind” (1 Peter 3:8 esv). ...

At first glance, Peter seems to list five random virtues. On closer inspec- tion, a pattern emerges. The first and last are mental or intellectual, the second and fourth are emotional, and brotherly love stands at the center. Further, all these traits have a social dimension. Together, they keep rela- tionships healthy. ...

同心

Strong relationships begin with “unity of mind” (homophrones). To have one mind is not to have identical opinions about politics, philosophy, ethics, business, food, music, and leisure. Rather, unity means that we are “agree- able and sensitive to each other’s concerns.”1 Unity comes not from a creed or a law laid upon us, nor from a pretense that we agree when we actually disagree, but from relationships, respectful dialogue, and common causes. ...

First Peter 3:8 mentions three forms of love—sympathy, brotherly love, compassion. Sympathy and compassion are emotional virtues. Sympathy is the ability to feel what another feels, whether in joy or in sorrow. We must “rejoice with those who rejoice [and] mourn with those who mourn” (Rom. 12:15). If one suffers, all suffer. If one is honored, all rejoice (1 Cor. 12:26). To sympathize is to enter the experience of others and, if possible, to act on what we feel. Jesus sympathizes with us in our weakness. He “has been tempted in every way, just as we are, yet was without sin,” so he knows our struggles (Heb. 4:15). Among humans, sympathy largely rests on shared pains, but Jesus is both strong and empathetic! He doesn’t merely sympathize with us in our battle against evil; he defeats Satan and the powers of evil. He feels with us and acts for us. ...

The term translated “brotherly love” (philadelphos) could be rendered “brotherly affection.” The command to love one another is foundational (John 13:34–35; cf. 1 Thess. 4:9). Jesus set a high standard when he said, “As I have loved you, so you must love one another” (John 13:34). In his kindness, his insight into our souls, and his sacrifice for our sins, Jesus embodies love. ...

J. Ramsey Michaels, 1 Peter, Word Biblical Commentary 49 (Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 1988), 176. ...

Jesus identifies “Love your neighbor as yourself” as the second great com- mand (Matt. 22:39). Paul agrees: “Be devoted to one another in brotherly love” (Rom. 12:10). ...

A slight misconception of love has grown up in some Christian circles. Many are aware that Greek has four principal terms for love and that three of them appear in the New Testament.2 Among these, we ordinarily give pride of place to agapē, which we call divine love. We commonly say that agapē is the greatest or purest form of love, since God has this love even for his enemies. But the contrast between the various words for love isn’t sharp; the terms overlap and can be used interchangeably. Indeed, the verb phileō, from the same family as philia (typically, affectionate love), often appears in John’s gospel, where it describes the Father’s love for the Son (John 5:20), the Father’s love for us (16:27), and Jesus’ love for his disciples (11:36; 20:2).3 Further, the Septuagint uses agapaō for Amnon’s sexual passion for Tamar; we would expect a form of the word eros. ...

Since agapē goes to enemies, it is based neither on feelings for the loved one nor on beauty or virtue that we see in that person. Indeed, we can make the case that agapē is greater than human or brotherly affection (philia), since agapē is indiscriminate and inclusive, going to every neighbor or stranger who crosses our path. Further, God himself is the source and model of agapē. By contrast, the love of human affection (which philia often, but not always, signifies) is exclusive and discriminating. It goes to friends, to the attrac- tive, the skillful, the few. It would seem that such love rises from natural admiration, so that there is no need to require it. Nonetheless, Romans 12:10; 1 Thessalonians 4:9; Hebrews 13:1; and 1 Peter 3:8 all bless and command brotherly, affectionate love. The apostles blessed tender affection between friends and family members. ...

When Christians say that agapē is the highest form of love because it is Godlike and dispassionate, they probably mean that love for enemies is noble and amazing, which it is. And agapē is often the term for God’s love for unattractive sinners. But God wants, even expects, us to feel affection for each other. And we can show affection in a warm embrace and in acts of kindness. In short, love is not essentially dispassionate. It can be dispassionate—and ...

The four are agapē, philia, storgē, eros ....

The emotional component may be weaker in some of these cases, but there is no reason to believe it has disappeared. ...

it must be if we are to love someone who is misbehaving. But God created us with emotions, so we love emotionally. ...

The final aspect of love in 1 Peter 3:8 is compassion. Compassion is the emotion or feeling of love, tenderness, generosity, and warmth. Compas- sion and sympathy come naturally to some. Others have to work to open themselves to it. Some of us are drawn to babies, lonely old people, and sad emotional stories. Others want to run away from all three. Few of us gladly listen to sorrowful friends. Eventually, we want to say, “Don’t be a baby. Toughen up. Your problems are nothing. You brought this on yourself. Fight through it and you’ll be stronger.”4 In short, whether by nature or nurture, many of us lack sympathy and compassion. In that case, we should question our inclinations, for God is compassionate (Ex. 34:6). Jesus is kind and tender, and he expects us to grow toward conformity to him (Eph. 4:32; Rom. 8:29). ...

谦卑

The final blessed trait of 1 Peter 3:8 is humility. It is easy to see that humil- ity, listed last, corresponds to unity, listed first. To be humble is to suppress the desire to be important and to put our interests first. Since most quarrels come from a desire to have our way, we see that humility fosters unity. Jesus is the supreme model of humility. “Your attitude should be the same as that of Christ Jesus: ‘Who, being in very nature God, did not consider equality with God something to be grasped, but made himself nothing, taking the very nature of a servant’ ” (Phil. 2:5–7). ...

In book 7 of his Republic, Plato commented that the best governors are reluctant to hold power, not eager for it, so that the man who hungers to rule the republic is ipso facto unfit to rule it. George Washington exempli- fied this in 1788. He hoped to retire from public life and tend his farms, but when America needed a leader, all eyes turned to him and he agreed to serve again. The person who hungers for rule is unfit for rule. ...

Humility must not be confused with a poor self-concept. It’s “a willingness to take the lower place, to perform the less exalted service,” and to put the interests of others ahead of our own.5 As John Calvin said, self-denial is a ...

See Dan B. Allender, The Healing Path: How the Hurts in Your Past Can Lead You to a More Abundant Life (Colorado Springs: WaterBrook, 1999), 3–16. ...

Peter H. Davids, The First Epistle of Peter (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1990), 125. ...

good summary of the Christian life.6 This has nothing to do with personal style. One can be humble and assertive. The problem is not assertion; it is self-assertion. When I was a young pastor, the CEO of a local company and former navy commander came to my small church. I was not yet thirty years old, and when we spoke I braced myself, even physically, standing with my feet wide apart, shoulders square, leaning toward him, so that his sheer will didn’t blow me against the nearest wall. He was very assertive, but because he didn’t assert himself, he was a humble man. ...

Nonretaliation ...

First Peter 3:9 urges, “Do not pay evil with evil or insult with insult, but with blessing, because to this you were called so that you may inherit a blessing.” First Peter 3:8 and 9 present contrasting commands. The opposite of love (3:8) is mean-spirited justice, the cycle of insult and counterinsult, blows and counterblows, retaliations and retaliation for prior retaliation (3:9). That describes life between many hostile groups that border on each other—Serbs and Bosnians, Israelis and Palestinians, Shiites and Sunnis, and many more. ...

Instead of cursing, we should bless. There is a time for silence, as Jesus showed during his trial (Matt. 26:63). But ordinarily we should be ready to bless those who curse or persecute us (Rom. 12:14; 1 Cor. 4:12). In Scripture, this blessing could be a general word of kindness or the word of blessing, the gospel. Jesus commanded us to love our enemies, to pray for them, and so to bless them (Matt. 5:44). He practiced what he preached, speaking words of blessing from the cross. We can do the same in politics and work, in families and friendships. ...

As Peter knows, it is human nature to do the opposite, repaying injury for injury. Some people even seem to delight in taking offense, feeling wounded, and claiming victim status, even if there is no real harm. A few years ago, I planned to go to Brazil to speak at a conference. Alas, I failed to realize that standards had shifted, so that my visa, which still had life on it from a prior conference, was invalid. I was turned away as I tried to board my plane, and the nearest Brazilian consulate could not set things ...

John Calvin, Institutes of the Christian Religion, trans. Ford Lewis Battles (Philadelphia: West- minster, 1960), 3.7.1–10. ...

right in time. Behind this shift in visa policy, I later learned, lay a diplo- matic squabble. American officials had allegedly refused to admit some well-qualified Brazilians. The Brazilians took umbrage and retaliated by refusing entry to Americans. ...

Who starts these skirmishes? Who ends them? Who gets hurt, without reason, in the interim? Peter declares, “Do not repay evil with evil,” but bless “that you may inherit a blessing” (1 Peter 3:9). In the Old Testament, the blessing was the Promised Land. In 1:4–7, Peter says that the bless- ing is now eternal life, which begins when Jesus returns. The principle of returning good for evil follows Jesus’ word: “Forgive, and you will be forgiven. Give, and it will be given to you With the measure you use, ...

it will be measured to you” (Luke 6:37–38). More than that, the prime example of nonretaliation is our conversion, for God called us when we were still his enemies. May we therefore seek ways to bless friend and foe, even if they fail us. ...

Living in Peace ...

First Peter 3:10–12 is essentially a long quotation from Psalm 34. David wrote it as praise: “I will extol the Lord Glorify the Lord with me” ...

(Ps. 34:1–3). Yet the psalm moves from the blessing of God to the fear of God, and the fear of the Lord plays itself out in daily life. David’s God- fearing counsel for life nicely fits Peter’s interest in discipleship in difficult times. Peter knows that persecution causes troubles, but there are ways to minimize trouble; Peter quotes some from Psalm 34: ...

Whoever would love life and see good days ...

must keep his tongue from evil ...

and his lips from deceitful speech. He must turn from evil and do good; ...

he must seek peace and pursue it. (1 Peter 3:10–11, quoting Ps. 34:12–14) ...

“Life” in 1 Peter 3:10 refers to life on earth. The prospect of “good days” shows that Peter momentarily put aside the specter of persecution. He con- siders how disciples might live when life is fair, when skies are blue, when ...

justice and peace prevail. How might we keep the peace in ordinary times? Peter answers with a short blast of wisdom literature. If you love life and want good days, do things that facilitate peace. ...

What Peter calls “good days” is roughly what we call happiness. Social scientists have studied happiness for years and have reached consistent conclusions. The poor are generally less happy, but once someone escapes poverty, his or her wealth, career success, and individual liberty add little to happiness. Arduous and constructive challenges are important, but “the daily activities most associated with happiness are all social” things such as a strong marriage and time spent with friends.7 ...

First, then, to enjoy “good days”—and good relationships—we must con- trol our tongues. Previously, 1 Peter mentioned verbal sins such as accusing, denouncing, blaspheming, and ridiculing. Here Peter mentions deceit and “evil” speech, which, judging by all Scripture, would include gossip, slander, boasting, bragging, lying, making false promises or vows, rudeness, and abuse of God’s name. The opposite is to speak the truth in love, to praise God, and to bless humanity. ...

Second, we must “turn from evil and do good” (1 Peter 3:11). Peter talks about the right behavior of a disciple in two ways. First Peter 1 says that we must be holy because God is holy. Holiness signifies consecration to God and separation from sin (1:15–16; 2:5–9; 3:5). The statement “Be holy in all your conduct,” or way of life (1:15 esv), provides a bridge to the other aspect of right behavior, which is doing good to others. The language of “doing good” appears just twelve times in the New Testament, and six of them are in Peter.8 ...

Doing good is the active, outward-facing aspect of Christian conduct. Holiness signifies separation, even withdrawal, from the evils of this world. By contrast, when we do good we engage the world, seek to reverse evil. We put up buildings, create constructive institutions, perform music, and generally do whatever our skill and experience allows. To do good is to bring good to all. By doing good, Peter says, believers silence the accusa- tions of foolish men (1 Peter 2:14–15). Three times Peter urges readers to ...

戴维 ·布鲁克斯, 社会性动物: 爱、 品格与成就的隐秘源泉》

(纽约: 兰登书屋,2011 年),195-97 页。

这组术语包括 agathopoieōagathopoiiaagathopoios 它们出现于 彼得前书》2:15,20; 3:1, 6, 17; 4:19。

继续行善不辍 即便面对苦难 (2:20;3:17;4:19)教导妻子们效法撒拉行善,无论丈夫是否与她们同信(3:6)。通过行善,我们既能挫败某些人的敌意,也能赢得他人归信(2:15;3:1)。

我们所享的福泽源于我们所行的善举。若想拥有美好人生,就当"离恶行善"。这并非要人天真处世。当耶稣差遣门徒进入充满敌意的社会时,嘱咐他们要灵巧如蛇。我们不应无谓地将自己置于险境。但永远, 永远 我们都要努力 "向众人善" 即便我们特别关注"信徒之家"(加 6:10) 因此,平常时日,我们行善, 便能活出美好。以热情待人,人必乐见;以笑颜化解小隙,友朋自聚。

第三, 若我们 " 寻求和睦 追赶和睦 ", 生活就会美好。 这一主题贯穿 《新约》 书信。 如同彼得,《希伯来书》12:14 也将圣洁与追求和睦相连:"要追求与众人和睦,并要追求圣洁。" 同样, 保罗告诉我们:"若是能行,总要尽力与众人和睦"(罗马书 12:18)。 我们注意到这些限定条件。 首先, 和平可能根本无法实现。 其次, 缔造和平至少需要双方共同参与。 我们只能尽己所能。 可悲的是, 有些永远无法与之和解。 因此有时必须放弃努力。 正如《箴言》26:17 所言: 过路耳朵, 就像多管闲事插手他人纷争。”

那么总结来说,当我们遵循彼得的五项诫命时就能找到美好生活:停止恶言、远离恶行、行善、寻求和平并竭力追求。其核心诫命就是善待他人。

接着彼得总结道,我们将蒙受神的恩宠:"因为主的眼目看顾义人, 祂的耳朵倾听他们的祈祷; 但主的面容必向行恶的人变色" 彼得前书 3:12)。 这听起来很像民数记 6:24-26 的经典祝福:

赐福给你, 保护你;

使他的光照你, 赐恩给你;

脸, 赐你平安。

然而我们注意到这里不仅祝福。 耶和华 "行恶的为敌 。" 这是公义的彰显, 而非报复。 为使信众得享平安, 控告者必须缄默, 仇敌必须止息, 甚至受审。《善恶的彼岸》 中, 弗里德里希·尼采嘲讽基督教 id=49>之一那些宗教伦理体系 它们奉行奴隶道德 颂扬慈善、虔诚、 克制、 渺小、 以及顺从。 这种道德完全不具备伟大人物那种肯定生命的豪迈气概,只有一种可悲的期盼——指望上帝日后为受苦的信徒复仇。

但尼采误解了基督教伦理。无论身处何方,我们都行善事,并对世界的权力结构保持现实态度。若有机会我们就争取自由 (《哥林多前书》7:21) 若有可能我们就缔造和平 并将一切行为结果交托给上帝——这是现实的认知——因为祂是审判全地的主(《彼得前书》2:23)。

因此彼得已经阐明如何我们才能寻得一种美好安宁的生活。 倘若我们远离恶言恶行,善待众人,并顺服正当权柄,通常引导我们今世过上美好生活。 然而事实并非总是如此, 正如彼得随即指出的。 我们可能依然行善因此遭受苦难。 若是这样, 至少我们可以问心 id=48>知道眼目看顾义人, 他的耳朵垂听我们的祷告, 那向我们施恩的圣颜也必抵挡邪恶。

这些恩典是我们因信靠耶稣、与他联合而得的。这信心使我们能够活出美好生命, 说出祝福之言,恶,活在和睦、 同情、 仁爱、 怜悯谦卑之中。患难临到, 我们便能确信自己已尽力避免。而苦难来临, 我们知道主必垂听我们呼求。足以激励我们在他的国度里忠心生活。

11

x BeCex 3:x3–x8

?就是为义受苦,也是有福的。不要怕人的威吓,也不要惊慌。(彼得前书 3:13-14)

近期一项民意调查揭示了美国人最深的恐惧。受访者提到了蛇、蜘蛛、蜜蜂、虫子、蝙蝠和老鼠等动物。 有些动物分泌毒液 因此这些恐惧情有可原 非洲蛮荒的地区 名单上肯定包括狮子、 鬣狗、 鳄鱼

以及河马——它们热衷于掀翻船只并袭击船上的人。

Most fears are more personal. We fear enemies, armies, strangers, death, and loneliness. We fear public speaking and public singing (especially solos) not because they are intrinsically dangerous, but because they can lead to public humiliation. We fear places and spaces. We fear enclosed places (claustrophobia) and open spaces (agoraphobia). We fear crowds, bridges, tunnels, and storms. ...

Fears vary over the years. After a serious terrorist attack, we fear terrorism. After a nuclear accident, we fear radiation. People who lived in Communist countries were, logically, afraid of the secret police, concentration camps, ...

and starvation. In the West, people fear job loss and economic stagnation. Our fears of cancer, flying, war, and heights, among other things, manifest our central fear of death. But we also fear bullies, broken relationships, and embarrassment. We can be afraid of safe things, such as flying, and unafraid of dangerous things, such as addictive prescription drugs. We can shed a fear of public speaking when we try it and it goes well, and we can acquire a fear, perhaps if a spider bite sends us to the hospital. ...

Fearless in the Face of Trouble ...

Peter repeatedly addresses the question of proper and improper fears in the middle section of his epistle, in 1 Peter 2:17–23; 3:1–6; 3:14–16; and 4:1–6.1 For the first half of his epistle, Peter has stressed the necessity of an exemplary life in this hostile environment. As we saw, Peter alleviated the fear of persecution with a quotation from Psalm 34, “Whoever would love life and see good days must keep his tongue from evil and his lips from deceitful speech. He must turn from evil and do good; he must seek peace and pursue it” (1 Peter 3:10–11). It was possible to lead a good life, even in that hour. Believers could still evade trouble and live in peace, by controlling the tongue, telling the truth, and doing good to others. Peter had enough confidence that justice prevails that he could ask, “Who is going to harm you if you are eager to do good?” (3:13). If a man lives with zeal and devotion for all that is beautiful, just, and good, how many enemies can he have? The question might be translated: “Who is going to harm you if you are an enthusiast, a partisan, for the good?”2 Again, if you are passionately committed to what is beautiful, just, and good, how many enemies can you have? Few, if any. This note of optimism is found at times in the Bible: ...

Proverbs 16:7: “When a man’s ways are pleasing to the Lord, he makes even his enemies live at peace with him.” ...

Romans 13:3: “Rulers hold no terror for those who do right, but for those who do wrong. Do you want to be free from fear of the one in authority? Then do what is right and he will commend you.” ...

Fear as noun or verb appears seven times, but the theme continues into chapter 4. ...

The Greek is zēlotēs—one who is eager, avid, ardent, enthusiastic, zealous. ...

As a practical matter, if a believer seems to have a number of enemies, persecution could be the cause, but it’s also possible that the “victim” is earning enemies the old-fashioned way, through selfishness or faithlessness. We must not confuse the trouble we deserve with the trouble we do not. ...

Nonetheless, Peter concedes, it is possible to suffer for doing good. At times oppression is commonplace. When corruption and deceit rule a society, the good are not welcome. For that reason, Jesus said, “Blessed are those who are persecuted because of righteousness, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven” (Matt. 5:10). Then the righteous should call to God for vindication. As David notes, “A righteous man may have many troubles, but the Lord delivers him from them all” (Ps. 34:19). First Peter 3 leads us through such a time. ...

The Wrong Fears ...

Peter intends to prepare the church for persecution. Ordinarily, he main- tains, if we live well, life goes well. Yet he must concede that irrational persecution is possible: “Even if you should suffer for what is right, you are blessed. ‘Do not fear what they fear; do not be frightened’” (1 Peter 3:14). The phrase “even if you should suffer” has a rare grammatical feature. The verb is in the optative mood, which signals that the event—the suffering—is viewed, at least for now, as a remote or doubtful possibility.3 ...

Peter wants to prepare his readers for trouble by gently suggesting the possibility: “Don’t expect anyone to harm you if you are enthusiastic about goodness, but if it should happen, respond this way.” First, the mistreated should count themselves blessed. Second, we should neither fear the persecu- tors nor be troubled within. God rules the future—in the short term, at the midterm, and for eternity. If anything, we should fear God, not with craven fear, but with the fear of respect. We should fear disappointing One whom we love and revere. This is the fear that the Bible often commends. Moses said: “What does the Lord . . . ask of you but to fear the Lord your God, to walk in all his ways, to love him, to serve [him] with all your heart” (Deut. 10:12). Likewise, Solomon declared, “Do not be wise in your own eyes; fear the Lord and shun evil” (Prov. 3:7). We need to know what to fear and what not to fear, for the right fears bring sanity. ...

