Thoughts going in, Sunday May 1st

1 Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ, To God's elect, exiles scattered throughout the provinces of Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia and Bithynia, 2 who have been chosen according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through the sanctifying work of the Spirit, to be obedient to Jesus Christ and sprinkled with his blood: Grace and peace be yours in abundance. 3 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, 4 and into an inheritance that can never perish, spoil or fade. This inheritance is kept in heaven for you, 5 who through faith are shielded by God's power until the coming of the salvation that is ready to be revealed in the last time. 6 In all this you greatly rejoice, though now for a little while you may have had to suffer grief in all kinds of trials. 7 These have come so that your faith--of greater worth than gold, which perishes even though refined by fire--may be proved genuine and may result in praise, glory and honor when Jesus Christ is revealed. 8 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, 9 for you are receiving the end result of your faith, the salvation of your souls.

During the Sundays of Easter (2nd –7th) the second reading appointed is consistently from 1Peter, which, seems to naturally suggest the development of a ‘sermon series.’ Add to this the theological reality that the whole of Lent was in *preparation for Baptism, Easter was the day of Baptism/renewal of baptismal vows, and a suggested sermon series theme for the 1Peter readings becomes something like: “Living Our Easter Baptism.”

The text appointed for this Sunday actually begins with vs 3, but it seems odd to me to just jump into an epistle without including its salutation. This, however, quickly opens a can of exegetical worms, such as AUTHORSHIP and ADDRESSEES. Verse 1 of the text declares authorship to be “Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ.” It’s a simple enough statement, yet full of issues when unpacked. For instance, most casual students of the New Testament realize that “Peter” was not a given/proper name. The fisherman Simon son of Jonah was **titled “Peter” by Jesus (Matthew 16:18). Petros (Greek) and “Cephas” (Aramaic) mean “rock.” If John Wayne were writing the letter, it would be as if he began it: “The Duke, an apostle of Jesus….”

This opens up some interesting topics for discussion. For instance, scholars have noted that Simon-Peter’s death has been traditionally hooked to the persecution of the Emperor Nero in Rome. Since Nero died in 68AD, it stands to reason that Simon-Peter would’ve been executed some time before. This also means that if the letter was entirely written/dictated (more on dictation later) by Peter, its composition date would’ve had to have been prior to 68. Most traditional scholarship tends toward 64-65AD. This *early dating is troubling for some scholars who see in this letter earmarks of a more developed church/situation than what is thought to have been current in 64/65AD.

The original language of the letter, like all NT documents is Greek. However, it is a very complex Greek—not the sort that would be easily attributed to a Galilean fisherman. Near the end, however, the author credits Silas (1Peter 5:12) as a helper/instrument of writing. Silas (aka Silvanus) was a thoroughly Hellenized convert more than capable of constructing the document. Hence, many theories posit Peter as the ‘author,’ but Silas as the scribe/writer.

Of just as great a concern are the ADDRESSEES. “To God's elect, exiles scattered (aka ‘dispersed’) throughout the provinces…” The Elect of the Dispersion is a technical term that had meaning independent of Peter’s use. It had always been applied to **JEWS living outside of the holy land (going back to Babylonian Exile days). Many commentators, thus, see that Peter is borrowing a strictly Jewish term to refer to the ‘Gentile recipients’ of the letter. However, Stern (always interesting even if we disagree with him) bucks that trend, stating: “God’s elected ones, meaning ISRAEL, living as aliens in the Diaspora. Kefa directs his letter primarily to Jewish believers (including Jewish proselytes who later accepted Yeshua), since he was “an emissary to the Circumcised” (Gal 2:7-8).” Even so, Stern also sees passages of the letter as applying strictly to Gentiles who have come to faith in ‘Yeshua’ without a Jewish connection. Stern brings up an interesting possibility, that, sadly does not seem to be entertained at all by mainstream scholarship—which seems to accept as ‘obvious’ that Peter, the Apostle to the Circumcised, is writing an encyclical letter to an all Gentile church.

For my purposes, I will take the mediating position that **both sides add nuance & understanding to the letter, but that the reality of the day was probably something less than the strict black & white colors that most commentators use. Prior to the 2nd century, or at the very least, prior to the destruction of Jerusalem & the temple, I can imagine that nearly any ‘local congregation’ had a potential mixture of Messianic Jews & non-proselyte Gentile converts—whether 50/50 or 99/1. Indeed, since even the word “church” has been weighted with such ‘Gentile only’ overtones, I would prefer the term “Messianic community” as a neutral designation for all local gatherings of Jesus-followers. THUS, in the theology of 1Peter, the MESSIANIC COMMUNITY, however it is ethnically comprised, is THE Elect of the Dispersion. The Messianic Community are the ‘aliens’ living amongst a potentially hostile indigenous people—which may include Roman civil authorities, pagan local/territorial cults, and even [non-Messianic] Jews.

So, what’s going on?
The passage is very dense…with a LOT of things packed into it, but the overwhelming message is that of HOPE. If the series in general is “Living Our Easter Baptism,” then part one would definitely be: “Living Our Easter Baptism, the GLORIOUS HOPE.”
Of course the HOPE that is ours through baptism is not ‘optimism,’ or even ‘the power of positive thinking.’ Biblical HOPE is always the confident assurance that **GOD** is good for his promises. The specific EASTER aspect of this, then, is hooked to the resurrection of Jesus. Because Jesus has been raised, ALL BELIEVERS can live in [biblical] HOPE. In spite of our status as sojourners in a strange land (with hostile inhabitants), we can have confident assurance that God is ‘good for his promises.’ He’s already shown us this in the resurrection of his blessed son.

Cheers,

TM