Submission is hard.  It is hard to defer to an authority figure when you’re certain that you’re smarter, more competent, or definitely more deserving of authority than he is.  It’s even harder when your authority is godless or cruel, crooked or perverse. I can only imagine.  But even more, it’s difficult to imagine submitting when the authority is persecuting you because of your devotion to Christ.  In such circumstances, what we’ll learn tonight is that we are to joyfully submit as to Christ Himself, without any sense that we need vindication or revenge in this lifetime. 

Have you ever seen this sort of attitude in action?  I made the case last time that most of us probably haven’t.  This is rare.  But more often than not, I think that truly submissive people are people of tremendous influence.  While the opposite might seem to be the case, those who submit biblically tend to be loyal, trusted advisors to whom a master may turn for counsel or input.  So he has influence with his master.  But he is also one whom others would watch like a hawk to see how he does it…and to see when he’s finally going to slip up. 

I think of David who was submissive to Saul.  Though Saul sought David’s life, David was intensely loyal to the “Lord’s anointed.”  Even when he had opportunities to kill Saul, David recognized that Saul was appointed by God, and he refused to speak or do harm to the Lord’s appointed king, though David was promised to be the next king.  This is astounding.  But Saul could certainly trust David. 

Darius the Mede trusted Daniel because he was submissive and faithful.  He was consistent and did what he was supposed to do, though Darius threw him in the lions’ den.  Daniel didn’t worry or waver. 

Society would crumble without submission. William McDonald writes, “It is a built-in fact of life that in any society or organization, there must be authority on the one hand, and obedience to that authority on the other.”  Without submission there would be anarchy, and there would never be harmony in any marriage.  Without a principle of mutual submission, it would be impossible for two people who are fundamentally equal, like a man and a wife, a slave and a master, to coexist.  There has to be submission for it to work as it should.

And I don’t mean that the same person must always be the one submitting; it is perfectly biblical for a husband to exercise appropriate submission as he dies to himself and his own needs for the sake of his wife, or for a master to appropriately submit to the needs of his servants, though the position and roles of the servants and wives and children are positions of submission to particular authorities.  This is a principle clearly from the mind of God, as evidenced in Scripture and the fact that it works so beautifully.

David and Daniel and godly wives like Queen Esther demonstrate the kind of impact a submissive person can have.  Peter knew this, and he figured that if the position of suffering believers was one of great opportunity and possibility for spiritual impact, the position of suffering Christian slaves presented even greater opportunity.

The last time we were together we looked at the believer’s responsibility to respond with honor to civil authority, and tonight we’ll transition with Peter to submission to earthly masters, good or bad.  This was what Peter called his readers to do, though they were suffering for their faithfulness to Christ at the hands of godless authorities.  But as believers, our joyful submission to authority is borne out of our love for God for two reasons:

1)   We love Him, and want to submit to Him, so we submit to the authorities He has put in place as though to Christ directly.

2)   He is sovereign, and He does not make mistakes.  An all-powerful God who is also good has willed for those leaders to be in authority over us, and so to rail against their authority is to grumble against God, supposing that He has made a mistake. 

What we’ve seen then, in 1 Peter 2:13-17 is a sort of rationale for submission to authorities.  In our passage for this evening and the subsequent two paragraphs, Peter gets into the nuts and bolts.  If verses 13-17 are the “why,” we now transition into the “what” and “how.” 

It’s one thing to bang the submission drum, insisting that we submit to our authorities with all faithfulness.  It’s quite another thing to look at the nitty-gritty implications of such a command. 

Let’s see what the apostle has to say.

READ 1 PETER 2: 18-25

I.     The Exhortation (2:18)

II.  The Explanation (2:19-21a)

III.         The Example (2:21b-25)

I.     The Exhortation (2:18)

“Servants, be subject to your masters with all respect, not only to the good and gentle but also to the unjust.”

Servants.  The term Peter uses here (oiketai) refers to household servants.  It literally means “domestics.”  It is distinguished from the more common doulos, which is the general term for slaves.  These servants may have been freed slaves or perhaps hired laborers, must most likely they were slaves who were close in proximity or maybe even relationship to households.  It’s easy to speculate, but I think the most important reason that they are addressed – especially as distinct from slaves out in the field, or douloi – is because this was likely the primary occupation of a large part of Peter’s audience.

One mistake we make when it comes to passages like this one or Paul’s teaching from Ephesians or Colossians on slave-master relationships is a failure to see them at face value.  We tend to jump right to our modern-day application as employees and employers, perhaps, or as students and teachers.  While the application piece is important, I think this sells short the immediate historical context of Peter’s letter.