The optative mood appears just seventy times in the New Testament. A good number of them are in Peter. Roughly half appear in the stereotyped phrase “May it never be” (me genoito). ...

“Do not fear” might be the most common command in the Bible. The Bible tells us to shake off fear about a hundred times and gives a reason almost every time. It also tells us what not to fear. We should not fear conspiracy, shame, insults, financial loss, or loneliness. We should not fear enemies, hostility, or suffering. We should not fear death. ...

When Peter states, “Do not fear what they fear” (1 Peter 3:14), he means that we must question our fears. Some fears are sensible, such as the fear of heights or infections. Fear of public embarrassment drives us to prepare when we are scheduled for presentations. But, Jesus tells us, we should not fear those who slander and persecute us for our faith. In Matthew, he says that we should “beware of men” and yet “have no fear of them” (Matt. 10:17, 26 esv). Rather, we should fear him “who can destroy both soul and body in hell” (10:28). ...

Echoing the word of Jesus, Peter instructs his people to be fearless even if, by ordinary standards, they had cause for fear. Indeed, Peter’s people lived in a time and place—the Roman Empire, around a.d. 70—when a person could face loss of property, exile, prison, bodily harm, or even death for the faith.4 The command in 1 Peter 3:14 bears close study. It has been translated ...

several ways, and each reflects important elements of the Greek text: ...

niv: “Do not fear what they fear; do not be frightened.” ...

esv: “Have no fear of them, nor be troubled.” ...

nrsv: “Do not fear what they fear, and do not be intimidated.” ...

nasb: “And do not fear their intimidation, and do not be troubled.” ...

cev: “So stop being afraid and don’t worry about what people might do.” ...

The key clause literally reads, “Do not fear the fear of them.” The niv, nrsv, and others take the phrase to mean that we should not fear the same things that they fear. That is, a disciple does not have the same fears as a secular person. But the esv, kjv, nasb, and others say that we should not fear them as they try to frighten or intimidate us. ...

Hebrews, probably also written shortly before a.d. 70, reminds the church of an earlier time, perhaps in the reign of Emperor Claudius (around a.d. 50), when believers endured “insult and per- secution . . . [and] sympathized with those in prison and joyfully accepted the confiscation of [their] property” (Heb. 10:32–34). ...

Translators and commentators disagree because both translations (or interpretations) are grammatically and theologically plausible.5 That is, it’s true that we should not “fear them”—those who could make Peter’s people “suffer for what is right” (1 Peter 3:14). But it’s also true that we should not fear “what they fear,” that is, the same things that pagans fear. We should not be anxious about food and clothing, since God cares for us (Ps. 37:25; Matt. 6:25–34). We should not fear traps, plots, pestilence, or war (Ps. 91:2–6; Isa. 8:12; Jer. 30:10–11), since God cares for us. Society cannot decide what is frightening for us. We must choose our fears wisely rather than fearing what everyone else fears. ...

Both interpretations also make sense in context, too. We should not fear ...

“what they fear” because disciples are “aliens” in this world and have dif- ferent thoughts and different fears. Yet the idea that we should not “fear them” is even more prominent, as 1 Peter 3:15–4:6 prepares his people to endure suffering. ...

Even though both views have strengths, we conclude that Peter means we should “have no fear of them.” First, he is quoting Isaiah 8:13, where the prophet tells flawed King Ahaz that he should fear God, not an Assyrian invasion. Second, in the immediate context, fear of persecutors is far more prominent.6 So, then, Peter concedes that we can suffer “for righteousness’ sake” even if we are “zealous for what is good” (1 Peter 3:13–14 esv). But even if that happens, we should not be frightened by persecutors. ...

Rather, we should “set apart Christ as Lord” (1 Peter 3:15). “Set apart” translates the Greek word hagiazō. Hagiazō is normally translated “sanctify” or “make holy.” Since God is already holy, the word has the sense of setting apart or recognizing God as holy. To set Christ apart means, first, that since Jesus is sovereign over all, we should not fear whatever might befall us. Sec- ond, since Jesus is Lord, we should fear him, not what any lesser person or power can do (cf. Luke 12:5). If we have the right fear, the fear of the Lord, we can overcome lesser fears. ...

Peter hopes his people will not even begin to fear persecution. The threat is yet distant, so they need not worry about future possibilities. But even ...

The Greek reads: tōn de phobōn autōn mē phobēthete. The debate hinges on the fourth word, the genitive pronoun autōn, which can mean “their” or “of them.” ...

J. Ramsey Michaels, 1 Peter, Word Biblical Commentary 49 (Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 1988), 184–87. ...

if persecution comes, they must not be intimidated or succumb to fear of possible harm. ...

Dietrich Bonhoeffer was a German pastor who had the courage to speak out against Adolf Hitler, write about it, organize opposition against Hitler, and even join plans to assassinate him. He also helped Jews to escape from Germany. Bonhoeffer persevered in all this for a decade, even though he was engaged to a woman for part of the time. The Nazis imprisoned and finally executed him. He said, “Those who are afraid of men have no fear of God, and those who fear God have no more fear of men.”7 ...

Living by the Right Fear ...

Instead of living in fear, therefore, we set Jesus apart as the One to fear. As we consider the prospect of persecution, we should not fear it, but prepare for it. We should always be “prepared to make a defense to anyone who asks you for a reason for the hope that is in you” (1 Peter 3:15 esv). Of course, believers should always be ready to make a case for the faith, but Peter’s term for defense suggests a formal event, in court, answering charges. We can prepare to defend the faith in several ways. ...

Peter assumes that the saints are willing to be known as God’s people. Further, we should know that the way to “always be prepared” is to prepare continually. My family goes hiking in the Rockies most summers. One year, we hiked to a lake at 12,500 feet on the first day. Just as we arrived, it began to snow. We had to leave soon, but one daughter spotted a rocky promon- tory that promised a panoramic view of a vast valley. Although we had had no time to adjust to the altitude, she began dashing uphill, toward the rock. How could she dash uphill at that altitude, when she had lived in the flatlands all year? She had been running seven to ten miles daily for weeks, so she had the capacity to meet the challenge. So it is with us. ...

We prepare for unforeseen challenges by preparing daily for what we can foresee. The path is obvious. We read Scripture daily and meditate on it so that its truth sinks into mind and soul. We listen to our secular friends and to our culture. How do they object to the faith? What offends ...

Dietrich Bonhoeffer, The Cost of Discipleship (New York: Macmillan, 1937), 242. See also Eric Metaxas, Bonhoeffer: Pastor, Martyr, Prophet, Spy (Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 2010). Critics have questioned Metaxas’s theological analysis of Bonhoeffer, but not his historical research. ...

or seems senseless to them, and what resonates? We also look for answers to the objections as we read, converse, and listen to Christian teaching. Finally, while we must not fall into mere subjectivism—who Jesus is for me and what he does for me—we should be ready to speak personally and tell people why we hope in Jesus. ...

The answer we give can be a formal self-defense; Peter’s term fits a hearing, whether before Roman authorities, Communist officials, secular scholars, or neopagans. Yet we should also be ready to defend the faith informally, with friends. ...

Jesus supplements Peter’s point in Matthew 10. As he sends his disciples out to proclaim the kingdom, he knows they are too new in the faith to prepare for every possibility. So he makes a promise: “But when they arrest you, do not worry about what to say or how to say it. At that time you will be given what to say, for it will not be you speaking, but the Spirit of your Father speaking through you” (Matt. 10:19–20). This is an immense com- fort and a good word for those who are prone to dream (or worry) that the success of God’s cause depends on the quality of their performance. Yet the promise that the Spirit will speak through us in crisis does not abrogate the demand that we prepare when we can, as best we can. ...

Peter urges disciples to be prepared both to defend themselves and to present the faith, to turn the tables from defense to evangelism. We see the apostle Paul doing this in his trial before King Agrippa (Acts 26:19–29). At the start, Paul defends himself as an accused man must. But by the end, he dares to question the king: “King Agrippa, do you believe the prophets? I know you do.” Agrippa felt the pressure, respond- ing, “Do you think that in such a short time you can persuade me to be a Christian?” (26:27–28). Evangelism is a gift of the Spirit, but every believer must be ready to present the reason for faith and hope. The task is by no means easy. There have been societies in which most people had a broadly Christian worldview. Even if people did not follow Christ, they knew the content of the faith. They believed that God exists and that he is personal, holy, loving, triune, and redeeming—that he is offended by sin, yet sent his Son Jesus to redeem his people. Evangelists could assume that people knew and perhaps concurred, intellectually, with leading tenets of the faith. But today, biblical ideas are largely unknown to most people, even in formerly Christianized nations. It takes time to ...

explain the faith in terms that people can grasp, and our lives had better adorn our words. ...

彼得进一步用第二种方式描述这种对指控者的辩护或回应:我们应当"常作准备......以温柔敬畏的心回答各人"(彼得前书 3:15)。 这里的"盼望" 并非指一种愿望——"我希望这场暴风雨不会破坏我们的野餐"。彼得而言, 盼望意味着永生的确切期待。当时异教对死者命运的看法各异,但多数人预期要么不复存在,要么生活在阴间的幽冥之境(哈迪斯)。使徒们将盼望与基督及其子民的复活联系起来。 我们将与耶稣一同欢喜作王, 在灵性与肉体都得更新, 进入被称为新天新地的更新创造之中(赛。 65:17; 66:22;2 彼得 3:13; 启.21:1). 彼得信徒重生得着 活泼盼望”(彼得前书 1:3)耶稣死里复活联系起来。帖撒罗尼迦前书 4:13-14 中,保罗宣告:

弟兄们,关于那些已安息的人,我们不愿你们一无所知,以免忧伤那些没有指望世人一样。 我们耶稣死而复活,所以也信神必将他里面安息的人与耶稣一同带来。

我们的盼望并非虚无缥缈的云端永生。我们期盼的是与基督同在,在这更新的大地上,获得完美灵性与肉体合一的生命。罗马书8:11教导我们:"那叫基督从死里复活的,也必借着住在你们心里的圣灵,使你们必死的身体又活过来。"这模式正是耶稣复活后的身体。"当他显现的时候,我们必要像他,因为必得见他的真体"(约翰一书3:2)。

经验告诉我们,物质之躯终将腐朽消亡。但圣经明示我们将如耶稣一般,获得焕然一新的肉身。我们现世的躯体会患病衰老,不听使唤, 而复活后的身体将完美无瑕,永不朽坏,完全适应新生命的需要。8 耶稣复活后的身体既保留了原有形貌使人可辨,又具备了全新特质以致不能立时被认出。其形态相似却已改变,这也预示着我们将来必要改变(哥林多前书 15:51-52)。

N.T. 赖特,《惊喜于希望》 纽约: 哈珀柯林斯出版社,2008 年),147-63 页。

如同耶稣的身体, 我们复活后的身体也将具备行走、 触摸进食的能力, 同时可能拥有耶稣所展现的某些能力。 维克托 (约 1150 年 )推测 复活后的身体 免于死亡与悲伤;它将处于力量的巅峰,摆脱疾病与畸形,保持在三十岁左右的年纪,这正是基督开始传道时的年龄。 这具身体超越我们所能想象的一切, 甚至超越基督复活后人间显现的记载。9 这种永生盼望我们恐惧中释放。 无畏的大卫曾说:信靠神, 必不惧怕。 人能把我怎么样呢?”(诗篇 56:11)。问得好;答案是:“人能杀害我们。”但这真的那么糟糕吗?那些杀害我们的人不过是让我们比预期更早地进入神的同在。正如大卫宣告的:“耶我的亮光,我的拯救——我还 I

谁呢?”(27:1)。

因此彼得教导我们明智地选择自己的恐惧。 我们不能盲目追随他人恐惧。高处有毒生物保持警惕合理的, 但必须审慎评估恐惧,因为许多恐惧实属谬误。我们畏惧改变与未知,但它们真有那么可怕吗?我们害怕失去健康、财富和朋友。虽然忧患意识看似明智,但当我们审视信仰先贤时,会发现磨难正是他们故事的核心。正如亚伯拉罕登上圣经舞台时,便舍弃了世俗的财富与安稳。 就在离开前,献出了自己珍爱的儿子。 我们喜爱这些故事,“只要它们发生在别人身上”。10 但它们确实教会我们无畏地生活。

因此我们活在盼望中 并且我们能够阐明盼望。彼得补充道, 我们必须 “以温柔敬畏的心回答各人,存着无亏的良心,叫你们在何事上被毁谤,就在何事上可以叫那诬赖你们在基督里有好品行的人自觉羞愧” 彼得前书 3:15-16 和合本 )。 这段教导值得仔细推敲。 首先, 彼得指出我们应当活出美好生命, 以致即便遭受毁谤, 那些 恶意的终将明白自己说谎感到羞愧。 具体而言, 彼得教导我们保持温柔尊重。 温柔 (或称谦和 即是谦卑, 一种

杰弗里· 伯顿· 罗素, 天堂历史 新版 (普林斯顿, 新泽西州: 普林斯顿大学出版社,1998 年),第 119 页及以下。

·B. 阿连德, 被讲述: 认识你的故事, 塑造你的人生》(科罗拉多斯普林斯: 水溪出版社,2005 年),第 40 页。

拒绝使用武力主张权利。11 尊重实质上就是敬畏。 有趣的是, 门徒能够世人展现这种正确的敬畏, 因为我们对怀有更大的敬重或畏惧(参 1:17)。 因此, 当我们遭受诽谤或诬告时, 可以温柔谦卑地回应, 因为我们知道至高主宰必为我们伸冤(2:23)。 因此,美名虽可贵 (箴 22:1)我们不必世人法庭上自己辩护。

This is important for Christian leaders who are the targets of unjust attacks that are actually directed at Christ and his church globally. (Lest we pity ourselves, let’s recall that we receive praise for things we didn’t do right as well as blame for things we didn’t do wrong.) Since righteousness seems bizarre to some people (1 Peter 4:4), it is impossible to silence every accuser. Therefore, sometimes it is right to stop defending ourselves and to follow Jesus as we entrust ourselves to God’s judgment (2:23). ...

It is our task to keep “a clear conscience,” a confidence that our behavior has been good (Acts 23:1; Rom. 2:15; Heb. 13:18). Our good behavior, Peter reminds us, is “in Christ” (1 Peter 3:16). Jesus defines good conduct by his commands and his example (3:18), and he is “the power and motivation for good conduct in even the most provoking situations.”12 ...

The disciple, wrongly accused, might suffer unjustly. Yet “it is better, if it is God’s will, to suffer for doing good than for doing evil” (1 Peter 3:17). This restates, in broader terms, what Peter earlier told Christian slaves (2:19–20); he says it again in 4:13–15. If we suffer for doing evil, we merely endure just punishment. A believer cannot claim persecution when punished for wickedness or folly. But if we suffer for doing good, we demonstrate our union with Christ and can expect to join him in glory (4:13–14). Until then, we strive to live well and endure suffering “if it is God’s will.”13 ...

First Peter 2:12 directs us to live honorably and trust God to vindicate us if slandered. Here he notes that we live so well that slander is obviously false (3:16). First Peter 2:18–20 says that slaves follow Jesus’ example when they endure injustice. Here Peter explains why and how Jesus suffered. We ...

The Greek is prautēs; the companion adjective praus appears in texts such as Matthew 5:5 (“Blessed are the meek”) and 21:5. ...

Peter H. Davids, The First Epistle of Peter (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1990), 133. ...

In the phrase “if it is God’s will” (1 Peter 3:17), the verb’s mood is optative, suggesting that this suffering is possible, but not certain. ...

know that Jesus’ suffering sets an example, yet 1 Peter 3:18 points out that we have more than just another case of a man who suffered for doing good. Above all, Jesus did not merely suffer; he suffered to the point of death, for our sins.14 That is, Jesus died a substitutionary death. He did nothing to deserve suffering or death. He was sinless and deserved nothing but God’s favor. Logically, since the Father would not let an innocent man suffer and die—for that would be unjust—Jesus suffered on behalf of another. Peter teaches that Christ suffered and died “for sins once for all, the righteous for the unrighteous” (1 Peter 3:18). That is, we have a one-time, permanent, nonrepeatable substitution: Jesus, the righteous, died for us, the unrighteous. He bore on our behalf the punishment, the death that our sins deserved. As Isaiah had prophesied centuries earlier, “My righteous servant will justify ...

many, and he will bear their iniquities” (Isa. 53:11). ...

Furthermore, Jesus suffered “that he might bring us to God” (1 Peter 3:18 esv). He died to lead us from death to life, from slavery to freedom, from alienation to knowledge of God. So we passed from enemy territory into God’s presence. We crossed over from death to life (John 5:24). But Jesus’ death is not final. He was “put to death in the flesh but made alive in the spirit” (1 Peter 3:18 esv). Jesus’ death killed his flesh (for a time), but it did not kill him. When we are then united to him by faith, death will not destroy us either. ...

Careful readers notice that Peter draws on the example of Christ repeatedly—in 1 Peter 2:18–25; 3:14–18; and 4:12–14. Whenever Peter com- ments on injustice, the suffering of slaves, or the persecution of disciples, he turns to Jesus’ life to make sense of it. He decides that if Jesus could suffer unjustly, his disciples can, too. Indeed, the force of Jesus’ moral example might be more prominent in Peter than in any other epistle. Still, moral example is by no means Peter’s prime concept of atonement. Even if Peter turns to the cross for moral reasons, he begins and ends with the cross as the source of atonement and of grace. It is the foundation for the Christian life before it is an example. Thus, 1 Peter 1 says that believers are holy because they “were redeemed” from their futile life by “the precious blood of Christ,” God’s spotless Lamb (1:14–19). In chapter 5, Peter calls himself “a witness ...

The Greek text varies here; some manuscripts say that Jesus suffered, others that he died. The Greek words for suffered and died are fairly similar. And the meanings overlap, since we know that Jesus shed his blood and died (1 Peter 1:3, 19). ...

of Christ’s sufferings,” which offered the grace in which we stand (5:1, 10). So Peter establishes the atonement in 1:14–19, returns to it in 2:22–24 and 3:18, and then presents it as a pattern for disciples. ...

Peter reminds us that the starting point for every issue that the Christian faces can be found in the gospel: ...

If we commit sins, Jesus is our propitiation, our atoning sacrifice. ...

If we are condemned for sin, Jesus justifies us by grace through faith. ...

If sins and character flaws hold us captive, he redeems or liberates us. ...

If we are estranged, he reconciles us to himself and his people. ...

If we feel isolated, he adopts us into his family. ...

If we feel insignificant, the gospel unites us to him. ...

Beyond these spiritual and soteriological issues, the gospel also speaks to our moral life, our conduct, as Peter knows: ...

In society, we are humble, even as Christ humbled himself and made himself nothing. ...

In marriage, we love as Christ loved the church. ...

At work, like Christ, we do our duty and fulfill our calling. ...

First Peter 3:13–18 is a highly theological passage; nonetheless, it contains several suggestions about the conduct of life of the believer. First, 3:14 directs, we should live fearlessly. Or rather, a proper fear of God should drive out lesser fears—public opinion, human foes, tragedy, our own weakness. So we should choose our fears well. It’s sensible to fear snakes and heights, but the Lord, in his awesome goodness and justice, is the One to fear. Second, 3:16 urges, we should keep a clear conscience, so that if we face unjust attacks, we will be able to defend ourselves, with gentle self-confidence and reverence for God, our Protector and Judge. Third, when an opponent speaks, we should “be prepared to make a defense” and to give a reason “for the hope that is in [us]” (3:15 esv). This defense may be formal, in court, or informal, among friends. Finally, we remember that even if we suffer (or die!), the Lord vindicates his people. That liberates us even from the fear of death. For the love of God drives out all lesser fears, that we might live in reverent fear of him (3:15). ...

12

The Work of the Living Christ ...

x BeCex 3:x8–zz ...

For Christ died for sins once for all, the righteous for the unrighteous, to bring you to God. He was put to death in the body but made alive by the Spirit, through whom also he went and preached to the spirits in prison who disobeyed long ago. (1 Peter 3:18–20a) ...

The Challenge of Understanding Our Passage ...

