Pearls from Peter: Part 1
I have had positive feedback on the Jewels from John series and so I am starting a new series along similar lines. The focus is once again on reflection rather than exposition. I emphasise what I perceive the Holy Spirit as saying rather than how we intellectually process the text. I will be selecting passages from Peter’s first letter.
This is not going to be a long series as I am planning something new and, for me, challenging … more about this soon.
1 Peter 1:1-2
“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.”
First Reflection
This is Peter’s opening greeting to churches all over what is now Turkey. It is a complex salutation containing several profound ideas such as elect, strangers in the world, foreknowledge, sanctifying, and sprinkling by his blood. All this from someone we know from the Gospels was a fisherman! Yet the way he writes, and what he writes in this letter, doesn’t sound much like a simple fisherman. However, from the church’s earliest days, all theologians and historians have determined that the letter was indeed written by Peter the Apostle. So, how can we account for the apparent anomaly of such wisdom from a ‘mere’ fisherman?
The Gospel authors portray Peter as impulsive and outspoken. For instance, his bold confession of Jesus as the Christ (Matthew 16:16) and his impulsive actions like his attempt to walk on water (Matthew 14:22–31), not to mention vehement rebuking Jesus (Mark 8:33). He seems to have had a passionate, though sometimes rash, temperament. Later, in Acts, Peter emerged as a prominent leader. At Pentecost (Acts 2), he delivered a powerful evangelistic sermon. He led the early church and evidenced growth into a mature, authoritative figure. Yet, he was bold but quite harsh and judgmental in the way he handled people like Ananias and Saphira. Even Paul had to rebuke him for compromising his position when the Jewish legalists challenged him (Galatians 2). Peter became a strong leader, but still had some issues and characteristics that Jesus would not have approved of. However, there is no evidence or indication that he had developed into a profound thinker and sophisticated communicator. Yet the letter of 1 Peter evidences both. What do you think happened to this man that changed him so?
I love Peter because the record of his life and witness gives me so much encouragement. He was flawed and so am I; the Lord was gracious to him so he will also be towards me; He grew into the likeness of Jesus and I am too, albeit slowly.
Second Reflection
The word ‘elect’ in the above translation of 1 Peter 1:2 is theologically loaded, but I don’t need to consider it in this reflection. Why not? Well, although the NIV has inserted the word, it is not actually in the Greek manuscripts. The translators added it because they felt that it helped make sense of the statement. However, the HCSB translation simply says, ‘To the temporary residents of the Dispersion in the province of …’ For those unfamiliar with Reformed doctrine that God has only chosen some to be saved this difference might slip by unnoticed. The NIV tends to support this idea by the way it translates the Greek of this passage.
Should we distrust modern translations of the scriptures or do we need a D.Th to read them correctly? Neither. We have so many translations, all of them available on the internet, that we just need to read a few of them if a passage looks a little ‘out’ to us. In addition, God has given the church teachers (Ephesians 4:11-12) and we have access to them either in our local churches or in the commentaries they write. The Holy Spirit will also give us discernment if we are open to him.
I often thank God that I am living in the 21st century and have immediate access to so many sources of knowledge and understanding. I even have free access to Artificial Intelligence (My favourite is Perplexity.ai) and I can query it any time I like. Try it, The answers you get might surprise and delight you.
Third Reflection
Do you see the word ‘foreknowledge’ in 1 Peter 1:2? This is a word for another complex doctrine often tied to ‘Election’. Reformed theology holds that if God knows something in advance then it can only be because he has pre-determined that it will happen. I have never understood the convoluted logic that gives rise to this conclusion. I would think, from a common sense perspective that just if I know something will happen does not necessarily mean that I have caused it to happen, or even wanted it to happen. If I had access to the world’s most sophisticated Quantum Computer, I could probably work out to .00000001% the chance of something happening. I would be sure that it would happen, but I would also know that I did not cause it to happen. And, no, I won’t be responding to any comments by ‘concerned’ Calvinists. 🙂
Once again, as I reflect on this, I am grateful that with a little common sense we can all understand the meaning of a passage. The passage in question here is not a deep theological treatise, but an opening greeting to people who didn’t have theological degrees but who did have God-given common sense.
To summarise, read how Eugene Peterson phrases the two verses from First Peter chapter one:
‘I, Peter, am an apostle on assignment by Jesus, the Messiah, writing to exiles scattered to the four winds. Not one is missing, not one forgotten. God the Father has his eye on each of you, and has determined by the work of the Spirit to keep you obedient through the sacrifice of Jesus. May everything good from God be yours!’
Pearls from Peter: Part 1 Read More »