Roman culture depended heavily on the slave population for much of is work and whatnot.  It is speculated that over half of the population of the city of Rome herself were slaves, and the number was probably also high in the Roman provinces that Peter is addressing. 

Also worth noting then, is that, unlike Paul, Peter does not address masters.  Neither does he go after the institution of slavery.  Because the institution of slavery is not a problem.  Slavery is not an instituted by God, though He does superintend it.  Neither is democracy instituted by God, but He ultimately appoints our presidents.  Paul in Galatians and Ephesians addressed believing slaves and masters. There may or may not have been slave owners in Peter’s audience, but addressing them doesn’t get at the point he’s going after.  He is addressing Christian household slaves, and these may be the most oppressed group in all of the Roman Empire (and yes, I’m aware that he talks to wives just 8 verses later; the slaves were generally worse off than wives).  He will give his instruction to joyfully and respectfully submit to the most oppressed group in the Empire and the application is super-clear for everyone else. 

Roman society at the time of Peter’s letter did not have a high view of slaves.  While conditions may have been improving some, they were still quite bad.  As there developed laws providing for some modicum of protection for slaves during Nero’s reign, these protections were minimal.  The Stoics presented a strong philosophical influence on the culture, and they suggested that there was at least some sense of wrong treatment toward slaves, which is further than Aristotle went.  Aristotle, a Greek whose work on Ethics was also profoundly influential in Roman philosophy, had suggested that it was impossible for masters to treat slaves immorally, since the slaves actually had no rights as property any more than sheep or cattle.  (And this in a book on ethics.)

With these and similar philosophies undergirding the Roman mentality of the time, it is not surprising then, that these household slaves led difficult lives. 

Peter tells them to “be subject to [their] masters with all respect, not only to the good and gentle but also to the unjust.”

This notion of subjection is not new to us, now.  This is not technically a command, but is rather a participle connecting with a prior command, probably from verse 13: “Be subject for the Lord’s sake to every human institution….”

We explored this at length last time, but like in verses 13-17, we see here the type of submission that they are to render: “with all respect.”  This phrasing can be understood to mean “out of fear of God.”  It is because of their fear of the Lord that they are to submit to their masters. 

Do you get that?  It is not because authorities are inherently worthy of our respect that we submit to them, but because God is.  So you can stop waiting to render submission until your boss or parent or teacher deserves it and do it now because God deserves it.

But here’s where Peter becomes downright unrealistic at the end of verse 18: “not only to the good and gentle but also to the unjust.”  Now this is going too far.  I can understand submitting to a godly authority as to the Lord because that’s easy.  If I were a slave and I had a godly master, I’d happily render to him respect and submission.  The kind and fair masters are one thing, but the crooked are another. 

He says, “but also to the unjust.”  The term translated “unjust” is the Greek word skolios, from which we draw the term scoliosis, or the condition of the unnatural curvature of the spine.  These are crooked, harsh, wicked masters, and Peter is as clear as he can be that we are to submit to them as to Christ Himself. 

Why on earth would he make such an unreasonable demand?  I’m glad you asked.

II.  The Explanation (2:19-21a)

“For this is a gracious thing, when, mindful of God, one endures sorrows while suffering unjustly.  ²⁰ For what credit is it if, when you sin and are beaten for it, you endure? But if when you do good and suffer for it you endure, this is a gracious thing in the sight of God.  ²¹ For to this you have been called…”

It is a gracious thing to endure sorrows under suffering that they do not deserve.  Note that it’s not just the suffering itself, but even the endurance of the sorrow that is gracious.  This hearkens back to 1:6, where a form of the same word is used:

1 Peter 1:6  In this you rejoice, though now for a little while, if necessary, you have been grieved by various trials,

Not only are the trials necessary, but for sake of our refinement and our testimony, even our sorrow and grief are necessary.  How we grieve speaks to how we love. 

In other words, these may not be happy beatings!  These may be cruel, physically and emotionally painful, underserved payment for righteous conduct!  How unfair is that?

I love Peter’s usage of the term charis, translated in the ESV as being “gracious,” or as finding “favor” in the NASB.  He uses it twice in verses 20 and 21.  I love it for two reasons, both of which are true, and I think even contextually accurate:  this kind of supernatural joy and submission amidst unfair suffering both require God’s grace and they demonstrate it.  That is, it is an evidence of the Spirit’s work in them that they would be able to endure the suffering under trials and it in turn heaps grace on the heads of their afflicters and those watching. 