First Peter 3:18b–22 is by all accounts the most difficult passage to inter- pret in 1 Peter—some say the entire New Testament. Lengthy academic works aim simply to describe the history of its interpretation, or even single aspects of it, such as Jesus’ speech “to the spirits in prison” (3:19). Indeed, since this is an expository commentary, I feel obligated to suggest that it might be best for pastors to preach 1 Peter 3:19–22 in conjunction with the larger passage, 3:13–22, of which it is a part.1 However difficult 3:19–22 may ...

Grammatically, the sentence that starts at 1 Peter 3:18 ends at 3:20, and a grammatical con- nection runs to the end of 3:22, so there is continuity from verses 18 to 22. I believe it is generally best for pastors to preach through the grammatical units of a book when possible. The mind of the expositor is more likely to conform to the mind of the apostle and of Christ. There is less tempta- ...

be, if we read the passage in context and hold to the essentials of the faith, we will at least avoid major error.2 ...

Taking 1 Peter 3:13–22 as a whole, we see that the end of the passage gives reasons for the commands stated in the beginning. The passage is a cousin of 1 Peter 2:18–25. Both present Jesus as the supreme example of the innocent man who endures mistreatment. In 1 Peter 2, Jesus suffers injustice and entrusts himself to God. In 1 Peter 3, Jesus suffers for doing good and experiences God’s vindication. In each passage, Jesus both illustrates and empowers righteous action. Yet whereas 1 Peter 2 accents Jesus’ sacrifice, 1 Peter 3 calls attention to his resurrection, exaltation, and power over all (3:21–22). ...

First Peter 3:13–18 explains that Christians who suffer are “blessed” and free from fear because they know Christ as Lord. The Christian keeps a clear conscience so that those who malign believers “may be ashamed of their slander” (3:14–16). Further, “it is better . . . to suffer for doing good than for doing evil” (3:17). No suffering can thwart God’s purposes, Peter states, “for Christ died for sins once for all . . . to bring you to God” (3:18a). But after he died, God raised him in power and vindicated him, giving us strong hope of the same vindication (3:18, 22). ...

Scholars generally agree that 1 Peter 3:18–22 draws on an early creed or hymn, since the structure and vocabulary seem to differ from the rest of Peter, but to say more is to speculate. The texture of 3:18–19 is almost poetic: ...

For Christ also suffered once for sins, the righteous for the unrighteous, that he might bring us to God, ...

being put to death in the flesh ...

but [being] made alive in the spirit [or “made alive by the Spirit,” niv] ...

in which [or “through whom,” niv] he went and proclaimed [“preached,” niv] to the spirits in prison. (esv) ...

tion for the teacher to seize topics in the text and separate them from it. While it can be difficult to preach the entire unit when working with longer passages, it is generally feasible in New Testament epistles. A pastor could cover 1 Peter 3:13–22 in one sermon, focusing on 3:13–18, and then treat the certainties and essentials of 3:19–22. Not every congregation is ready for an entire sermon on a text as complex as 3:19–22. ...

Interested pastors may turn to reliable academic commentaries by Achtemeier, Davids, Gop- pelt, Jobes, and Michaels if they wish to probe riddles of the passage in detail. ...

Even here, in the easier part of the passage, there are riddles. Above all, it seems impossible to be sure whether the Greek means that Jesus was made alive in his human spirit or made alive by God’s Spirit. Further, did he preach in his spirit or did he preach in the power of God’s Spirit? Interpreters and translators are divided and uncertain. First, Greek doesn’t use capital let- ters except for personal names, so we don’t know whether spirit should be capitalized, to refer to the Holy Spirit, or not, to refer to Jesus’s spirit. Either reading makes sense in context. Second, the word spirit is in the dative case, without a clarifying preposition. As a result, the sense could be that Jesus is alive in or with regard to his spirit or that he is alive by means of God’s Spirit. If we step back from the exegetical uncertainties, however, we see that each reading is possible grammatically and theologically because other sections of the New Testament show that both are true: Jesus is alive in his human spirit and by the Holy Spirit. Moreover, Jesus both preached in his spirit and by the Holy Spirit, since the Spirit empowered all of Jesus’ life and ministry. From Luke 1–4 alone, we know that the Spirit begat Christ (Luke 1:35), entered him at baptism (3:16, 22), led him to combat Satan (4:1), and empowered his miracles and his message (4:14, 18). Let’s not be dismayed that it’s difficult to separate the work of the spirit of Jesus the man from the work of God the Spirit. Rather, we should give thanks for the unity in the ...

work and persons of the triune God. ...

Whatever the uncertainties in 1 Peter 3:18–19, the main theme is manifest: When Jesus suffered unjustly, God vindicated him, and he will vindicate us, too. Further, there is a tight connection between verses 18 and 22, where identical aorist passive participles (all ending with the letters -theis) connect what humans did to Jesus and what the Father did for Jesus. ...

He was put to death, by men, in the flesh (thanatōtheis). ...

He was made alive in the Spirit [or in his spirit] (zōopoiētheis). He has gone to heaven (poreutheis). ...

This threefold declaration is the framework for the passage. Jesus was put to death, and then rose to life and ascended into heaven. Peter wants us to know that if we suffer and even die for the faith, God will raise and vindicate us, too. It is all too common for Western Christians to obsess over their pains and sorrows. But if we can discipline ourselves to lift our ...

eyes from present troubles, we should find courage in knowing that we will follow the pattern of Christ, through suffering to resurrection and vindication. ...

The skeleton of 1 Peter 3:18–22 is clear, but questions abound. First Peter 3:19–20 (esv) says that Jesus “went and proclaimed to the spirits in prison, because they formerly did not obey, when God’s patience waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was being prepared, in which a few, that is, eight per- sons, were brought safely through water.” Four questions seem prominent: ...

(1) Where did Jesus go? (2) Who were the spirits in prison? (3) What is their prison? (4) What did Jesus say to them? ...

The Misuse of Our Passage ...

If we hope to interpret this passage correctly, we cannot import 1 Peter 4:6 or Ephesians 4:9 or the Apostles’ Creed (“he descended into hell”) into it. The passage does not say that Jesus “descended,” nor does it mention hell. It states that he went, not that he went down. Further, we cannot assume that prison (phulakē) means “hell.” New Testament Greek had an ample vocabulary to refer to the idea of hell or the realm of the dead—Hades, Gehenna, the abyss, the lake of fire, the outer darkness, Tartarus—but prison is no part of that vocabulary.3 Clearly, we must read Peter on its own terms. Furthermore, the likelihood of misreading multiplies when people come looking for evidence to support their heterodox ideas. Specifically, there is interest in finding, in 1 Peter 3, evidence of a postmortem evangelistic proclamation of the gospel. That proclamation might be for those who never heard the gospel in this life or for those who heard but rejected it. At the popular level, we have Love Wins, by the difficult-to-categorize pastor Rob Bell. Evincing a slippery grasp on history as well as theology, Bell asserts, “At the center of the Christian tradition since the first church have been a number who insist that history is not tragic, hell is not forever, and love, in the end, wins and all will be reconciled to God.”4 Of course, to reach universal ...

See “Regions below the Surface of the Earth,” in Johannes Louw and Eugene Nida, Greek- English Lexicon of the New Testament: Based on Semantic Domains, 2nd ed. (New York: United Bible Societies, 1998–99), 1:5–7. ...

Rob Bell, Love Wins: A Book about Heaven, Hell, and the Fate of Every Person Who Ever Lived ...

(New York: HarperOne, 2011), 109. ...

salvation, there must be postmortem evangelism.5 To my knowledge, Bell never actually cites 1 Peter 3. But it would be plausible for self-identified Christians to do so, since they like to appeal to Scripture. ...

Archbishop Hilarion Alfeyev of the Russian Orthodox Church does appeal to 1 Peter 3 in his substantive monograph, Christ the Conqueror of Hell. Alfeyev focuses more on patristic tradition and orthodox liturgy than on Scripture, but he does cite 1 Peter 3:19 and 4:6 as he starts his argument. He claims that Peter’s words “serve as the basis for understanding” how Jesus’ “preaching in hell” reached Noah’s generation, described in Genesis 6:6 ...

Those who were condemned earlier “according to men in the flesh” by God who, according to the biblical expression, “was sorry” that he had created them, did not perish eternally. Christ descended into hell, granting them another chance of salvation by preaching to them the Gospel of the kingdom so that they might live “according to God in the spirit.”7 ...

Alfeyev wants to draw on Scripture, and for about three pages he mentions seven or eight passages that “serve as the basis” for his assertion that the patristic and orthodox tradition, especially in its liturgy, has long claimed that Christ descended into hell and preached, postmortem, to those who had not believed in him while on earth. Further, his tradition says that Jesus “freed all who were held captive” and “emptied hell” so that no mortals remained. Thus, Jesus descended into hell as Conqueror, to mortify death and destroy hell.8 ...

A scholar such as Alfeyev chooses his words carefully, so that the phrase “serve as the basis” is telling. The New Testament texts that he cites indeed “serve” his argument. He cites them but does not attempt to make his case from them. Indeed, he gives just three pages on the New Testament, but grants fourteen pages on apocryphal literature, sixty on the patristic tradi- tion, and fifty on the liturgy of the Orthodox Church. Alfeyev will hardly be the only person to see whether 1 Peter can serve his purposes, cite him ...

Fans of C. S. Lewis must acknowledge that he at least made it possible to read The Great Divorce ...

as a guess at how that might occur. ...

Hilarion Alfeyev, Christ the Conqueror of Hell: The Descent into Hades from an Orthodox Per- spective (St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 2009), 19. ...

Ibid., 18–19. ...

Ibid., 203–18. ...

briefly, and move on. For Alfeyev, like others in the Roman and Orthodox tradition, tradition has as much weight as Scripture—more in some cases, since the tradition teaches us how to interpret Scripture. In that tradition it is acceptable to argue this way: ...

Scripture could indicate X. ...

While Scripture isn’t clear regarding X, our tradition affirms X with certainty. ...

Therefore, we affirm X with certainty. ...

Let no evangelical Protestant follow that pattern of reasoning. It is fine to say, “Scripture is not clear, but our confession says,” and then show respect to a confession that captures the wisdom of godly leaders past. But those who profess the supreme authority of Scripture should never argue: “Scripture is not clear, but our confession is. Therefore, we affirm and require adherence to the confession.” Instead, let the many bodies that affirm the Westminster Confession appreciate the genius of its assertion that Scripture is infallible but councils are not. And let us require supreme allegiance to God and his Word. No human artifact merits such loyalty. ...

The Gospel Proclaimed to the “Spirits in Prison ...

The task of the faithful expositor is clear. If we cannot plumb the mysteries of the passage, we can (1) state the main, clear points and (2) avoid major error by refusing to base novel doctrines on an obscure passage. ...

So, then, Peter states that Jesus “preached” (niv) or “proclaimed” (esv, nasb) something. The Greek verb is not euaggelizomai, “to preach the gospel or good news,” but kērussō, “to make a proclamation.” Like other words, kērussō has a range of meanings, and it can be used for evangelistic proc- lamations (e.g., Rom. 10:8–15; Gal. 2:2), but it typically means “to make an official announcement or public declaration,” not “to evangelize” (e.g., Mark 1:45; Gal. 5:11; Rev. 5:2). So we need not think that Jesus evangelized the spirits in prison. ...

Next, who are these “spirits in prison”? Theories abound. They could be the demons that Jesus cast out during his ministry in Israel, as they await a final reckoning hinted at in Luke 8:26–33. But there is barely a scrap of ...

evidence for this interpretation. They could be all the saints of old, waiting for Jesus to liberate them from Sheol or the bonds of death. But the efficacy of Jesus’ sacrifice is not bound by time. There is no need to believe that Old Testament saints were separated from God from the day of their death to the day of Jesus’ resurrection. The spirits could be the antediluvian generation of humans who lived in the darkness of Noah’s day. But why would they be singled out to hear Jesus’ words? Or they could be fallen angels, perhaps those mentioned in Genesis 6 and imprisoned by God (2 Peter 2:4; Jude 6). The last option, that Jesus made a proclamation to fallen angels, is most widely adopted, for several reasons. ...

First, in the New Testament, the word spirits (plural) “always refers to non-human spiritual beings unless qualified.” It calls deceased humans souls (psuchē).9 So unless this passage is the lone exception (and it would be special pleading to claim that it is), spirits does not mean “humans” here either. Typically, spirits refers to evil spirits or fallen angels. ...

Second, we can identify the spirits who “disobeyed . . . in the days of Noah.” In Peter’s time, the most common Jewish understanding of Genesis 6 held that fallen angels played a great role in corrupting humans in Noah’s generation. These fallen angels are prominent in 1 Enoch 12–21. Of course, Enoch is not authoritative, but it was a widely known and revered book at the time, so we can expect readers to pick up an allusion to it.10 First Enoch 21:6–10 says that fallen angels “transgressed the commandment of the Lord” and so were bound to prison. ...

Third, as we saw earlier, prison probably does not refer to hell, since the New Testament uses many other terms for the location of dead, unre- deemed humans. We notice that no location for Peter’s prison is given. It seems wise (if not certain) to take prison as a metaphor for God’s control over evil spirits. Jesus’ domination of evil spirits is certainly a pervasive theme in the Gospels and Acts, as both he and his apostles break their power and force them to submit to his will. Indeed, the Synoptics’ prin- cipal explanation of Jesus’ power over demons uses a similar metaphor for his control of Satan: ...

Peter H. Davids, The First Epistle of Peter (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1990), 139–40. ...

We may say that an allusion to Enoch in that day might be picked up much as an allusion to ...

C. S. Lewis’s Aslan might be picked up today. ...

But if I drive out demons by the Spirit of God, then the kingdom of God has come upon you. ...

Or again, how can anyone enter a strong man’s house and carry off his possessions unless he first ties up the strong man? (Matt. 12:28–29) ...

We cannot know what Jesus told the spirits in prison, but several New Tes- tament themes would be appropriate: Their realm is now under his dominion. Every knee will bow to him. Their doom is sealed, since Jesus’ death and resurrection concludes and demonstrates his control over evil in all places and forever. Martin Luther supposedly said that if Jesus descended into hell, he spent three days thumbing his nose at the devil. There may be truth to the gibe. After all, demons seem confused about Jesus’ life and ministry. In the beginning, when Satan tempted Jesus, he offered bloodless paths to glory (Matt. 4:1–11). But at the end, he prompted Judas to betray Jesus to death (John 13:27). Perhaps Jesus proclaimed that his death, resurrection, and exaltation sealed their defeat and doom. We cannot now know. But we do know that nothing in 1 Peter 3 promotes the idea that Jesus evangelized humans after their deaths. ...

Indeed, if we want to guard against uncertainty by asserting what is certain, let us affirm this: If the essence of hell is separation from God, then Jesus “descended into hell” on the cross. He experienced separation from the Father while on the cross. The Apostles’ Creed declares that Jesus was crucified, dead, and buried and that he descended into hell. What the creed says is true, but the order of two phrases should be reversed to read, “He was crucified, descended into hell, was dead and buried, and rose again on the third day.” Jesus’ main descent into hell occurred on the cross. After his death, Scripture notes, he did not join the devil in hell; he joined the Father in paradise (Luke 24:34, 46). ...

God gives people ample opportunity to repent in this life. Indeed, Peter relates, during the long years when Noah built the ark, “God waited patiently,” but no one responded to the call to repent. Sadly, Peter says, “in it only a few people, eight in all, were saved through water” (1 Peter 3:20). With this segue to baptism, Peter presents a similarity between Noah’s family and the family of Christians. The senses are different, but both are saved through water. Yet whereas a few were saved through water in Noah’s day, now, Peter asserts, baptism saves you through the resurrection of Christ. ...

“藉

无论挪亚家族基督的家有何差异 上帝的子民都凭信心持守祂的立约应许,主必拯救祂的羊群。彼得指出,挪亚一家正是“藉着水得救”(彼得前书 3:20)。 他接着说:"这水所表明的洗礼,现在借着耶稣基督复活也拯救你们;这洗礼本不在乎除掉肉体的污秽,只求在神面前有无亏的良心"(彼得前书3:21-22上)。如果我们精简彼得前书3:21前半节,就会听到"洗礼现在拯救你们"这句话(新美国标准版圣经使用了完全相同的措辞)。教会长期以来一直对这句话存在争议。

早期教会中,许多人认为洗礼对救赎至关重要,并将这一信念体现在为垂死婴儿施行的紧急洗礼中。 后来, 奥古斯丁提出观点认为婴儿通过受洗纳入教会的信仰与生活体系。 另一些人则侧重于为成人皈依者洗礼所做的长期准备。 他们洗礼信仰的承认联系起来、 通过一个人分享基督的死 复活 中世纪,托马斯-阿奎那(Thomas Aquinas)等人强调上帝通过七件圣事来施恩。在这一体系中,洗礼的重要作用是消除原罪的罪孽。

众所周知,新教徒们争论婴儿洗礼是否正当适用 是,象征成就何事。过度简化之险, 我们多数新教徒旨在规避两种谬误。 其一, 鉴于经文明示洗礼之效, 他们不愿将洗礼贬为已获恩典的单纯标记。因圣经明言:洗礼使我们与基督联合(罗马书 6:1 及后)、披戴基督(加拉太书 3:27)、并入基督身体(哥林多前书 12:13)。

其次, 我们知道 洗礼这一行为本身不能带来救赎 (我们否认罗马教廷所主张" 因功生效 " 概念——圣礼本身具有效力。)圣经明确指出 耶稣的救赎本乎恩因着信 这在关键经文《使徒行传》2:21、15:11、16:31《罗马书》10:9-10均有明证。 况且 显而易见的是,许多受洗者最终背弃了主及其圣约。

因此,新教徒承认上帝在洗礼中赐予恩典,但否认这能确保救赎或必然带来永恒生命的重生。 我们希望两种谬误之间持守中道。 我们否认洗礼仅仅是一个空洞的仪式

记号,也否认洗礼是具有内在效力的记号。那么洗礼究竟成就了什么?

威斯敏斯特信条 似乎规避了我们面临的双重危险,阐明了洗礼积极作用。28.1 章节中,指出洗礼是耶稣基督设立的圣礼, 旨在使"受洗者加入有形教会", 并作为 "恩典之约的标记与印证, 以及信徒与基督联合的象征"。信条28.5-6 章节中进一步论述了洗礼的效力:

28.5. 虽然轻视或忽视此圣礼乃大罪,但恩典与救赎并非如此不可分割地与之相连,以致于没有它不能重生得救:不意味着所有受洗者必然重生。

28.6. 洗礼的效力并不局限于施行的那一刻;然而通过正确使用此圣礼, 所应许的恩典不仅被提供,而且圣灵确实会按照上帝旨意的安排,在祂预定的时间,恩典真实彰显赐予那些 (无论成人婴孩) 配得之人。

至少新教关于洗礼经典论述。洗礼"恩典之约记号印证"实为施恩具。信条着重强调圣约中所应许的恩典 以及基督联合。 二者坚实圣经依据。 《罗马书》6 章 1 至 4 节说,我们受洗归入基督的死与复活,与他联合(参 《加》3:27)。《使徒行传》2:38-41洗礼约中的恩典相连——当彼得在五旬节讲道的高潮,对那些知罪的人说:"你们要悔改,受洗" 这应许是给你们和你们儿女的。"

尽管如此, 唯独圣经 原则仍促使我们放下信条,思考其他经文。 我们基督教洗礼的源头起点—— 耶稣《马太福音》28:18-20颁布的大使命开始。 在那里, 耶稣洗礼置于门徒造就的语境中 神学争论往往聚焦于重生救赎, 这两者虽相关截然不同)。 在大使命中,耶稣吩咐门徒们"使万民作我的门徒,"和施洗是门徒训练的方式或途径。

For adults, baptism is a confirmation of their faith and an instrument of their union with the triune God. For children, the Spirit may or may not impart new life at the time of baptism, but baptism can surely be a means for discipleship. For instance, when a child witnesses an infant baptism during worship, parents (or others) can remind the child of his or her own baptism: ...

We baptized you when you were little, too. We promised to raise you to trust Jesus. The pastor put water on you, too. We use water for washing, and when we baptized you, we asked God to wash away your sins. The pastor also said, “In the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit” for you. That means that he asked God to be your God. Now you belong to him. We all want you to believe in God for yourself, but baptism means that you are never all by yourself. See how the family always comes to baptisms and how the whole church is there? Our family came, too, and we pray for you. The people of the church promised to care for you as well. We teach you and pray for you so that you will belong to God and follow him all your life. [Friends in the Baptist tradition can adopt this outlook, with necessary adjustments, since infant dedication shares substantial common ground with infant baptism.] ...