And that, ladies and gentlemen, is a great reason to submit to godless authorities; by doing so we evidence our salvation and pour out grace on other people.  That is a great explanation for his exhortation, and it is a powerful way to impact a dying world while dying ourselves. 

And I believe that we today are practically deprived of this powerful privilege, and you know why?  Because most of the people in this room have godly authorities.  You wouldn’t know persecution if it walked into this room. 

And if Peter’s readers were to submit to their masters with all respect, how much more ought we to submit to godly authorities?  But just imagine for a moment that you had nothing but absolutely tyrannical, dictatorial, violently abusive parents, teachers, pastors, small group leaders, etc.  Peter – and God – would STILL expect you to submit to those authorities with all respect as to Christ Himself.

That means that you have absolutely NO EXCUSE for any hint of rebellion or failure to submit.  David felt guilty when he even spoke against the Lord’s anointed.  He felt bad for approaching Saul in the cave just to lord over Saul that he didn’t kill him when he had the chance.  Can you relate to that kind of sensitivity in your own life regarding the people that God has put in charge over you? 

For some in this room, your rebellious heart and attitude are shameful.  What do you have to complain about?  This sort of attitude would make no sense whatsoever to Peter.  He wouldn’t understand it.  To godless authorities, maybe.  But we tend to complain even when we have it so very well. 

He uses here in verse 20 a negative rhetorical question to make his point.  “For what credit is it if, when you sin and are beaten for it, you endure?”  The implied answer is, “none.”  There is no credit for getting what you deserve when you’re a bonehead.

Some of you think it’s commendable to fess up when you sin.  You may want a pat on the back or praise for being honest.  Well, being honest is good because it keeps you from adding another sin to the list, and it is necessary to help you regain the trust of those you’ve wronged.

But don’t play the martyr card because you’re getting what you deserve.  If you steal from an employer and you confess it to your employer afterward, don’t expect him to be thrilled.  He should fire you, even if he’s glad you came forward.  You should at least be reprimanded.  But don’t say your boss is persecuting you.

Really this concept needs little explanation, which is why it’s a good one; everybody gets the point. 

Then Peter goes on: “But if when you do good and suffer for it you endure, this is a gracious thing in the sight of God.”

Did you get that?  Doing GOOD.  Peter was speaking hypothetically about these believers doing good and suffering for it.  That is, by being obedient to God and His laws they were earning beatings.  For refusing to worship the Roman gods and for worshiping the living God alone some would possibly be beaten.  These good deeds are the reason they are suffering. 

That endurance under such suffering for such reasons requires God’s grace, and it demonstrates grace on our part. 

Would you continue to do good if it meant that you would suffer for it?

As Peter transitions to his example of Christ in the verses that follow, he tells them, at the start of verse 21, “…for to this you have been called.”  This calling refers to the effectual call of the Spirit when we are saved.  Suffering for Jesus Christ is part of the call to salvation.  It is part and parcel to the Christian life, and being called to salvation is being called to suffer for His sake if necessary.  Why else would Jesus tell His disciples to “take up [their] cross and follow [Him]?” 

Next time we’ll pick up with the consummate example of submission as we consider together the suffering of Jesus and how He responded. 

III.         The Example (2:21b-25)

“…because Christ also suffered for you, leaving you an example, so that you might follow in his steps.  ²² He committed no sin, neither was deceit found in his mouth.  ²³ When he was reviled, he did not revile in return; when he suffered, he did not threaten, but continued entrusting himself to him who judges justly.  ²⁴ He himself bore our sins in his body on the tree, that we might die to sin and live to righteousness. By his wounds you have been healed.  ²⁵ For you were straying like sheep, but have now returned to the Shepherd and Overseer of your souls.”

CONCLUSION and QUESTIONS

1.    Can you imagine a world without any submission?  What would that look like? 

2.    Think about your authorities for a moment.  Are they godly or not? Is it harder or easier to submit to godly authorities?  Is your attitude the same toward them all?

3.    What can you learn from David about the right attitude toward authorities?  See 1 Samuel 18:6-11; 19:9-10; 24:2-12; 26:6-12.

4.    If you were to appear before God tonight and had to give an account for how you’ve respected your parents in your heart, would He be pleased with your account?