Is all of this consistent with 1 Peter 3? Yes, although it is not immediately obvious. To quote the esv, which offers an essentially literal, word-for-word translation: “Baptism, which corresponds to this [the baptism of Noah’s fam- ily], now saves you, not as a removal of dirt from the body but as an appeal to God for a good conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ” (3:21). We still hear the words “baptism . . . now saves you.” Yet Peter is clear that neither water nor baptism, per se, can save. The act itself does not save. What saves is the “appeal to God for a good conscience.” What saves, to paraphrase, is the proper awareness of God that leads someone to seek and find peace with him. This occurs, however, not on the basis of the interest or effort of the person in question, but “through the resurrection of Jesus Christ, who has gone into heaven and is at the right hand of God, with angels, authorities, and powers having been subjected to him” (1 Peter 3:21–22 esv). The risen and reigning Christ saves and is the basis of our appeal to God. ...

Water baptism represents all this. ...

So Peter returns to the conquering power of Jesus’ resurrection and ascen- sion and the assurance it brings. Jesus “suffered once for sins, the righteous for the unrighteous, that he might bring us to God” (1 Peter 3:18 esv). To ...

atone for sin, Jesus had to endure the pain and shame of the cross. Still, just as Jesus’ openness to dangerous obedience is our model, his ascension and exaltation are our hope, for God raised him from the dead and seated him “at God’s right hand” (3:21–22). Peter assures us that just as the Father vindicated Jesus, so he will vindicate us if we suffer for him. That ought to motivate the fearlessness Peter advocated in 3:14. If we have the mind of Christ, we can and should put it into practice. ...

Peter has already described how the mind of Christ galvanizes us for cou- rageous living. We fear God, not humanity (1 Peter 2:17; 3:15). We commit to make God’s grace visible (3:15–16). In troubles, we await vindication and entrust ourselves to God, who judges justly (2:23). Because Jesus conquered death, nothing can keep us from joining him at God’s right hand. We lay hold of God’s power by the faith that unites us to him, so his character and his deeds become ours. Naturally, all of this is easier said than done. We need the means of grace to lay hold of the courage that is ours—prayer, Christian community, praise (alone and in public worship), meditation, repentance, and the right use of the sacraments, including baptism. Whatever we find uncertain in life or in the message of 1 Peter 3, this should be clear. “Christ died for sins once for all, the righteous for the unrighteous, to bring you to God” (3:18). Now he “has gone into heaven and is at God’s right hand—with angels, authorities and powers in submission to him” (3:22). ...

13

Breaking with Sin ...

x BeCex e:x–n ...

Therefore, since Christ suffered in his body, arm yourselves also with the same attitude, because he who has suffered in his body is done with sin. As a result, he does not live the rest of his earthly life for evil human desires, but rather for the will of God. ...

(1 Peter 4:1–2) ...

Goals for Life ...

The pilgrims who settled New England came to America, from one per- spective, because they felt alienated from their own culture. They first left England for Amsterdam, then Leiden, and then the New World, in a search for religious freedom. They left England because laws required attendance at the Church of England, which they considered corrupt. In Amsterdam and Leiden, some pilgrims found no work. When they saw their children becoming ever more Dutch, they decided to go to America. There they met cold, hunger, disease, hostility (since the natives had already met slavers), and, all too often, death. The pilgrims sacrificed so much because they wanted to pursue a life of purity and devotion to God. Their dedication shows that strong goals, rigorously pursued, can lead almost anywhere. But “anywhere” ...

could entail suffering, and suffering tempts some to abandon their goals. Yet if we give up when we face hardship, life becomes dull. There is less pain, but less meaning. Whether someone wants to start a new society or a new company, great goals are costly and demand sacrifices. ...

Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi is a champion of goals. Well-chosen goals, he declares, leave us no time to be unhappy. Challenging and engaging goals leave us “little room . . . for noticing the entropy of normal life.” At a mini- mum, therefore, goals are a superb diversion. But how are we to choose the right goals? Adults cannot assume that meaning comes through traditional roles—woman as wife and mother, man as worker and provider. So, then, Csikszentmihalyi asks, “How do we know where to invest psychic energy?” No one can show us the goal that deserves our energy, so each person must discover his or her purpose independently, through trial and error and self-knowledge.1 ...

Is Csikszentmihalyi right? Do we examine ourselves so that we can find or create meaning? Can we find the equilibrium between action and con- templation, so that we can pursue the right goals? How many have aimed at a goal, reached it, and then realized that it was a mistake? Further, we often choose noble goals and fail to reach them. We can choose marriage and suffer betrayal. We can choose a sensible career and watch it explode for reasons outside our control. Unfortunately, in order to be sure that we have chosen the right goals, we would need to be omniscient. And even if we choose the right goals, if we select the wrong means, we court disaster. I have spent many days working on projects or goals that I never envi- sioned. As a young man, I wanted to be a teaching professor, introducing students to the glories of Christian theology and philosophy. I expected to lead vibrant seminars that periodically ended with a cookout and Wiffle ball in my backyard. But for a decade, I led a large urban church where I raised money, solved communication problems, trained new staff, and wrote when time permitted. I never envisioned giving myself to the first three at ...

all or giving so much to the last. ...

Maybe I lost my way, maybe not. We make plans as best we can, staying within God’s revealed will. We measure our abilities, passions, and oppor- tunities, yet we say “Lord willing” because Scripture teaches us to hold our ...

Mihaly Csikszentmihalyi, Flow: The Psychology of Optimal Experience (New York: Harper & Row, 1990), 225–27. ...

goals loosely. The Lord is free to overrule our plans: “To man belong the plans of the heart, but from the Lord comes the reply In his heart a ...

man plans his course, but the Lord determines his steps” (Prov. 16:1, 9). That is, we can have goals, but must keep them open to revision. ...

Perhaps we should think less of “my goals” and more of following God’s call to Christ and to holiness. Then we can take account of our gifts, training, and experiences. We know that we are on the right path if we say with Paul, “I want to know Christ and the power of his resurrection and the fellowship of sharing in his sufferings Forgetting what is behind and straining toward what is ...

ahead, I press on toward the goal to which God has called me” (Phil. 3:10, ...

13–14). The principal goal is to know Christ. Then we search for personal goals, which are secondary and provisional, open to God’s midcourse adjustments. ...

God himself pursues goals, above all the redemption of humanity through the work of Jesus. And he assigns goals to some of his servants. He chose Moses to lead Israel from Egypt (Ex. 3:9–10) and Paul to proclaim the gospel to the Gentiles (Acts 9:15). We see the same thing in Peter himself. Still, because we see dimly, we might not perceive our God-given assignments. We might also think a task is ours when it is not. We must remember that David wanted to build the temple and that Nathan initially approved David’s desire (1 Chron. 17, 22). ...

This shows, again, that we must maintain some critical distance or detach- ment from our plans. Our self-appraisals are always somewhat inaccurate and sometimes flatly erroneous, so we remain open to correction. And as long as we love and obey God, our tactical errors will be less damaging. Personal goals are less important if we do the good that lies before us and trust the results to God. Yet we dare not drift through life, taking whatever others thrust upon us, squandering our gifts because we fail to hone them. We may imagine ourselves as travelers on a great overland journey, from Cairo to Cape Town. We plan to visit places familiar from an earlier stint in East Africa. We know that parts of the trip—a cruise up the Nile, perhaps—will be safe and pleasant. Other phases will take us to semiclosed borders and to roads of dirt and sand that are more theoretical than substantial. Yet in all the uncertainty, there is a launch point and a terminus, and a sense of the way from one end to the other.2 ...

Paul Theroux took this journey in 2001, as recounted in Dark Star Safari: Overland from Cairo to Cape Town (Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 2003). ...

This image can provide a lens on 1 Peter as a whole. Clusters of specific commands are found in 2:13–3:7 and 5:1–5, but large stretches have none. Rather, Peter offers a condensed epitome “of the Christian life and of the conduct that it inspires.”3 He describes the work of Christ and the life that follows in ideal terms. Readers must discover how his general principles manifest themselves daily. Take Peter’s description of the atonement: “He himself bore our sins in his body on the tree” (2:24). He tells us that Jesus’ willingness to suffer and entrust himself to God sets us an example, but he adds no specifics. We need to apply it to ourselves. ...

首先彼得 4:1-6 就是另一个例证 经文开篇道:“所以基督在肉身 你们同样的心志装备自己 ,因为凡在肉身受过苦的,就已经与罪断绝了”(4:1)。 这段经文假定,正如彼得先前所言,神的子民是客旅和寄居的(1:1, 17;2:11)。接着它指出了我们为这身份所付的代价。旧日的朋友不会满意门徒的新生命。他们会震惊,会指责,甚至可能升级为肢体暴力(4:4, 12-19)。

彼得早已觉察到这种危险 勉励他的信徒忍耐:"你们就是为义受苦,也是有福的"(彼得前书 3:14)。他强调耶稣复活得胜的大能及随之而来的确据——基督"也曾一次为罪受苦,就是义的代替不义的,为要引我们到神面前"(3:18esv)。为赎清罪孽,耶稣必须忍受十字架的苦难。4 跟随耶稣意味着彼得门徒也需舍弃安全,在遭受敌对时"将自己交托那按公义审判人的主"(2:23)。但正如耶稣甘愿顺服至危难之境是我们的榜样,祂升到神右边也成了我们的盼望(3:21-22)。

最终我们拥有一个宏大目标—— 按照 "神的旨意" 而活 (彼得前书 4:2) 起点我们异教过往的放荡与偶像崇拜(4:3),终点则是面见审判者并交账的日子(4:5)。除此之外,当我们离弃罪恶跟随基督时,人生道路便豁然开朗。

埃德蒙·克罗尼,《彼得前书的信息:十字架之路》(伊利诺伊州唐纳斯格罗夫:校园出版社,1988 年),15 页。

希伯来书与彼得不谋而合:"让我们定睛仰望耶稣,祂是我们信心的创始成终者,因那摆在前面的喜乐,就轻看羞辱,忍受了十字架的苦难,如今坐在神宝座的右边"(希伯来书 12:2)。

回顾彼得前书 3:18 所言"基督也曾一次为罪受苦",彼得应许道:正如父神为耶稣伸冤,我们若受苦 彼得在 3:14 所倡导的"基督既在肉身受苦,你们也当以同样的心志装备自己,因为凡在肉身受过苦的,就已经与罪断绝了"(4:1)。心,我们必须像战士般全副武装, id=40>以基督的心志洞见行事。5 彼得已经阐明这种洞见: 我们敬畏神, 而非世人 (2:17;3:15)。 我们立志使神的恩典显明 (3:15–16)。患难中, 我们持守 坚定不移的盼望, 等候公义的伸张” 并将自己交托给按公义审判的神(2:23)。6

首先彼得前书 4:1 隐晦地补充道,肉身受过苦的, 就已断绝了。 希腊文动词被翻译为 断绝”原意是 “停止、 终止或完成”某事。7 这意味着当我们认同基督的受苦时,我们就在整体上与罪隔绝了。为信仰、为信念甘愿受苦的态度具有激励作用。受苦一种力量。 甘愿受苦证明我们信仰真实。 一位世俗历史学家指出:“妥协的宗教永远不可能成为 ... 真正的教。8 当我们不惜承受肉体或物质上的苦难仍坚守耶稣时, 我们就是在跟随他。 这种甘愿受苦的态度正表明我们已与的本质—— 自私 —— 彻底决裂。 我们明白自己不仅停留在言语, 而是真正置于自我之上。

苦难的危险看似与多元社会相去甚远,大多数国家这种信仰怀有敌意。(据最新调查显示, 基督徒超过一百个国家面临迫害风险 即便在所谓自由的国度,存在公开信奉基督会招致危险的地区。 彼得时代的信徒们面临着监禁、 鞭打死亡。 约在公元64 年 50 年,克劳狄乌斯将基督徒驱逐出罗马没收了他们的财产。 约在 64-65 年间,

《新国际新约神学词典》 第三卷第 125 页, 词条 “理性”(大急流城: 桑德凡出版社,1975 年)。

斯科特·麦克奈特,《彼得前书》NIV 应用注释本), 大急流城: 桑德凡出版社,1996 年, 第 224 页。

弗雷德里克 ·W. 丹克编, 希腊语-英语词典 新约其他早期基督文献 第 3 版 (芝加哥: 芝加哥大学出版社,2000 年), 第 638 页; 约翰尼斯·卢尤金·尼达,《基于语义域的新约希腊语-英语词典》 第 2 版(纽约: 联合圣经公会,1998–99 年),1:660。希腊语 pauō 尤其中动态形式, 意为“停止做某事”或自我中止; 参路加福音 11:1;使徒行传 14:18。

罗宾 · 莱恩 · 福克斯 ,《 异教徒基督徒 》( 纽约: 克诺夫出版社 1987 年 ), 第 441 页

尼禄使他们流血。 希伯来书 10 章提到较轻的压迫:“你们有时当众羞辱迫害; 有时那些这样对待的人站在一起。你们体恤那些被囚禁的人,并且欣然接受自己的财产被没收,因为知道自己有更美好、长存的产业”(希伯来书 10:33-34)。希伯来书作者说, 情况可能变得更糟。预见到流血事件(12:4)。

Peter also sees heavier suffering approaching: “Dear friends, do not be surprised at the painful trial you are suffering, as though something strange were happening to you” (1 Peter 4:12). So he reminds them that Jesus suffered in the flesh, hinting that we should be ready for the same (4:1). When Jesus submitted to death on the cross, he defied the instinct of self-preservation. We can and must make the same break, even if we don’t face a clear test such as persecution. We make a similar break when we sacrificially give money, time, or personal peace in order to advance the cause of Christ. ...

We distinguish a babysitter from a parent by this: In an emergency, she calls the parents and is free to leave when they arrive. Parents do not leave. The willingness to suffer with and for a child shows that a parent has broken with the life of the childless. So the believer who suffers for righteousness has broken with the easy life. The commitment to ease and pleasure is the source of so much sin. A faith that endures suffering is done with that. ...

Imagine a man who, after a string of reversals, examines himself and decides that he is angry, cynical, lazy, and arrogant, despite a singular lack of achievement. He resolves to change, to become a decent human. Yet he knows that mere resolve is insufficient. He must do something. That night he takes his wife to a play he hates, because she likes it. On the way home, he gives $90 to a homeless man, keeping just $10 for himself. He knows it’s foolish, but he had to give something away that day, to seal his break with the old life.9 A willingness to sacrifice, to suffer loss, proves that he has changed. ...

Arm yourselves with this willingness to suffer, Peter urges, “so as to live for the rest of the time in the flesh no longer for human passions but for the will of God” (1 Peter 4:2 esv). Our “time in the flesh” is our allotted time on earth, whether long or short. It is our span of days, our “time of exile,” ...

Based on Nick Hornby, How to Be Good (New York: Viking, 2001). ...

whether filled with joy or sorrow (Ps. 90:9–17; 1 Peter 1:17). Our lifestyle and our passions can be good or bad. We can indulge evil passions or pursue good ones, but disciples live “for the will of God.” ...

An Indulgent Life ...

In 1 Peter 4:3, Peter explains that his people should live well from that time onward: “For you have spent enough time in the past doing what pagans choose to do—living in debauchery, lust, drunkenness, orgies, carousing and detestable idolatry.” This is ironic understatement. One day is more than enough time for debauchery and idolatry, and Peter’s readers had spent their lives at these things until they received the gospel. ...

Peter’s list of sins fits the times. Debauchery, lust, drunkenness, orgies, and carousing are sensual sins. Many pagans gave themselves to such things, to liaisons with slaves, concubines, courtesans, and lovers, to drinking and feasting, as far as their resources and their need to protect their reputation permitted.10 Idolatry was the norm, but we need to purge certain contem- porary concepts if we want to understand it. The principal religions of the time, emperor worship and the veneration of local patron deities, had scant doctrine or moral instruction. Those duties fell to philosophers. The popular religions emphasized public celebrations, in which everyone was expected to participate. Everyone came together to honor the emperor and swear by his genius, or to pay homage to the city’s patron gods. This promoted social unity and (allegedly) maintained the favor of the gods. Imagine mandatory celebrations of Independence Day as a proof of loyalty to nation and neigh- bor, and we start to see polytheism and emperor worship as Greco-Romans did. Peter calls all of it “lawless idolatry” (1 Peter 4:3 esv), since these gods had no laws of their own and violated the law of God. ...

The vices of Peter’s day have parallels today. We spend enough time sat- isfying our greed and lusts, getting drunk or stoned, and following newer deities. Peter exhorts us that it’s time to change, to stop wasting our lives. ...

Yet when people do change, it might displease old friends. They “are surprised when you do not join them in the same flood of debauchery, and they malign you” (1 Peter 4:4 esv). Old friends notice that the believer no ...

Bruce W. Winter, After Paul Left Corinth: The Influence of Secular Ethics and Social Change ...

(Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2001). ...

longer (literally) “runs” or “travels with” them. The believer has a new crowd, and the old crowd doesn’t like it. It upsets the equilibrium. The woman who lives for her lusts feels threatened or judged by the woman who lives differ- ently. The secular man is baffled. Why doesn’t his friend want to have fun? Change is unsettling, and that includes constructive moral reform. ...

The secular person attacks. The church is still maligned for its moral positions. When a culture abandons biblical standards, when extramarital sex, cohabitation, and birth outside of marriage become normal, people attack the church for its moral snobbery and judgmentalism. While the church might deserve criticism if it constantly scolds, we surely invite reproach if we commit the very sins we condemn and if we blast one sin and tolerate another. Still, there is a time to stand up and say, “That’s wrong.” Peter warns us that if we do take a stand, we need to expect slander, not applause. ...

A Life Conducted in Gods Presence ...

Disciples might feel defenseless, but according to Peter, their foes “will have to give account to him who is ready to judge the living and the dead” (1 Peter 4:5). God is ready to judge all flesh. “The living and the dead” rep- resent all humanity, past and present. If God is ready to judge, we should be ready, too, for “the end of all things is near” (4:7). James likewise says that “the Lord [is] coming,” that his coming is “near,” and that “the Judge is standing at the door” (James 5:8–9; cf. Rom. 13:12). This teaching originates with Jesus, who makes four essential points. First, no one knows the day or hour of his coming (Matt. 24:36, 42, 50). Second, he will come personally, in a manner that is visible to all (24:26–27, 30–31). Third, his coming ends the history of fallen humanity (24:37–40; 25:31–46). Fourth, we should always be prepared for Jesus’ return (24:42–25:13). If we are, we will have joy in his presence and will receive his blessing (25:14–46).11 ...

Peter’s statement that “the end of all things is near” (1 Peter 4:7) is puzzling if we assume that near means “soon, by the clock.” But 2 Peter 3 explains that God’s scale of time differs from ours. For him, “a thousand years are like a day” (2 Peter 3:8). To the Lord, we might seem like little children who ...

This follows a summary of New Testament eschatology outlined in my commentary, James, Reformed Expository Commentary (Phillipsburg, NJ: P&R Publishing, 2007), 278–80. ...

start asking, “Are we there yet?” when a fifteen-hour trip is fifteen minutes old. Besides, an apparent delay grants sinners more time to repent (3:9). ...

Jesus tells us that he will come suddenly, without warning, like a thief in the night (Matt. 24:43–44; cf. 2 Peter 3:10). As a thief slips in without forewarning, so Jesus will come unexpectedly (Matt. 24:50). Each day could be the day. Therefore, everyone should prepare for Jesus’ return. Scripture promotes the question “Will you be ready when he returns?” rather than “When will Christ return?” We should always be ready to give an account of our life. ...

First Peter 4:6 has been the subject of extensive debate because of lexi- cal, grammatical, and theological questions.12 The great question is the meaning of the gospel proclamation to the dead. Some have cited 4:6 and 3:19 to support the concept of a postmortem gospel proclamation by which many, perhaps even all, humans eventually believe.13 Others believe that the “dead” are the spiritually dead and that they will receive either judgment or life, depending on their response to the message. We can get a hint of some interpretive issues if we quote both the niv and esv, noticing the differences: ...

For this is the reason the gospel was preached even to those who are now dead, so that they might be judged according to men in regard to the body, but live according to God in regard to the spirit. (niv) ...

For this is why the gospel was preached even to those who are dead, that though judged in the flesh the way people are, they might live in the spirit the way God does. (esv) ...

As always, the literary and cultural contexts offer the surest path to under- standing. The literary context shows that the “dead” are the physically dead. The previous verse, 1 Peter 4:5, has just mentioned “the living and the dead,” ...

For more detailed exploration of the issues, consult any of the technical commentaries by Davids, Goppelt, Jobes, Marshall, and Michaels. While I have drawn on many writers, I most follow Karen H. Jobes, 1 Peter (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2005), 270–73. ...

See Hilarion Alfeyev, Christ the Conqueror of Hell: The Descent into Hades from an Orthodox Perspective (St. Vladimir’s Seminary Press, 2009). Alfeyev studies the history of the doctrine of Christ’s descent into hell. In the East, he found widespread belief that Jesus preached, postmortem, to those who did not believe in him during their lifetime. The West generally held a narrower view—perhaps applying Jesus’ preaching to Noah’s generation. Many in the East held that Jesus “freed all who were held captive” and “emptied hell” so that no mortals remained. Thus, Jesus descended into hell not as victim but as Conqueror, to mortify death and destroy hell. See ibid., 203–18. ...

where Peter certainly means the physically dead. It would be most surprising if he changed meanings so abruptly in tightly connected lines. The literary and cultural contexts also come together here. In the immediate context, Peter’s first point, as Karen Jobes notes, is that “death does not exempt a person from God’s coming judgment.” Pagans rarely taught personal accountability after death. ...

With that assumption, a pagan critic could reasonably question what good the gospel is, since it seems so restrictive of behavior in this life, and then the believer dies like everyone else. Peter, however, teaches that because people will be judged even after physical death, contra pagan expectation, the gospel message of forgiveness and judgment . . . is still efficacious. Death does not invalidate either the promises or the warnings of the gospel of Jesus Christ.14 ...

This preaching is therefore not connected to the preaching “to the spirits in prison,” mentioned in 1 Peter 3:19. Although English translations often use preach for both verses, the Greek of 3:19 is kērussō, which means that Jesus made a proclamation, while 1 Peter 4:6 uses euaggelizomai, which means that Jesus preached the good news.15 Further, 3:19 says that Christ made a proclamation; 4:6 says that “the gospel was preached.” Acts and many of Paul’s epistles show that the apostles and their coworkers did this preaching. The point is straightforward and fits the context perfectly: The people who malign Christians (1 Peter 4:4) will have to give an account to God for their actions (4:5). First Peter 4:6 begins: “For this reason”—that is, because judgment is coming—the gospel was preached widely, “even to those who are now dead,” that is, people who have died since they heard the gospel while they still lived. Peter points out that the goal of evangelism is to prepare humans for the day when they stand before God and “give account” to him as Judge. Death exempts no one from this judgment, nor does death remove any believer from Jesus’ care.16 His work as Deliverer is not always visible to us in this life, yet Jesus’ “redemption is not void . . . ...

for his power extends to the dead.”17 ...

Jobes, 1 Peter, 270–71. ...

As we noted in the previous chapter, kērussō and euaggelizomai inevitably overlap in mean- ing, but a distinction remains. ...

Jobes, 1 Peter, 272–73. ...

John Calvin, Calvin’s Commentaries, trans. John Owen, vol. 22, The First Epistle of Peter (Grand Rapids: Baker, 1999), 126. ...

This passage has several teachings that we must take to heart. Above all, it makes a claim about Christ. His gospel is essential for all and is no fleeting, provincial social construct. The people who mock it need it, lest they face the judgment with nothing but their sin. Everyone needs the gospel, and all who believe it “live according to God in regard to the spirit” (1 Peter 4:6). ...

Everyone dies. Everyone is judged in the flesh, “according to men.” That is, everyone is guilty and everyone fails, even by human standards. We con- demn others for sins that we know to be wrong, and then we do the same things, and so condemn ourselves (Rom. 2:1–3).18 ...

The idea of judgment is offensive today. The Bible teaches that God is love; we reduce that to the idea that he is nice to people. C. S. Lewis observes that we want “not so much a Father in heaven as a grandfather in heaven—a senile benevolence who likes to see young people enjoying themselves and whose plan for the universe was simply that it might be . . . said at the end of each day ‘a good time was had by all.’ 19 ...

But God aims for something greater than our happiness; he aims for our goodness. No one wants to be condemned by God, but we should not want a God who is so soft that he doesn’t care what we do so long as we feel good while doing it. God is holy, a consuming fire. He deserves our reverence and awe. The thought of facing him and accounting for life in the body ought to motivate us to embrace the gospel, which was preached that men might live forever with God. ...

This returns us to our first thought. We certainly may pursue individual goals for life, trying to find God’s design for us. Yet life is full of disruptions, and they easily erase the lines we wrote into the script. We can trust God to write new lines and let the story unfold as he wills. That begins with the substitutionary sacrifice of Christ, and then to his exemplary life that shows the way. It continues with Jesus’ resurrection and ascension. These grant us the boldness that lets us break with our old life. The world may slander, but it is more than enough compensation to share the attitude of the Lord who broke the power of sin on the cross, that we might break the power of sin day by day. ...

J. Ramsey Michaels, 1 Peter, Word Biblical Commentary 49 (Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 1988), 154–55. ...

C. S. Lewis, The Problem of Pain (New York: Collins Fount Paperbacks, 1977), 28. ...

14

Gifts from God, Gifts for God ...

x BeCex e:7–xx ...

Each one should use whatever gift he has received to serve others, faithfully administering God’s grace in its various forms. If anyone speaks, he should do it as one speaking the very words of God. If anyone serves, he should do it with the strength God provides, so that in all things God may be praised through Jesus Christ. To him be the glory and the power for ever and ever. ...

(彼得前书 4:10–11)

那年夏天我在宾夕法尼亚州尼塔尼山脉一个家庭营地演讲。 我们七岁的长女可以在营地自由活动, 包括营地边缘绵延的树林。探索倒下的原木细小的溪流, 捕捉小型的

生物。 有一天,突然冲进我们的房间, 手里捧着一个装满植物、 昆虫和红斑蝾螈的盒子, 大声宣布:"我天生就该做这个。"

这种感受的标签——"我为此而生"——被称作最优体验心流。 米哈里·契克森米哈赖将心流描述为完全沉浸于某项活动中,"纯粹为了活动本身。自我意识消失,时光飞逝。每个动作、 举动想法自然而然地承接前一个行为

你的整个身心投入其中, 并且你正自己的能力发挥极致。1 一位教授曾说:"我免费教学;他们付钱是让我批改作业。"对他而言,教学是一种最佳体验。在最佳体验中,自我意识逐渐消退。时光飞逝,但当我们专注于当下时,时间又仿佛被拉长。运动员会感觉球体变大、对手动作变慢;演讲者则感到每个词语都承接着前文的逻辑与激情,听众融为一体。 饥饿、 口渴疲惫都无法打断这种状态, 外界干扰也逐渐消失。常能体验心流状态的人是有福的。2

我们感受自己某种使命我们运用神赐的恩赐时。这些恩赐装备信徒在神的国度里服侍——首先是教会,也包括更广阔世界的工作。为便于讨论,我认为神将才能赐予所有人,无论信徒还是怀疑者 这些才能我们奉献 且圣灵愿意使其为神的旨意结出果实时,它们就成为恩赐。但在探讨新约中关于恩赐的神学之前,我们需要将其置于彼得前书 4:7-11 的信息背景下。

群体活出生命

既然彼得前书 4:5-6 说凡有血气的都必向上帝交账,那审判 活人死人 彼得便自然4:7 节转向万物的终结。更重要的是,这段经文结束了彼得前书从 2:11 延伸到 4:11 的长篇中间部分,该部分描述了门徒的社会行为规范。彼得前书 2:11-12 是序曲,使徒敦促他所爱的读者们“要禁戒肉体的私欲,这私欲是与灵魂争战的”,并“在外邦人中应当品行端正,叫那些毁谤你们是作恶的,因看见你们的好行为,便在鉴察的日子归荣耀给神”。其纲要很简单:远离恶行、多行善事、铭记末日。同样地,彼得前书 4:7-9 也劝诫门徒要保持清醒的头脑并行善,同时要记念那日子。

米哈里·契克森米哈赖,接受约翰·盖尔兰采访,《心流》,《连线》4.09 期(1996 年),http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/4.09/czik.html.

米哈里· 契克森米哈赖,《心流: 最优体验心理学》 纽约: 哈珀 & 罗出版社,1990 年),第 53–60 页,143–60 页。

希腊原文中有个未翻译的连词 de 松散地连接着彼得前书 4:6 和 4:7: 福音被传扬是因为全人类都将受审判(4:6), 而这之所以重要,是因为“万物的结局临近了”(4:7)。 我们所知的这个世界,往好里说充满模棱两可,往坏里说充满苦难,不会永远持续。当这个世代终结时,耶稣将再来推翻罪恶,建立他的新秩序。 那时创造将达到其应有的终点。 这个终点 “临近” 并非按时间顺序, 而是从神学角度而言。 彼得在近两千年前就断言终点临近,他是正确的,因为通过耶稣的复活和圣灵的恩赐,我们已被带入上帝救赎计划的最后阶段。3 彼得已在 1:20 中指出我们处于末后的时代,他说耶稣"在这末世为你们显现"。当这个时代终结时,耶稣将再来推翻罪恶并建立他的新秩序。那日子临近的意思是它随时可能发生(参太 3:2;4:17;10:7;24:44;可 1:15)。

“所以,”彼得说,我们必须以耶稣再临为生活准则,保持清醒、自律、常常祷告,并充满爱与宽恕 (彼得前书 4:7-8)。因我们正处在上帝救赎计划的最后阶段,因末日将近,某些行为准则随之而来。这些诫命是这段经文的核心:

警醒自制 你们祷告 (4:7 下)。

恒久不懈地彼此相爱 如此便能遮掩罪过 (4:8)。

互相款待而不发怨言 (4:9)。

善用上帝所赐恩赐 彼此服侍 4:10

可以说基督教是所有信仰中对理性要求最高的。拥有严密复杂的教义体系,不断召唤信徒思考信仰的深层含义,让神的真理指引他们的人生。 彼得那句双重诫命 「要清醒明理 保持自制」 看似一种重言修辞, 两个动词实则发挥着合而为一的作用。 保持清醒的头脑看清事物本质采取适当行动。 动词 “自制”源自一个最初表示 克制 的术语

单词 telos 被译为“终点”,既可指代过程的最终阶段,也可表示过程的终止。

原指 "清醒" 而非 "醉酒" 状态 后演变为 "警醒、 心智健全严守精神纪律" 之意 4推动祷告生活 (参 彼得前书 》3:7)并非泛泛祷告 而是 " 基于视角之现实,呼求并顺服神,从而在处境中获得力量与指引的祷告"5

The word all links 1 Peter 4:7 and 4:8. Because “the end of all things is near,” believers should, “above all, love each other deeply, because love covers over a multitude of sins” (4:8). A disciple loves everyone, even his enemies, but Peter focuses on love within the Christian community. The reference to “grumbling” in 4:9 underscores the need to maintain Christian unity. The word deeply (Greek ektenēs) can describe an attitude of perseverance, earnestness, and eagerness, even devotion. Such love “covers” many sins not by covering them up, and not by atoning for them, since Jesus does that (1:18–19; 2:24). Rather, we cover sins by forgiving them. This is first taught in Proverbs 10:12: “Hatred stirs up strife, but love covers all offenses” (esv). The phrase also appears in James 5:20, and we see the concept in Matthew 18:21–22; Luke 17:3–6; and 1 Corinthians 13:7. Further, such forgiveness is vital to Peter’s interest in preserving Christian community. ...

Why does Peter claim that such love is “above all”? Because the church is a society of sinners, redeemed by grace. Because we are sinners who both offend each other and take offense when no real offense is given. We cannot hope for a strong Christian community if we fail to extend to one another the grace that the Lord first gave us. Church splits, at local and national levels, give sad testimony to the evil effects when such grace is missing. But Paul exhorts, “Be kind and compassionate to one another, forgiving each other, just as in Christ God forgave you” (Eph. 4:32). Love includes feelings (Rom. 12:10), but it is more than a feeling. Love is a resolve to do good to others, including the good of forgiving their sins. ...

When Peter instructs, “Offer hospitality to one another without grum- bling” (1 Peter 4:9), he shifts from the general principles of 4:7–8 to particu- lars in 4:9. Hospitality is a form of the love mentioned in 4:8. Indeed, the Greek term for hospitality, philoxenos, is a compound formed from philos (love) and xenos (stranger). Hospitality is a specific form of love: caring for strangers, who might be part of the Christian mission. Of course, believers ...

Paul J. Achtemeier, 1 Peter (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1996), 294. ...

Peter H. Davids, The First Epistle of Peter (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1990), 156–57. ...

with larger homes are most capable of offering hospitality. The little phrase “without grumbling” reminds us that hospitality can be burdensome. Yet hospitality is necessary, given the imperative of Christian mission and the lack of decent lodging, in that day, for travelers. This implies that all the service we offer each other should be humble and joyful. ...

Throughout, Peter stresses mutuality, as we see in the repeated use of “one another.” He says that Christians must “keep loving one another” (1 Peter 4:8), “show hospitality to one another” (4:9), and exercise our gifts to “serve one another” (4:10, all esv). These are universal obligations, but we are most likely to help one another cheerfully—“without grumbling”—and effectively when we act within our God-given endowments. ...

Peter speaks to every Christian, not just elite believers or church officers, when he urges, “Each one should use whatever gift he has received to serve others” (1 Peter 4:10). We serve others because our gifts ultimately belong to God, not to us. We are “good stewards of God’s varied grace” (4:10 esv; cf. Rom. 12:6). God’s gifts are gracious in two senses: (1) they are given widely and freely, and (2) they are bestowed apart from human merit. ...

Because we receive gifts from God, they are never simply ours. Gifts in some senses do, and in some senses do not, belong to us. We receive them from God, but they are not our possession or trophy. There is no room for pride, and we have no right to view them as a windfall. ...

Paul says that those who hold office are stewards of God’s grace (e.g., 1 Cor. 4:1–2; Titus 1:7). But 1 Peter 4:10, like Romans 12 and 1 Corinthians 12, asserts that every believer is a steward of God’s grace. For Peter, grace usually means the gift of salvation awaiting all who believe in Jesus (1 Peter 1:10, 13; 3:7). And to be sure, every gift, rightly exercised, points to God’s grace, but this passage is not saying that we steward or manage God’s saving grace. The grace of 1 Peter 4:10 is the grace that gives abilities and ministries to all. For most gifts, there is no office, so Peter speaks to all disciples, not office- holders. Nonetheless, the two main categories of gifts, speaking and serving, do correspond to the two principal church offices: “If anyone speaks [as elders do], he should do it as one speaking the very words of God. If anyone serves [as deacons do], he should do it with the strength God provides, so that in all things God may be praised through Jesus Christ. To him be the glory and the power for ever and ever. Amen” (1 Peter 4:11). Teaching and ruling elders lead the ministry of words, and deacons lead the ministry of deeds. ...

Peter says that speakers should act as if they utter “the very words [or oracles] of God” (1 Peter 4:11; logia theou). This is the exact phrasing of the Septuagint of Numbers 24:4, 16, where Balaam’s words are God’s words or oracles (cf. Rom. 3:2; Acts 7:38). Historically, church leaders and schol- ars have taken this as a comment on preaching. Chapter 1 of the Second Helvetic Confession famously says, “The preaching of the word of God is the word of God.” Earlier, Martin Luther said, “Every honest pastor’s and preacher’s mouth is Christ’s mouth . . . and the Word which he preacheth is likewise not the pastor’s and preacher’s but God’s.”6 Similarly, John Calvin said, “When a man has climbed up into the pulpit . . . it is [so] that God may speak to us by the mouth of a man.”7 So preaching is God’s Word in some sense, yet the preacher’s words are human, too, and therefore often garbled, weak, or even false. But the Spirit “makes the broken human words become . . . a living word of God to the hearers.”8 Hebrews states that this happens in the church, and not only through the apostles: “Remember your leaders, who spoke the word of God to you” (Heb. 13:7; cf. 1 Thess. 2:13; 1 Peter 1:25). Preachers can and must prepare, yet we must pray that the Lord will excise what is false, improve what is true, and apply all the truth, even things hinted at rather than articulated, to receptive hearts. At best, when a congregation hears Christ proclaimed, according to the pattern of Scripture itself, they hear more than explanation and application; they hear Christ himself, imploring them to believe and to live by grace. (At worst, a preacher knowingly contradicts Scripture.) ...

Although we traditionally apply 1 Peter 4:11a to preaching, dialogical teaching that is Scripture-based and prayer-bathed can have the same “very words of God” status. Suppose a man strikes and threatens his wife and children. The wife, ashamed and afraid of a humiliating scandal, tells her pastor, “If I pray fervently and do nothing upsetting, I believe I can overcome my husband’s anger and violence.” A wise pastor might reply, “Mrs. Smith, I admire your endurance and devotion, but it is very likely that he will strike and threaten again, no matter what you do or how you pray. This case requires church leaders and, quite likely, civil authorities to stand with ...

Quoted in Karl Barth, Church Dogmatics, ed. G. W. Bromiley and T. F. Torrance, vol. 1.1 (New York: T. & T. Clark, 2009), 107. ...

T. H. L. Parker, Calvin’s Preaching, sermon 22 on 1 Timothy 3:2 (Louisville, KY: Westminster/ John Knox, 1992), 24. ...

C. E. B. Cranfield, I & II Peter and Jude (London: SCM Press, 1960), 117. ...

you. God appointed church authorities to rebuke sin, and he summons civil authorities to strike fear in evildoers and punish them as necessary” (cf. Rom. 13:3–4). Strong pastoral counsel of this kind may also be God’s very Word. First Peter 4:11 also mentions those who serve. They give to the poor and needy, feed the hungry, welcome the stranger, and visit the sick and the prisoner. Some of them do the work; others organize it. Servants are also stewards of grace. Our service has greatest effect when it is performed not with grim resolve but “with the strength God provides” (1 Peter 4:11). If servants know that their strength and resources come from God, they will not condescend or patronize. Whether we speak or act, we focus on God, who is the source of all strength and every accomplishment. Then “God may be praised through Jesus Christ. To him be the glory” (1 Peter 4:11; cf. ...

Phil. 4:13; Rev. 5:12; 7:12). ...

This passage harks back to 1 Peter 2:12. There Peter sees evildoers glorify- ing God (perhaps not willingly) on the day that God “visits” mankind, for they must acknowledge the good deeds of believers. In this chapter, Peter sees believers doing good and willingly giving God all praise and glory. This passage also looks to the end of Peter. A united, gifted, and God-centered church will endure fiery trials. It will live together well under Jesus, the Good Shepherd, and will await the day when Christ exalts us (4:12–5:10).9 Although we could stop here, the biblical theology of gifts is both impor- tant and somewhat misunderstood. We can therefore profit from an extended ...

meditation on the biblical teaching. ...

A Theology of Gifts ...

The theological conviction behind the concept of gifts is simple: we “do not all have the same function” (Rom. 12:4). From the beginning, God cre- ated mankind for diversity within unity. Some serve, some teach, some lead (12:7–8). Christianity has a point of contact with pagan thought here: Aristotle said that a city-state is made of different kinds of men and finds life in its diversity.10 Paul says that the church is like one body with many ...

J. Ramsey Michaels, 1 Peter, Word Biblical Commentary 49 (Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 1988), 254. ...

Aristotle, Politics, in The Basic Works of Aristotle, ed. Richard McKeon (New York: Random House, 1941), 2.2. ...

parts or members (1 Cor. 12:12–30). We don’t all sing the same note. God created us for harmony. ...

When God created this world, he cast his powers on the waters of human- ity. He expected us to use our strength and creativity to give him a return on his investments (Eccl. 11:1). We each love some part of God’s creation and exercise our abilities within it. Each person reflects the character of God and the grace of Christ in a distinct way, so that we make a personal contribution to God’s design for our world, even while our work overlaps with that of many others. Each of us has tastes and insights. Each sees something discrete in a landscape. One regards a desert as dead and frightening; another rests in its austere beauty. Many love to see an unbroken succession of sunny days; others love mist and rain in the valley. At any point, our capacities, experiences, and tastes can lead us to unique service. Jesus promised, “To him who overcomes, I will give . . . a white stone with a new name written on it, known only to him who receives it” (Rev. 2:17). Because each of us has a unique name, insights, capacities, and interests, each can make a unique contribution to God’s work. ...

A Survey of Spiritual Gifts: Biblical Principles, Lists, and Terms ...

God bestows a persona and graces that equip each one to herald his kingdom and serve him. He has distributed gifts to every believer. Peter lists the gifts of the Spirit in 1 Peter 4:10–11. Paul’s lists appear in Romans 12, 1 Corinthians 12–14, and Ephesians 4. These lists vary in size and content. Together, they mention about twenty gifts. Several cite teaching, prophesy- ing, serving, encouraging, leading, giving, and healing, but no two lists are identical and none is exhaustive. None tries to enumerate and categorize all classes of God-given talent. ...

Careful reading suggests that the lists are partial. First, each list diverges from the others. Even short lists can have terms that are missing in long ones. Second, some terms are listed as gifts in one place and a result of a gift in others: Encouraging is a gift in Romans 12:8, but a result of prophecy in 1 Corinthians 14:3. Knowledge is independent in 1 Corinthians 12:8 and a result of prophecy in 1 Corinthians 14:6. Third, music appears with the gifts of teaching, tongues, and interpretation in 1 Corinthians 14:26, but is never ...

listed as a gift. Similarly, hospitality is mentioned near gift lists (Rom. 12:13; 1 Peter 4:9), and it aids church life (Rom. 16:23; 1 Tim. 5:10; 3 John 8), but is never called a gift. Again, Moses reports that God gave Bezalel and Oholiab artistic skill to construct the tabernacle (Ex. 31:2; 35:30; 36:1–2), but artistry appears in no New Testament inventory. Thus, we miss the point if we try to specify the precise number and categories of gifts. The main lesson is simple: we have diverse gifts and must find and use them. ...

有趣的是,我们最常使用的短语"属灵恩赐"从未出现在希腊原文中,尽管它出现在哥林多前书 12:1 和 14:1 的英文译本里。保罗将我们的属灵能力称为"恩赐"(以弗所书 4:7-8),11"服侍", 以及 "运行"(哥林多前书 12:5-6),"圣灵的显现"(哥林多前书 12:7),"属灵的事"(哥林多前书 12:1;14:1;希腊文为 pneuma-tika),以及"信心的度量"(罗马书 12:3)。保罗最喜爱的术语 charismata(罗马书 12:6;哥林多前书 12:9,29-31)与恩典 charis)同源,意为"恩典的礼物"。

圣经我们的能力为恩典 因为它们不仅仅是才能。上帝慷慨赐予这些恩典,它们也成他人蒙恩的途径。 彼得说,有恩赐的人 "服事他人,以各种形式忠心地施展神的恩典"(1 彼得书 4:10)。最好的情况下、 恩赐使 我们能够完成神的工作,并专注于 我们的工作。id=29>ourattentiononhimandhisgrace(1Cor.12:7-11;14:12)。 我们反对識破無神的人所擁有的能力 。id=48>godlessfromthegiftsofbelieversthis way: 我们寻求荣耀 好 wellas"thecommongood"(1Cor.12:7)。 所有恩赐都至关重要。正如人体需要每个器官,基督的身体也需要每个成员。我们更关注头部而非肺部,但生命两者皆需。我们更重视双手而非双脚,二者不可或缺 (林前 12:14-21)。 保罗确实提及 "更大的恩赐",但 "更大" 是指更具战略性的事工, 而非更讨喜悦的服侍

(12:31;14:1-5)。

赐的

因此,发现我们的天赋, 我们可以问:“我本质上一个言语的表达者, 还是一个行动的实践者?” 我们都会说话行动,大多数擅长其中一种

以弗所书 4:7-8 使用了两个表示恩赐的相似词汇 doreadoma 新约圣经通常使用复数形式: 恩赐 。但保罗确实劝勉提摩太要激发通过预言赐给他的那" 恩赐"(提摩太前书 4:14;提摩太后书 1:6)。

别人出色。 我们应当自问:"我擅长什么?哪些事上能感受到神的喜悦?有智慧的人反复邀请我参与哪些事?"

天赋始于我们与生俱来的核心能力。它源于我们能够娴熟且乐在其中的某项才能。上帝赐予每个子民不同的天赋,他们各自规划了使命。我们结交良师友, 施展才能的机遇便随之而来。每个人都有可能发展出独一无二能力组合。 我们可以发掘一项基础才能, 继而精进完善。 一个有音乐天赋的孩子可能起步, 继而转攻小提琴或小号。 一个从小对数字感兴趣的孩子,如果得到适当鼓励,可能会在数学的某个专门领域找到职业方向。

我们发现自己的才能往往是在成长过程中 通过同辈师长互动 经常上学时朋友们讲解课程 那时就隐约觉得自己可能成为一名教师 二十岁那年,有位校园团契负责人邀请我向大学生群体演讲。当我站起来发言时,既感到精力充沛、热情洋溢,又保持着平静与听众心意相通的状态。 当我完成时,一位朋友低声说:"我不知道你还能做到这样 。"我回答:"我也不知道。"无论到底是什么,从那以后我就一直在做这件事。

我的经历相当普遍 基础技能往往幼年时期就开始显现 细心的成年人注意到某些天赋 他们邀请年轻人自己共事。年轻人会想:"太好了!我想试试看。"尝试之后往往能成功,有时是部分成功,有时甚至超乎预期地出色。成年人会邀请他再次尝试,给予指导,这项技能便逐渐成熟。

可以通过视觉化方式呈现这一点。核心兴趣能力激发某人他人做出有益之举时, 这种渴望转化为行动,行动又将带来良好成果。 有识之士便会邀请这位才华横溢者再次效力。 假以时日, 某种正式形式可能应运而生, 无论是通过定期有偿工作, 还是担任受认可志愿者职位。 最理想的情况是, 某项技能运用得越频繁, 技能本身从中获得的愉悦感与日俱增。 因此我们学会自己能够应当做的事。 每个人都能通过这种方式找到一项技能。它或许能带来工作和收入,或许不能,但若存在属灵恩赐,就必结出属灵的果实。

有些人疑惑自己是否被呼召从事需要神学训练的基督教事工。教会应当为男女信徒提供机会探索这种可能性。每位信徒都需追寻

自己内心的热忱与才能。对潜在恩赐的探索远不止于自我实现。

渴望 (去满足需求, 服侍他人)

7. 实践促进成长, 导师指引深化渴望

6. 定期参与服侍的呼召

能力与渴望行动

果实 (有效的服侍)

水果指出, 进一步机会给予

14.1 礼物呼召

The discovery of our gifts can start with a question: Do I have a passion to right a wrong or to remedy a deficit?” It can be an evil that we have seen first- hand. Eventually the passion gets legs. We create a plan, and then dive into messy reality. We realize that we need training to go further, and we get that training.12 We also ask, What people will I serve?” Godly dreams aren’t selfish. They serve people who have suffered a wound or who face a deficit that we can remedy. Next, we can ask, “Where shall I serve?” Even if our work reaches across the globe, even if we travel constantly, there is a primary location and a specific group that most counts on us. We must know who they are. Finally, we ask, “What burden will I bear?” Every lasting call will bring glory and suffering, self-fulfillment and self-denial. We should aim to relieve suffering, do justice, restart a stagnant group, or tackle a tough project. ...

Dan B. Allender, To Be Told: Know Your Story, Shape Your Life (Colorado Springs: WaterBrook Press, 2005), 113–17. ...

If we meet a clear need, whether physical, financial, legal, psychological, educational, spiritual, or relational, it will bring both satisfaction and pain. There should be a focal point, a core activity in our service. Jesus himself showed this. Because Jesus is Creator and Lord of all, all things belong within his sphere of interest. Still, he came in one place, at one time, to serve one people. He did many things: he healed, taught, made disciples. But above all he lived in perfect righteousness, died in perfect innocence, and rose perfectly restored, that he might bear the punishment for our sins, defeat ...

death, and grant us eternal life. ...

None of us has gifts and a calling as splendid as Jesus. Few become glori- ous leaders. Yet every role is important. In the 2008 Olympics, Jason Lezak was a relay specialist on the U.S. men’s swim team that was led by Michael Phelps, who was pursuing an unprecedented eight gold medals. When Lezak arrived, he owned four medals from prior Olympic relays, but had never won an individual medal, and some opined that he couldn’t win a big race. Lezak was the anchor of the 400-meter freestyle relay. The U.S. freestyle teams had won the silver in the last two Olympics. In this race, the favored French team gave a 0.6-second lead to Alain Bernard, the world’s best free- style swimmer, for the final leg. ...

If Lezak failed to catch Bernard, Phelps, who had swum the first leg of the relay, would fail, too. When Lezak entered the pool, no one gave him a ...

chance to catch Bernard. Indeed, Bernard’s half-body lead grew to a full-body lead. But Lezak kept working. “You’re at the Olympics,” he told himself. “You can’t give up.” (Apparently, Olympic athletes think about quitting during their greatest races. Yet the internal compulsion given by their gift and the external discipline gained by training enable them to persevere.) ...

Lezak started gaining with thirty meters to go. Bernard was losing steam, pressing to honor his prerace boast of smashing the Americans. With ten meters to go, Lezak was almost even. People were screaming, “He’s catching up!” With five meters left, the race was a dead heat as Lezak swam toward his bellowing teammates. ...

Lezak and Bernard seemed to touch the wall simultaneously. Then the scoreboard flashed Lezak’s triumph. The man who couldn’t win the big race had won the gold with the fastest 100 meters of all time. The Americans had crushed the world record by four seconds and won on the strength of a relay specialist. Fans remember Phelps, who would eventually win eight ...

gold medals, and the image of him roaring at the finish line, every muscle straining. But Phelps, the greatest swimmer in the world, needed Lezak, the relay specialist, to win that race. Indeed, Lezak sealed the eighth gold with another relay victory that set a world record yet again. The world also has more relay specialists than independent stars. This applies in the church, too. Frederick Buechner observed, “The place God calls you to is the place where your deep gladness and the world’s deep hunger meet.”13 If Buechner is right, then our call and work are provisional, for the world’s hungers shift. We might have core abilities and interests that remain through life, but as we grow, our interests and capacities change, so that our call may change, too. We need to ask, “Where can I do the most good? Where can I, broken and restored as I am, bring restoration to this broken world?” If we finish a task, having contributed ...

what we could, we might need to move on, if God issues a new call. ...

Key Concepts ...

A gift is a capacity and desire for ministry, given by God for regular use, to bear fruit in the church. Capacity means gifted people’s ability to advance God’s kingdom. Gifted leaders mobilize people for causes. Gifted teachers are clear and compelling, so people learn. Encouragers listen, speak, and act to lift spirits. Desire means the ordinary pleasure that we take in our gifts. Yes, prophets might need to deliver bitter words. But there is usually joy in prophecy. Lead- ers govern diligently. Those who show mercy do it cheerfully. Givers do so generously. Paul’s phrase “let him give generously” literally reads “let him give with simplicity (Rom. 12:8). That is, if someone has the gift of giving, he or she needs no return, but simply gives. Giving itself is the reward. Givers say, “Please take this money. Please borrow our car. You will minister to us if you take our gift.” So it should be with all gifts. Leaders find satisfaction in helping people to accomplish their goals. The merciful are glad to help others. The gifted feel alive when they exercise their talents, even if doing so brings hardships, as apostleship did for Paul. If someone has a skill and ...

dislikes using it, it probably is not a gift in the fullest sense. ...

Fruit results when the exercise of a gift strengthens God’s church, bringing maturity and edification to the body of Christ (Eph. 4:12–13). ...

Frederick Buechner, Wishful Thinking: A Theological ABC (New York: Harper & Row, 1973), 95. ...

Conversely, a talented musician or speaker will not bless the church if he or she seeks to entertain rather than inspire worship. Gifts are God-centered. ...

Categories of Gifts ...

The gifts are diverse, yet we can classify them.14 Let me propose three categories. First, there are gifts of speaking and service, gifts of word or deed (table 14.1). Second, gifts can be more and less obviously supernatural (table 14.2). Third, gifts can be more public or more private (table 14.3). ...

Gifts of Speaking and Serving ...

Peter says, “If anyone speaks, he should do it as one speaking the very words of God. If anyone serves, he should do it with the strength God provides.” Through words and deeds, we administer God’s grace (1 Peter 4:10–11). This holds for everyone, not just elite believers or officeholders. ...

Speaking Gifts ...

Speaking and Doing Gifts ...

Doing Gifts ...

Apostleship ...

Faith ...

Administration ...

洞察力

领导力

创造力

鼓励

Giving ...

Evangelism ...

医治

知识

款待

Prophecy ...

怜悯

牧养

神迹

教导

服侍

方言

Tongues interpretation ...

智慧

Table 14.1 Speaking and doing gifts ...

Some gifts are listed, but neither defined nor described, so our knowledge is limited. ...

Gifts More Natural or More Supernatural ...

All gifts are supernatural, but gifts such as miracles, prophecy, and tongues are more obviously so. With gifts such as leadership, encouragement, and teaching, God heightens or consecrates common abilities. As gifted teachers prepare lessons, they use normal human skills.15 But we do not prepare, or follow procedures, to perform a miracle. That power comes immediately from the Spirit.16 ...

More Supernatural ...

Natural and Supernatural ...

More Natural ...

洞察力

Evangelism ...

Administration ...

医治

Faith ...

创造力

神迹

怜悯

洞察力

Prophecy ...

鼓励

方言

Giving ...

Tongues interpretation ...

款待

知识

领导力

服侍

牧养

教导

智慧

Table 14.2 More supernatural and more natural gifts ...

Gifts More Public or More Private ...

We differentiate between public gifts, used in leadership, and private gifts, used with individuals or small groups. Apostles, evangelists, teachers, and leaders exercise gifts publicly. Serving, encouraging, and contributing are ...

Scripture doesn’t define the relation between natural gifts and spiritual gifts or explain the role of training, but we perceive a link. Jesus prepared the Twelve for apostleship by teaching them and setting an example. Paul’s rabbinic training, Roman citizenship, resiliency, and intellectual ability prepared him to be the apostle to the Gentiles. ...

We can pray for healing, but healing comes directly from God in a way that sermons do not. ...

more private gifts. In Corinth, tongues were for private use and prophecy was for public speech (1 Cor. 14). ...

More Public/ Authoritative ...

Potentially Public or Private ...

Less Public/ Authoritative ...

Administration ...

洞察力

创造力

Apostleship ...

鼓励

Giving ...

领导力

Evangelism ...

医治

神迹

Faith ...

款待

Prophecy ...

知识

怜悯

教导

服侍

牧养

方言

Tongues interpretation ...

智慧

Table 14.3 More public/authoritative and less public/authoritative gifts ...

Gifts as Heightened Forms of Regular Duties ...

A second look at the gift lists shows that God expects all believers to participate, at least occasionally, in exercising most gifts. Most gifts of the Spirit label qualities or activities that are required of all believers. Wisdom, knowledge, discernment, faith, evangelism, teaching, generosity, and mercy are all gifts, yet believers should pursue all of them. ...

Typically, therefore, gifts entail a heightened capacity for something that others can do to a lesser degree.17 We might call this the Principle of Par- ticipation. One implication is that no one should use a theology of gifts to dodge mundane tasks such as nursery duty, claiming, “That’s not my gift.” Anyone can serve. ...

For example, wisdom is a gift, but the Bible says that all should pur- sue wisdom. We should listen to the wise and ask God for it (Proverbs; James 1:5). Similarly: ...

There are exceptions to this. For example, miracles and speaking in tongues are all or nothing. ...

Discernment is a gift, but Paul tells us that everyone should “test everything. Hold on to the good” (1 Thess. 5:21 esv). ...

传福音是一种恩赐,但人人都当为心中盼望的缘由作出解释(彼得前书3:15)。

信仰一种恩赐,人人都当基督(约翰福音 14:1)。

我们可以通过区分事工中功能、 角色职位,发展参与原则。 基督徒或许短暂行使几乎任何属灵功能。 每个人都能服侍,应当适当场合发挥作用。 一个脾气暴躁老顽固可能伤心之人鼓励话。 即便不是传道人, 一位旅人能在飞机上分享她的信仰。

一个人拥有技能渴望完成某项任务,他的劳作满足需求, 智者便会再次邀请他效力,此时他已超越单纯的功能性存在。 持续卓有成效的奉献便成为一种角色。工作变得习以为常、 充满喜悦、成效显著时,这或许正彰显着一种天赋,引领他在国度中承担恒常使命。 人们即使不具备特别的天赋 也能长期担任某个角色 就个人而言 我的主要恩赐在于教学讲道 但领导职责似乎追随着 要么是我具备领导恩赐不愿承认 要么虽无此恩赐身处领导力真空接受了这个角色 无论如何,我始终响应着引领的召唤。 然而,作为领导者工作 (忠于我的本性) 始终带着师者的质感。因此,我对领导力的理解更偏向认知层面而非行政管理。 我对行政事务本身并无兴趣,但行政工作却不可避免地身上, 因为若要使构想计划成为现实, 行政工作必不可少。 或许可以行政事务委派给此方面才能的人,终究无法完全置之不理。 正因如此,需求出现时, 能力平平可能会被硬塞与其特质不符至关重要的岗位。 理想情况下,

a 礼物/服务对话通常这样的:

领导者:我们需要 XYZ 方面的帮助,有人建议我联系你。服务者: 太好了。一直在祈祷机会参与 XYZ工作。领导者(事后):干得漂亮!你在这方面真有天赋。

服务者: 不必谢我。乐意效劳。 这是荣幸。

另一方面, 有些需求找不到热心的服务者。 我们不能仅仅因为它们不符合内心的使命感拒绝关注这些需求。 一个兴趣与能力平平的人或许会牺牲性地承担某个角色。可能发现这个角色想象中适合自己 从而选择留下。 或者天赋的出现时 立即退这个位置 像给予和鼓励这样的恩赐,无非是一种长期存在的角色。 并不存在所谓的鼓励职分。当教会认可、 呼召按立某人担任正式领导职位时, 角色便可转化为职分。 职分人员需符合圣经所描述的职位标准。 职分一种正式职位, 需经正式授予。 职分人员首先要接受考核,然后被按立来带领神的子民(提摩太前书 3:10;5:22)。过去, 曾有先知、 祭司、 君王使徒。 如今, 职分包括长老、执事,或许还有传福音者。上帝赐予长老教导、带领和牧养的恩赐。在某些传统中,牧师的技术性称谓是教导长老 ,因其侧重于此职分,但他同时也承担带领、牧养和传福音的职责。 然而,出色带领, 领袖们必须多个领域发挥作用。 刚强者需学会鼓励,怯懦者也当习得直言。 而且许多人应该愿意投身于那些存在明确紧迫需求的领域 例如灾后清理工作

自然灾害之后。

When we serve others, we get close to the character and plan of God. For when sin shattered his world, he came in space and time, among particular people, to solve our problem. After returning to the Father, he commissioned us, in all our diversity, to finish his work. At best, the redeemed have a name, and a set of gifts that let us bring God’s healing to this broken world. When the work is done, we don’t even need thanks. We say, “I was made for this.” ...

15

God’s Way to Endure Trials ...

x BeCex e:xz–xs ...

Dear friends, do not be surprised at the painful trial you are suffering, as though something strange were happening to you. But rejoice that you participate in the sufferings of Christ, ...

so that you may be overjoyed when his glory is revealed. (1 Peter 4:12–13) ...

rom the beginning of his epistle, Peter has told the disciples in his churches that they are strangers, outsiders, and aliens in this age. At best, he says, believers can live an exemplary eir good deeds will silence false accusations (1 Peter 1:2; 2:12). ...

The themes of alienation, suffering, and persecution never seem far away in 1 Peter. Each section contributes something to the apostle’s teaching on suffering and injustice. First Peter 2:18–23 tells disciples to bear mistreat- ment patiently and to entrust themselves to God, the Judge. We must never return evil for evil. If we must suffer, we should suffer for doing what is right. ...

A Final Word on Persecution ...

But 1 Peter 3 begins a more sustained and challenging discussion of the topic as the apostle warns his people to prepare to “suffer for what is right” ...

and to “suffer for doing good” (3:14, 17). He begins by asking, “Who is going to harm you if you are eager to do good?” (3:13). In the Greek, the question is phrased to invite the answer: “No one.” Yet, he says, you might suffer because you are good: “But even if you should suffer for what is right, you are blessed” (3:14). The Greek verbs in 3:13 and 3:17 use the rare optative mood, a verb form typically used for remote or theoretical possibilities. Ordinarily, Peter says, no one will harm you “if you are eager to do good.” Nonetheless, he implies, it could happen, and believers should be prepared. Perhaps Peter meant to ease his churches into the hard truth, or perhaps, ...

as some scholars speculate, Peter received bad news even as he wrote. What- ever the reason, Peter’s tone shifts in chapter 4. Suffering was a possibility; now he urges his readers to expect trouble.1 In 1 Peter 3:13–17, Peter tells us that persecution will possibly happen and that disciples must be prepared if it does. In 4:12 he says, “Do not be surprised at the painful trial you are suffering.” The Greek verb (xenizesthe) is a present imperative, which sug- gests that they are surprised by this development and should not be. ...

First Peter 4:12–19 is Peter’s final word on suffering and persecution. The apostle makes six points. First, the disciples in the church should not be surprised by fiery trials (4:12). Second, they should rejoice, for they share in the sufferings of Christ (4:13). Third, no one should suffer deservedly—as a murderer, thief, or even a meddler (4:15). Fourth, no one should be ashamed to “suffer as a Christian.” Rather, we should praise God that we bear the name of Christ (4:16). Fifth, we should be prepared to meet the Lord (4:17–18). Sixth, those who do suffer should entrust themselves to their faithful God (4:19). We will consider these commands one by one. ...

Dont Be Surprised at Trials ...

Peter opens starkly: “Do not be surprised at the painful trial you are suffering, as though something strange were happening to you” (1 Peter 4:12). “Do not be surprised,” Peter says, because trials are not strange. Peter predicts them. Jesus also told his disciples to expect them: “In this ...

Commentators speculate that the situation changed for the worse even as Peter wrote, so that his warnings grew more urgent. But there is no external evidence of such a change. It is possible that Peter chose to ease his readers into a difficult discussion. ...

world you will have trouble” (John 16:33b). Happily, Jesus also encour- ages: “Take heart! I have overcome the world” (16:33c). ...

Further, in God’s economy, the result of trials is positive. When we endure persecution, it demonstrates that we belong to God, our King. Jesus said, “Blessed are those who are persecuted for righteousness’ sake, for theirs is the kingdom of heaven” (Matt. 5:10 esv). Persecution proves that we are united to Christ: “Rejoice that you participate in the sufferings of Christ.” For that reason we have a reward in heaven “when his glory is revealed” (1 Peter 4:13; cf. Matt. 5:12). If Jesus suffers hostility, we should expect to follow our Master’s path (Matt. 10:24–25). ...

First Peter 4:12–19 marks the third time that Peter told believers that they must endure suffering. The leaders of the Roman Empire were not neces- sarily hostile to religious divergence, but new religions, exclusive religions, and rapidly growing religions were viewed less favorably. The apostle warns of trouble because he sees it coming and wants to shepherd his people. If they are prepared for adversity, they can endure, possibly even thrive. As we read Peter, we hear an urgent personal word. He wants to warn his “dear friends” of an imminent danger (4:12). ...

Since Western Christians generally live in times of relative ease, we might feel that Peter’s warnings have no purchase here. Western believ- ers might face mild mockery or dismissive remarks. Our arguments might not be taken seriously and our campus ministries might lose the right to meet on campus while the gay-lesbian-transgender-bisexual club doesn't, but this is marginalization, not red-blooded persecution. Of course, there is no guarantee that this peace will last. Still, we don’t feel the need for counsel about trials and suffering in easier days. Whatever hostility Western believers endure, as I write, it barely compares to the troubles of believers in Rome in Peter’s day. ...

Let us remember how many believers in Asia and Africa suffer for the cause of Christ every day. A friend of mine helps to lead a Christian training center for exiled Eritreans living in Sudan, one of the most oppressive nations on earth. In vast areas of Sudan, a family can be in mortal danger simply for being Christians. Nonetheless, life in Eritrea is so much worse that Eritrean Christians f lee to Sudan for refuge. The number of Christian leaders who are imprisoned and martyred for the faith has never been higher than it is today. ...

Although Western Christians face no direct persecution as I write, we never know when the situation might change. Apart from that, every nation experiences times of war, economic distress, and upheaval, so we can iden- tify with the problem of suffering. When our jobs disappear and savings dwindle, not because of dereliction or sin, but because of the mistakes of powerful people in distant places, we feel some of the sting of persecution. Whenever we suffer for actions beyond our control, we taste the life of the first Christians, who suffered even if they did no wrong. They suffered because they did something right; they repented of the follies of pagan polytheism. So even if our experience is far from Peter’s, we can hear his message for those who suffer unjustly. ...

“Do not be surprised at the painful trial you are suffering, as though ...

something strange were happening to you” (1 Peter 4:12). This world is full of tribulation of many kinds, and it strikes for many reasons. First, we suffer because we live in a fallen world. We taste pain and brokenness even when no human does evil. Flocks of birds strike planes so that they crash. We battle illness, disease, storms, and floods. Sadly, humanity sometimes compounds these ordinary disasters. We mismanage lands and rivers so that heavy rains become floods. War can multiply the effects of a light harvest so that it becomes famine. ...

Second, we suffer because we are united to evil men. We endure leaders, teachers, and coaches who, at one end of the spectrum, are careless, lazy, or unfair. At the other end, some are malicious, oppressive, and abusive. Heedless political leaders and generals start pointless wars and the foot soldiers die, leaving widows and orphans in their wake. Family members and so-called friends say and do cruel things. ...

Third, we suffer because of our own sins. According to Proverbs 5:22, “the evil deeds of a wicked man ensnare him; the cords of his sin hold him fast.” We suffer when friends break their promises, but when we break promises, we suffer, too—the decay of a relationship. ...

First Peter 4 addresses the worst evil: deliberate malice. A few try to harm Christians because they are hostile to the faith. Others seize the opportunity to rob or crush the weak, and if Christians happen to be weak, predators will attack the same way they would attack any other defenseless minority. Whether we suffer true persecution or for another reason, everyone needs Peter’s message about suffering. Therefore, as long as we live in this fallen ...

world, this magnificent ruin, we should expect to suffer. It is neither strange nor surprising. The more we expect trouble, the better we will be prepared for it. ...

We should be prepared because suffering is a “fiery ordeal” or “fiery trial” (1 Peter 4:12 nasb, nrsv, esv). The event tries or tests us. The phrase fiery trial is from Proverbs 27:21 (lxx), which reads, “A man is tested [or judged] by his praise.” This can mean either the praise we receive—our reputation—or the praise we give, what we choose to praise. Both make sense in context. If we endure trials, we should be praised. And if we praise God during the trial of unjust suffering, then we have surely passed a test of character.2 ...

Yet we can see why suffering took Peter’s people by surprise. They had never been cultural outsiders, so they had never faced irrational prejudice. Recently they had turned to God, so they might have expected his favor to lead to an easier life. But when life got harder, they were surprised. ...

Langdon Gilkey’s memoir, Shantung Compound,3 tells the story of two thousand Europeans and Americans whom the Japanese kept in an intern- ment camp in Shantung for the entire length of World War II. Their impris- onment surprised them because they had committed no crime. They were missionaries, businessmen, travelers, or educators who simply happened to live in north China when the war broke out. We can suffer simply for belonging to the wrong group at the wrong time. It should not surprise us; we should be prepared for it. ...

Rejoice That You Are United to Christ ...

Jesus predicted that we would face persecution, and he showed that God’s agents will suffer. As a result, Peter says, disciples should “rejoice that you participate in the sufferings of Christ, so that you may be overjoyed when his glory is revealed” (1 Peter 4:13). Suffering is a product of our union with Christ. ...

I once preached a guest sermon in a city known for its rudeness. After- ward, two men surprised me with their comments. One remarked that it was the second-best sermon he’d ever heard (I didn’t ask). The other told me that the message was “a stench in the nostrils of God.” The man seemed ...

Bruce K. Waltke, The Book of Proverbs (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2005), 2:387. ...

New York: Harper & Row, 1966. ...

arrogant, so I tried to discount it, but it is never easy to be blasted when we do our best to please God and neighbor. ...

But Peter tells us not to be surprised at trials or rejection. If Jesus, in all his perfection, could be rejected, so will we. If his life followed a pattern of suffering before glory, so will ours, since he expects our life to resemble his (1 Peter 2:23–25; 3:14; 5:1). Indeed, we should rejoice, not in suffering per se, but in the pain that demonstrates our participation in his suffering. So we rejoice if (and only if) we suffer innocently, as he did. Then we will rejoice when Jesus returns, in glory, appearing to all flesh, to judge and renew creation, beginning with this world (4:13). ...

Therefore, “if you are insulted [or reviled] because of the name of Christ, you are blessed, for” it proves that “the Spirit of glory and of God rests on ...

you” (1 Peter 4:14). In a hostile, pagan environment, a reproach can be proof that God’s Spirit shapes us so completely that our life disturbs the pagan, who responds by reviling. Opposition might therefore be proof that God is so differentiating us from the culture that we cannot be ignored. ...

Around a.d. 400, a monk named Telemachus felt God compelling him to travel to Rome to preach against the city’s corruptions, especially against the gladiatorial games. He preached on a street corner, but no one paid him heed. Then came a day for the games. As the crowds bounded to the amphi- theater, Telemachus decided to walk with them. He entered, saw, blanched, and acted. He leaped into the arena and shouted to two combatants to cease their bloody contest. ...

There are two accounts of what happened next. One says that the com- batants briefly stopped fighting each other, killed him, and then resumed their battle. The second reports that the crowd picked up loose stones from the crumbling Colosseum and used them to stone him to death. Either way, his protest so challenged the proceedings that he was slain. ...

It seemed that Telemachus’s protest had failed. But in Matthew 5:10–16, Jesus says that four things can happen when godly character manifests itself. We might be “persecuted because of righteousness” (5:10); we might be “the salt of the earth,” retarding its decay (5:13); we might be “the light of the world,” enlightening all who see it (5:14); and that light might shine so clearly that witnesses “see your good deeds and praise your Father in heaven” (5:16). Telemachus was persecuted for righteousness that day, but the story of Telemachus’s protest spread. His “salt and light” strengthened those who ...

protested the games. For centuries, most people had seen the games as a spectacle and entertainment. It took a long time, but eventually, with the help of Telemachus, the world came to view the games as a crime and an abomination. In God’s providence, the prosperity of the empire was crum- bling, making it harder for governors to sponsor the contests. By a.d. 450, to God’s glory, they had essentially ceased.4 ...

Today, young adults who abstain from sexual encounters before marriage are viewed as antiquarians at best, fools at worst. Why, a highly regarded advice columnist asks reproachfully, would any couple want to get married without first assuring themselves that they are sexually compatible? We believe that total physical self-giving belongs in the marital context of total personal self-giving—heart, soul, body, mind, will, and strength. Outside marriage, sexual intimacy is intrinsically deceptive—a life-uniting act with- out a life-uniting intent.5 There will always be areas where Christian ethics so clash with a given culture’s ethic that Christians will endure reproach for following God’s ways. ...

It is miserable to endure mockery, scorn, and character assassination, and every sane person recoils from physical persecution. Yet we want to be like Jesus, who loved us and gave himself for us as a sacrifice (Eph. 5:2). He is the supreme case of an innocent man unjustly persecuted. Like Jesus, we neither seek persecution nor retreat from it. We accept it if it comes, and when it does come, it proves that we have allied ourselves with the suffering Christ. Paul states, “I want to know Christ and the power of his resurrection and the fellowship of sharing in his sufferings” (Phil. 3:10–11). ...

When we belong to Christ, we experience a real union with him. My wife and I have been married for over thirty years. For some years, people have treated us as though we shared each other’s attributes. They pepper her with biblical and theological questions, even though she has no formal training. Even more astonishing, because she is delightfully friendly and remembers everyone’s name, people assume that I’m friendly and remember their names, too. There are good reasons for these assumptions. We become like the people with whom we are united. Husbands and wives, in real marriages at least, ...

Philip Schaff, History of the Christian Church (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson, 1996), 3:122–25. ...

Lewis B. Smedes, Sex for Christians: The Limits and Liberties of Sexual Living (Grand Rap- ids: Eerdmans, 1994), 110–11. See also Timothy Keller, with Kathy Keller, The Meaning of Marriage: Facing the Complexities of Commitment with the Wisdom of God (New York: Dutton, 2011), 224–27. ...

do become similar. Because of our marriage, I am friendlier and my wife knows more theology. ...

If we are united to Christ, we become more like him. Our life path resem- bles his more and more. Our suffering recapitulates his suffering. So our suffering shows that we belong to him now and will share in his coming victory. So we will “be overjoyed when his glory is revealed.” If we share in his suffering, we will share in his victory over death and enjoy God’s reward in heaven. ...

Peter teaches, “If you are insulted because of the name of Christ, you are blessed, for the Spirit of glory and of God rests on you” (1 Peter 4:14). Jesus likewise told his disciples that they were blessed if they suffered evil “because of righteousness” or “because of me” (Matt. 5:10–11). That is, we are blessed if we suffer for God’s principles, and we are blessed if we suffer for God’s Son. ...

Persecution also links us with the prophets, who suffered the same thing. If we suffer for Jesus’ sake, we are in good company. We join the prophets who suffered because they challenged their age. When we engage the world, clashing values inescapably create conflict. When Jeremiah confronted the idolatry and corruption of his age, they called him a traitor, burned his writings, and shut his mouth by tossing him into a pit. Ahead of his time, he participated in the sufferings of Christ. We should expect the same, for “a student is not above his teacher.” If opponents slander the master, they will also slander his followers (Matt. 10:24–25). Jesus doesn’t hide bad news; he repeats it: ...

If the world hates you, keep in mind that it hated me first. If you belonged to the world, it would love you as its own I have chosen you out of the world. ...

That is why the world hates you. Remember the words I spoke to you: “No servant is greater than his master.” If they persecuted me, they will persecute you also. (John 15:18–20) ...

The Bible never blesses suffering in itself. No one should take direct pleasure in pain. Threats, insults, and slander hurt, even if the slanderer is a great fool. Nonetheless, Peter insists, “If you are insulted because of the name of Christ, you are blessed, for the Spirit of glory and of God rests on you” (1 Peter 4:14). ...

Never Suffer for Evil Deeds; Avoid Well-Deserved Suffering ...

When the Spirit of glory so rests on us that we become more like Christ, we participate in his life, and insults suffered for the sake of righteousness prove that. But the progress of the disciple is always partial, so that Peter is compelled to add a caveat: “If you suffer, it should not be as a murderer or thief or any other kind of criminal, or even as a meddler” (1 Peter 4:15). Peter requires that we avoid criminal acts meriting punishment. He assumes that we will shun the foolishness that earns us displeasure. ...

Refraining from murder also means no displays of anger, no resentment. No harsh judgment—scorning, scoffing, despising, or belittling. Refraining from theft also means no envy or greed, no manipulation or abuse of funds, no unpaid debts, and no waste of wealth or creation. ...

It is obvious that disciples should avoid criminal activity, but the ban on meddling is a subtle notion. The term translated “meddler” (allotri- episkopos) is a rare compound word that means “an overseer of another’s affairs.” Meddlers interfere, usurping roles not properly theirs. They might even scheme to gain influence outside their sphere. They nose into matters that are not their proper concern and offer unwanted opinions. They speak when protocol calls for silence. No one gladly listens to a meddler; most are irritated. If a child is misbehaving at the grocery store, how many parents will welcome child-rearing tips from the nearest cashier? ...

The Lord disapproves when we violate reasonable social standards. He does not bless tactlessness or folly, even if they are somehow connected to the faith. A worker cannot claim persecution if, while proselytizing a fel- low laborer, he talks beyond the lunch hour and is rebuked for it. If we bark out corrections whenever our peers speak crudely, we can expect rejection. Leaders have a right to set standards for their organization, but ordinary employees should keep their judgments private. God does not bless tactless behavior, and it is not persecution when obnoxious acts earn wrath. There is a time for silence, as Solomon declared and as Jesus and Paul showed (Eccl. 3:7; Luke 23:9; John 19:9; Acts 19:30). ...

When we receive harsh treatment, we should ask, “What have I done to deserve this?” rather than “Why do they persecute me?” For example, if we freely share pointed opinions in person or in blogs and Internet posts, we should not be ...

surprised if people disagree with us and criticize us. And if the critic’s language is harsh, we should not call it persecution, but a predictable consequence of sharp debate. On the other hand, both David and Peter say that, ordinarily, we suffer no harm if we do good (1 Peter 3:10–13, quoting Ps. 34:12–16). ...

Dont Be Ashamed to Suffer as a Christian ...

“Yet if anyone suffers as a Christian, let him not be ashamed, but let him glorify God in that name” (1 Peter 4:16 esv). Translators debate whether the phrase “glorify God in that name” means that we praise God that we bear the name of Christ (niv), or that we praise God in the name of Christ (nasb). A common interpretation takes Peter to say, “Even if the name ‘Christian’ is hurled at you in derision, wear the name proudly, for you do belong to Christ.” In a common variant reading, the text reads “let him glorify God in this matter,” that is, let him glorify God while it happens.6 At any rate, it seems that the term Christian was a slur, an insult, much as certain English- men coined the term Puritan to mock English believers who had a zeal for purity. In each case, believers eventually decided to take the slur as a positive name. If that happens, Peter says, praise God in it. Don’t be ashamed; take your eyes off yourself. In today’s terms: ...

If called a fundamentalist, think, “Yes, I believe the fundamentals.” ...

If called a Bible-thumper, think, “Yes, I do read and honor God’s Word.” ...

If called a Puritan, think, “Yes, I do aim for purity and integrity.” ...

If called a Christian, think, “Yes, I do follow Jesus.” ...

In Peter’s day, Christians were exiled, arrested, tried, even slain for their faith. If any believer so suffers, he or she should count it an honor to suffer for Jesus’ name. ...

西方, 宗教自由长久以来受到尊重, 我们或许会认为这种讨论毫无意义。我们应当未雨绸缪。俄罗斯, 共产主义革命后, 以及德国纳粹统治的后期阶段,

主要差异在于通行文本采用"名"(onomati),而常见异读作"事"(merei)。参见 J. Ramsey Michaels,《彼得前书》,《世界圣经注释》 第 49 卷(纳什维尔:托马斯·尼尔森出版社,1988 年),269-70 页。

随着极端主义势力抬头,福音派基督徒的处境突然变得危险起来。最近,在伊拉克和苏丹,那些数十年来甚至数世纪处于安全状态的基督徒少数群体, 突然面临生存威胁。这种情况假以时日也可能在其他许多地区重演。

彼得 他的子民必须预备忠信度日, 因为个人要在审判者面前自己生命账: 因为审判时候到了, 神的审判; 若是我们起头,顺从福音人,怎样结局呢? 彼得前书 4:17)。 彼得此前多次提及审判 1:17;2:23;4:5–6)。 原文提到 “审判时候到”,必然是指最终审判。 旧约先知们宣告审判必须上帝的子民开始(耶 25:15-33,特别注意 25:29 节;参结 9 章;玛 3 章)。7

彼得的读者们或许惊讶地发现 信徒仍要面临审判。 毕竟, 作为基督徒已经充满挑战。在今世耶稣受苦后, 我们仍需面对审判。这个教导既不应让我们惊讶,也不该使我们沮丧。首先,这是圣经一贯的见证。耶稣曾说:"当人子在他荣耀里降临时......" 万民都要聚集在他面前,他要把他们分别出来,好像牧羊人绵羊山羊分开一般 (马太福音 25:31-32)。 山羊代表不信者,绵羊代表信徒。他将对信徒说: 你们这蒙我父赐福的, 可来承受创世以来你们预备的 因为我饿了, 你们给我吃; 渴了, 你们给我喝; 我作客旅, 你们留我住 (25:34-35)。 圣经始终教导我们, 当站在神面前时, 他必按我们的行为审判我们。 在末后的日子, 我们都要为这一切交账 (诗篇 62:12; 耶利米书 17:10; 马太福音 16:27;哥林多后书 5:10;彼得前书 1:17;启示录 20:12)。

审判不应我们惊慌, 因为还有第二个理由: 我们被定罪。并非根据行为。 我们的行为确实重要,其重要性在于它们反映了我们内心的委身。 诗篇 62 篇清楚阐明一点。 大卫宣告:“我的心灵唯在神里面得享安息。 惟有他是我的磐石拯救。”

彼得·H. 戴维斯,《彼得前书注释》(大急流城: 厄德曼斯出版社,1990 年), 第 170 页。

我的救恩 神啊,大能的, 主啊,慈爱的。 你必照各人所行的报应他"(诗篇 62:1-2,11-12)。 因为大卫信靠耶和华, 所以确信自己的生命作为彰显这份信靠。他知道主必鉴察他行为中的忠诚。

信徒的罪过与过失终将得赦免,然而——何等恩典——我们崇高的言行将在审判之日见证我们对主心志公开验证实据 (太 7:17-18;12:33-35; 雅各书 2:14-26) 因此我们省察己身扪心自问 言行究竟彰显何物岂非昭示耶稣君王恩典大能 统治已经改变了我们? 彼得指引我们期待那一天的到来并为之做好准备,按照我们作为"神的家庭"——天父的儿女——这一身份而活。

Now, Peter continues, if judgment day is a serious matter even for dis- ciples, “what will the outcome be for those who do not obey the gospel of God? And, ‘If it is hard for the righteous to be saved, what will become of the ungodly and the sinner?’ (1 Peter 4:17–18). That is, if someone does not love and obey God, it will be clear, and it will lead to judgment. Again, this is not judgment according to works in a narrow sense. Rather, the corrupt heart also proves itself in actions. Jeremiah put it this way: “The heart is deceitful above all things and beyond cure. Who can understand it? I the Lord search the heart and examine the mind, to reward a man according to his conduct, according to what his deeds deserve” (Jer. 17:9–10). So the direction of the heart and mind leads to deeds that God rewards or punishes. ...

The priority of the heart’s direction, a person’s faith or the lack of it, is clear ...

in the question that closes 1 Peter 4:17: “What will the outcome be for those who do not obey the gospel of God?” When the phrase “obey the gospel” appears in the Bible, it is clear that to obey the gospel means to believe the gospel of Jesus (Rom. 10:14–16; 2 Thess. 1:8–10). Peter is therefore speaking of those who hear and reject the gospel and persecute Christians for the faith (1 Peter 2:8; 3:14–17). If the judgment is a serious thing for “the family of God . . . , what will the outcome be for those who do not obey the gospel of God? And, ‘If it is hard for the righteous to be saved, what will become of the ungodly and the sinner?’ (1 Peter 4:17–18). It is hard even for believers to be saved. God must preserve the elect (Matt. 24:22–24). The gate is nar- row (Matt. 7:13–14). Our faith is tested and proved genuine (1 Peter 1:6–7; 4:12). We must remember whom to fear (3:14). ...

If the believer must be so careful to persevere and stay ready to meet the Judge, even in our union with Christ, what will come to the person who has spurned Christ, oppressed the weak, and lived for himself? We should then be sober-minded and give thanks that we face the judgment vindicated by the good deeds that come from faith. ...

Let us therefore be ready for that day. Many call on the Lord, but not all call sincerely (Matt. 7:22). We prepare by praying and telling Jesus, “I sincerely believe in you as you are presented in the gospel. I will fail often, but I do resolve to love, follow, and obey you, even if that should bring me persecution, for I know how you loved me and gave yourself for me.” ...

This passage begins and ends with suffering; suffering divides those who truly call on Jesus from those who dabble in religion for a season. Suffering clarifies things. If we endure at a cost, it shows that we know the Lord and are preparing daily to meet him and render an account for our life. ...

Commit Yourself, Therefore, to the Faithful God ...

“So then, those who suffer according to God’s will should commit them- selves to their faithful Creator and continue to do good” (1 Peter 4:19). We suffer according to God’s will when we suffer for the sake of righteousness, not our sin or folly. At the same time, we accept that our suffering is his will, his decree, as he continues to govern the world. ...

Peter also tells us how to endure suffering. Curiously, he does not com- mand us to be faithful; he reminds us that God is faithful. So we should continually commit or entrust ourselves to the faithful Creator.8 The word translated “commit” means “to entrust or to hand over something to the care of another.” The “thing” that we commit to God is our very life, and we do so because we believe he is faithful. That is why David told the Lord, “Into your hands I commit my spirit; redeem me, O Lord,” and it is why Jesus said the same words even as he died on the cross (Ps. 31:5; cf. Luke 23:46). The command is in the present tense, which means that we continue to ...

The Greek is paratithēmi. The verb is a present imperative, signifying an ongoing disposition. “Ourselves” translates hē psuchē—literally, “the soul.” This is not meant to contrast with the body. It means the whole person, perhaps with the connotation that persecutors can harm the body but not the whole person. See Matt. 10:28; Davids, 1 Peter, 173; Michaels, 1 Peter, 273. ...

commit ourselves to God, knowing that he is faithful. And while we suffer and trust, we do good, as he defines it in Scripture.9 ...

There is a time to flee persecution and run to another place, Jesus noted (Matt. 10:23). But while we might run by abandoning our home, we cannot run by abandoning our faith, our vows, or our Lord. Many do abandon their vows. Pastors administer vows fairly often—at weddings and baptisms, to new church members and church officers. A few take their vows in vain and begin to abandon them almost at once. All of us fail partially. But God does not. That is why we entrust ourselves to him instead of entrusting ourselves to ourselves. ...

Summary ...

To review, Peter has suggested some means to remain true during suffering and persecution. First, we must be ready when trials come (1 Peter 4:12). Second, we should rejoice that we are united to Christ (4:13). If we suffer insults, it shows that the Spirit of God rests on us (4:14). Third, we should suffer for the faith, not because we merit punishment (4:15). Fourth, no one should be ashamed to suffer because we bear the name of Christ (4:16). Fifth, we remember that we will stand before God the Judge (4:17–18). Finally, when we suffer, we should commit ourselves to our faithful God and continue to do good (4:19). ...

In Psalms 26:1; 35:24; 43:1; and 54:1, the singer pleads, “Vindicate me, O Lord.” Psalm 135:14 seems to answer the petitions: “For the Lord will vin- dicate his people.” Jesus is the archetype of the one who is falsely accused and then vindicated by God, above all in his resurrection (1 Tim. 3:16; see also Rom. 1:1–4 [which has the concept, not the word]). Because of our union with Christ (1 Peter 4:13), we will be vindicated with him. Knowing this, we can persevere. The sixfold counsel of 1 Peter 4:12–19 deserves our careful attention, but we must remember that the Bible is never essentially about lists of duties. To live by lists is as appealing as cotton candy—and just as nourishing. The Bible starts with the covenants and the character of God. He created us, he redeemed us, and he is worthy of our trust. If Jesus was willing to suffer in the flesh, we should be, too. And if the Father vindicated Jesus by raising him from the dead, he will vindicate us, too. That future, in God’s presence, ...

that future, sharing in his glory, teaches us to persevere. ...

The Greek phrase en agathopoia could mean by doing good” or while doing good.” While ...

fits better, for Peter is urging his readers to continue to do good as they suffer. ...

16

Jesus Shepherds His Church through Servant Leaders ...

x BeCex 5:x–e

我作为同作长老的,向你们中间的长老劝勉: 我这为基督受苦的见证人,也是将来同享所显现之荣耀的。你们务要牧养在你们中间神的群羊, 按着神的旨意照管他们; 不是出于勉强, 而是出于甘心; 也不是因为贪财, 乃是出于乐意; 不要辖制所托付你们的, 乃要作群羊的榜样。 到了牧长显现的时候, 你们必得那永不衰残的荣耀冠冕

( 彼得前书 5:1-4)

领导力是一种悖论——既是荣耀也是毁灭,既是特权也是折磨。人们领袖,领袖不应求,领袖, 其能力常被夸大。人们协助建议他们,偏爱奉承他们,纠缠环绕他们。但也有人怀疑、批评、 谴责。 他们领袖,乐。

评论一本(或电影)创作 (或执导) 容易得多 指责领导也比成为领导者简单。每向上一步,都意味着向下退一步。

每位领导者都深谙领导地位悖论 领域特有的方式预见 感知预判这些矛盾。法官手握重权。 追查真相, 保护弱者, 惩处恶徒。 对轻罪者课以罚金, 将歹徒绳之以法,无辜者清白。任何公正裁决都难免某些人失望, 更有少数执法者恨之入骨。 门前的无头鸡被划的轮胎尚可忍受, 但针对妻儿的死亡威胁便是另一回事了。 总统与总理们国民爱戴痛恨存在,既是狂热追捧的对象,也是暗杀阴谋的目标。在谄媚者的圈子里, 每个愿望奉为圣旨;敌对者阵营中, 每个举动诋毁。 老板、 教练、 导演、 州长——受爱戴又遭鄙夷。每项特权获得之日,便是自由丧失之时。

鲜有人能从容驾驭权力 一种总是急于决断 热衷

发号施令 甚至渴望支配 动辄滥用职权 另一种则怯于号令,敏感难当重任。柏拉图笔下那勉为其难却心怀担当的哲人王,实属凤毛麟角。

如同那些可悲的 日复一日吞食从不排出 直到浓缩的毒素使它们残废, 这位领导者甚至从未听闻那些简单的问题。 只有那些有毒的事务才会抵达他的案头, 只有那些无人能解的难题才会呈递到他面前。 哪个理智的人会想成为领导者呢? 被蒙蔽而渴望权力的人追求它, 天真而贪婪的渴求它。 更重要的是, 那些蒙神呼召并赐予领导才能的向往它。 他们渴望改变世界,真理、 和平恩典带入教会城市, 使人们获得医治生命。 他们想要改善这受造世界的部分

并且相信他们知道如何这件事。

通过圣经,敬虔的领袖们见证了耶稣的受难。依们的年岁生命程, 他们或朦胧清晰地悟,主同谛。 他们祂的荣耀,基于年岁与阅历,他们对这份盼望或怀抱坚定信心,或持谨慎乐观。但无论怀着怎样的待,始终盼望导与敬虔榜样牧养神的群羊。

彼得书信的末尾提及领导力这个主题。已经教导我们上帝所爱的子民,提升永活的盼望永不

ing inheritance. We endure hardship, follow God’s Word, and live by God’s mercy. By his blood Jesus ransomed us from a futile way of life and called us to be holy (1 Peter 1:1–16). Believers are a holy priesthood, a holy nation set apart for God by their faith in Jesus and their determination to follow him in their social relations, in their marriages and their homes (2:5–4:19). When we follow Jesus we change, and change can create problems (4:1–4). When a sinner reforms, he leaves his old ways and old companions, who might resent the departure. Peter’s people had been pagans, and when they forsook pagan ways, they became outsiders, exiles in their own culture. The government also had suspicions, since the disciples refused to worship the emperor, an attitude that looked subversive. These social and political problems, taken together, convinced Peter that trials and persecution were inevitable for all who will to suffer with Christ rather than renouncing him: “Do not be surprised at the painful trial you are suffering, as though something strange were happening to you. But rejoice that you participate in the sufferings of Christ” (4:12–13, passim). ...

The church needs stalwart shepherd leaders in such times.1 Elders should ...

not hesitate to lead the church, even though they might make themselves a target for persecution. In this willingness to suffer, Peter stands with Jesus and, calling himself a “fellow elder,” invites church leaders into solidarity with him.2 Strong and steady hands are essential during a crisis. ...

Yet churches need shepherds even in the best times. Even the saints can wander into sin, and the immature need a godly example (1 Peter 5:2–3). And however much individual Christians may progress, the church needs men to lead and to harness its diverse gifts (4:10–11). The greater the talents, the greater the need for leaders. It is the most gifted orchestra, comprising musicians with the greatest capacities and the most fertile imaginations, that needs the strongest conductor. ...

Apart from the challenge of enduring persecution, all Scripture testifies that the church will also experience trouble from internal sources, from ...

(1) the heretical, (2) the immoral, and (3) the envious. Peter’s prescriptions for elders answer all three problems. We begin with heresy and the antidote, experiential knowledge of true doctrine. ...

Although this turn of thought is not explicit, 1 Peter 5:1 does begin with oun, “so” or pos- sibly “therefore.” The conjunction points to a thought process. The church needs leaders for a reason. ...

Karen H. Jobes, 1 Peter (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2005), 300. ...

The Basis of Peters Leadership and Message ...

Peter speaks elder to elder: “To the elders among you, I appeal as a fel- low elder, a witness of Christ’s sufferings and one who also will share in the glory to be revealed” (1 Peter 5:1). We know that Jesus himself appointed Peter as an apostle and herald of the gospel, that Peter was one of the inner three, and that he was often a spokesman for the disciples. Yet with touching modesty, he calls himself a “fellow elder” rather than “apostle.” He locates himself with that band of elders who labor in the church. He stresses his equality with others and his empathy with their position, not his supremacy or even his authority. ...

Nonetheless, elders (presbuteroi) do possess authority over the con- gregation. Elder was the customary term for a community leader in the Old Testament and in the Judaism of the Hellenistic age. Peter does not call the others “fellow elders” in a play at humility; he “makes the elders aware of their commission.” They now fulfill part of the work of the apostles themselves—the need to shepherd and care for all the congregations (2 Cor. 11:28; 1 Peter 5:2).3 ...

Peter is “a witness of Christ’s sufferings” (1 Peter 5:1). Peter heard the words of Jesus and beheld his deeds, from the beginning (Acts 1:21), by the appointment of Jesus (Mark 3:14–16). He stood at Jesus’ side, both watch- ing events and hearing Jesus’ explanation of them, so Peter, in turn, could declare both what happened and what it meant. ...

No, Peter did not see everything with his own eyes; he fled before the crucifixion (Matt. 26:56). Nonetheless, he is a witness in the secondary sense that he testified to Jesus’ suffering. Thus, Peter partially shares the position of elders who proclaim the work of Jesus by drawing on the eye- witness testimony of others. In this limited sense, all elders are witnesses alongside the apostles. ...

Further, Peter is “a partaker in the glory that is going to be revealed” (1 Peter 5:1b esv). So Peter stands beside the church’s elders, not above them. All witness to Jesus and wait to participate in Jesus’ glory. From the position of “fellow elder,” he exhorts the elders of the church. This is no condescen- sion, no rhetorical subterfuge. He is not acting as though his fellow elders ...

Leonhard Goppelt, A Commentary on 1 Peter, trans. John E. Alsup (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1993), 341. ...

were his peers; he is elevating them to his level. All witness to Christ. All share in his sufferings and glory, for Jesus’ life is a pattern for ours, as Peter has said before (2:21ff.). ...

Peter is not denying his unique role as a witness of Jesus. As he proclaims in 2 Peter 1:16, he was and therefore is an eyewitness of Jesus’ majesty. But Peter wants to stress his solidarity with his fellow elders, and he can legiti- mately do so. After all, Peter was hardly a perfect leader. He contributed to Jesus’ suffering. He fell asleep when Jesus asked him to stand beside him in his anguish in Gethsemane, as he faced his death and separation from the Father. Hours later, after Jesus’ arrest, Peter denied that he even knew Jesus. Hours like these could lead one to ask how Peter (far from putting on humility) dares to present himself as a fellow elder. ...

Indeed, Peter’s case can explain how anyone dares to be called or to call himself an elder or leader. In a way, the church has leaders because God appointed “some to be apostles,” prophets, evangelists, pastors, and teachers, as well as elders (Eph. 4:11; cf. Acts 14:23). Yet Peter illustrates the principle that no one, not even an apostle, deserves to lead. Again, Peter denied that he even knew Jesus. He did so in Jesus’ darkest hour, despite Jesus’ prior warning, despite promising that he would never betray Jesus, and despite his position as a leader and example. ...

Beyond doubt, Peter’s actions disqualified him for church leadership. Yet here he is, an apostle and elder, shepherd and overseer (1 Peter 1:1; 5:1). He regained his position because Jesus reinstated him after his failures. After the resurrection, Peter and the other fishing disciples returned to the Sea of Galilee, and Jesus met Peter there (John 21:2–5). ...

Jesus asked him, “Simon, . . . do you truly love me . . . ?” (John 21:15). The question was fair. Peter had claimed that he loved Jesus more than anyone else did: “Even if all fall away on account of you, I never will.” Yet Peter did fall away, even swearing an oath that he had never known Jesus (Matt. 26:33, 72). ...

Peter had denied Jesus three times, so Jesus questioned him three times: “Do you love me?” Jesus wasn’t mocking Peter’s failure. Rather, Peter had denied Jesus three times, so Jesus asked three times, “Do you love me?” This allowed Peter to declare three times: “I love you, Lord; you know I love you.” That in turn lets Jesus reinstate Peter three times: “Feed my lambs,” “take care of my sheep,” “feed my sheep” (John 21:15–17). This was Peter’s restoration. ...

Someone called this sequence Peter’s ordination exam. Jesus’ questions were quite different from our (perfectly valid) questions about forms of church government and adherence to confessions of faith. Jesus’ questions were also quite different from our half-solicitous, half-accusatory inquiries: “Have you learned your lesson? Do you promise never to do that again? Are you really sorry?” Jesus simply asked, “Do you love me?” That remains the great question for every church leader. Apart from our union with Jesus, whom we love, our labors can bear no fruit. ...

The lessons are clear. First, no Christian leader is self-qualified, morally or spiritually. No one deserves to lead the church. Jesus forgives, appoints, and qualifies his apostles and elders. Second, the core of an elder’s qualifica- tion is the love of Jesus, both experienced and returned. ...

The love of Jesus creates the essential desire to lead and care for God’s people. Despite the threat of persecution, leaders do so “because you are willing,” as Peter puts it (1 Peter 5:2). Elders must also hold to the faith with a clear conscience. They should be apt to teach and lead. They should be tested and proved faithful. They must have godly character. They must care for people inside and outside their church. They should lead their own families well and so gain a good reputation (Acts 20:17–35; 1 Thess. 5:12–15; 1 Tim. 3:1–13; 5:17–19; Heb. 13:17). But above ...

all, they are beloved of God and must love God in return. ...

The Problem of Heretical Teachers ...

This foundational knowledge of Jesus and love for him is the antidote to the first internal challenge to the church and its leaders, the challenge of heretical teachers. In the New Testament, Paul says most about heretics and false teachers. Instead of leading in love, they are violent (spiritually) and quarrelsome (1 Tim. 6:3–5; cf. 2 Tim. 2:23–26). ...

False teachers are “confident” and want to be recognized as “teachers of the law, but they do not know what they are talking about or what they so confidently affirm” (1 Tim. 1:7). Elders, by contrast, are “able to teach” (3:2). False teachers “have shipwrecked their faith” (1:19), whereas elders and deacons have been tested and are above reproach (3:1, 7, 10). ...

Some false teachers are former church leaders. Paul foretold this in his final address to his beloved Ephesian elders: “Even from your own number men will arise and distort the truth in order to draw away disciples after ...

them” (Acts 20:30). In 1 Timothy 1:20, Paul names two of them—Hymenaeus and Alexander, whom he has “handed over to Satan.” This seems like the sort of public rebuke Paul requires when an elder is caught in sin (5:17–20). The greatest danger is that heretics will preach “a different gospel—which is really no gospel at all” in the truest sense of the word (Gal. 1:6–7). The “alter- native” gospel is contrary to the word Paul preached and utterly defective: “If anybody is preaching to you a gospel other than what you accepted, let him be eternally condemned!” (1:9). These teachers miss the central gospel, and shift their interest to matters that are, at best, peripheral. They major in genealogies, myths, speculations, and vain discussions (1 Tim. 1:4–6). Today they burrow into the interpretation of creeds and catechisms, rather than Scripture itself. They try to distinguish between the early and late phases of thought leaders instead of asking whether they are right or wrong. Second Peter 2 further ...

addresses false teachers. Speaking of the old covenant era, Peter says: ...

But there were also false prophets among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you. They will secretly introduce destructive heresies, even deny- ing the sovereign Lord who bought them Many will follow their shameful ...

[or sensual] ways and will bring the way of truth into disrepute. In their greed these teachers will exploit you with stories they have made up. (2 Peter 2:1–3) ...

Second Peter shows that the twin internal challenges of false teaching and immorality are linked. Peter explains that false teachers deny the Sovereign Lord so that they can claim to believe and yet live for selfish pleasure. They “carouse in broad daylight , reveling in their pleasures while they feast ...

with you. With eyes full of adultery, they never stop sinning; they seduce the unstable; they are experts in greed” (2:13–14). The antidote to such false and corrupt teachers is the holiness of the true Shepherd. ...

The Manner of a Godly Leader ...

Peter commands elders to “shepherd the flock of God that is among you”—that is, under the elder’s charge—“exercising oversight, not under compulsion, but willingly, not for shameful gain, but eagerly” (1 Peter 5:2 esv).4 This compressed ...

The phrase “exercising oversight” translates the single participle episkopountes