A truly submissive person is hard to find.  In fact, I’m not sure many of us would know one if we saw him.  Submission is at such a premium, that we may not even know what it actually looks like.  It’s theoretical. Something we read about. Fortunately, we have great examples in the Bible to look at. 

Daniel submitted to the Babylonian and Medo-Persian kings, carrying out their civil work while refusing to compromise his obviously stronger devotion to God.  God rewarded him with a long life of influence and blessing.

Joseph submitted to Potiphar and Pharaoh, and though he was falsely accused by Potiphar’s wife, he was ultimately rewarded for his faithfulness and elevated to a position of high prominence in Egypt, effecting the preservation of millions of people through the years of famine, not to mention ensuring that there actually would be a nation of Israel. 

The chief example is that of Jesus, who – knowing the unparalleled pain and agony that He would experience – submitted Himself to the will of the Father, paying a penalty that needed to be paid if His own were to ever be united to Him.  While on earth, he balanced submission to the Mosiac Law, the Roman government, and His Heavenly Father perfectly and supernaturally. 

But this sort of mentality is almost completely absent from our society.  I don’t believe that Scripture records any of these men actually whining about their situation or their unfair treatment, though if any were to be justified in so doing, it would be them. 

The se men’s submission was principally to God and was borne out in their actions.  Their devotion to God powered their actions. 

Joseph’s priority of honoring God comes out in his interaction with Potiphar’s wife:

Genesis 39:6-10   So [Potiphar] left all that he had in Joseph’s charge, and because of him he had no concern about anything but the food he ate. Now Joseph was handsome in form and appearance.  ⁷ And after a time his master’s wife cast her eyes on Joseph and said, "Lie with me."  ⁸ But he refused and said to his master’s wife, "Behold, because of me my master has no concern about anything in the house, and he has put everything that he has in my charge.  ⁹ He is not greater in this house than I am, nor has he kept back anything from me except yourself, because you are his wife. How then can I do this great wickedness and sin against God?"  ¹⁰ And as she spoke to Joseph day after day, he would not listen to her, to lie beside her or to be with her.

His submission to the will of Potiphar and his devotion to God strictly prevented him from engaging in such a sin with Potiphar’s wife. 

Daniel was submissive to Darius the Mede as much as he could be without violating God’s commands.  You’ll remember from Daniel 6 that he prayed three times a day, every day on his knees before his window, even after the command went forth that none were to pray to any other god but King Darius himself.  He would not violate the first commandment and was thrown to the lions for his submission to God but rebellion against the law of Darius.  Of course Darius didn’t want to do it, because Daniel had tremendous influence and value due to his faithfulness and submission. 

You know the rest of the story: Daniel was spared from the hungry lions, while Darius – who had actually issued his execution – fasted and stayed awake all night in hopes that the morning would find Daniel still alive.  Daniel was in fact alive in the morning and those who had tricked Darius were in turn thrown into the lions’ den themselves. 

As for Jesus, in addition to His explicit statements that He does what the Father tells Him, you may recall the scene at Gethsemane in Matthew 26 where Jesus, fully aware of what was before Him, asked “My Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me; nevertheless, not as I will, but as you will."

Later on, the author to the book of Hebrews tells us that Jesus endured the cross “for the joy that was set before Him.”  He knew what awaited, and that helped Him to endure the agony of Calvary.

And here’s the beautiful thing that has to remain in our minds as we study this passage and as we live our own lives: just like Jesus, we know the end of the story, and we know the outcome is secure.  That is what Peter has been laboring since chapter 1, verse 1.  Your place and your inheritance in eternity are secure, and so we can – with boldness – go about our work and lives here. 

In a sense, submission to civil authority is no big deal; what can they do to us?  Take our lives?  That will only help us to see Jesus sooner.  Take our possessions?  They’ll burn in time anyway.  Make us uncomfortable?  Only for a season, and it’s far better to be uncomfortable here for a while than in hell for eternity. 

The believers’ ignorant oppressors were to be pitied, and the Christians were to work to see them won for Christ through their testimony.  That is Peter’s desire throughout the writing of this letter, and he makes his position even clearer in the paragraph that we will look at this evening.  So, follow along with me as I read 1 Peter 2:13-17.

READ 1 PETER 2:13-17

I think that the main point that Peter is trying to make here is clear thanks to the context, and we find it in verse 15:

“For this is the will of God, that by doing good you should put to silence the ignorance of foolish people.”

This resonates beautifully with the immediate context of the surrounding verses, which tell about doing good, via submission to civil authorities.  Also, we see the greater context of the surrounding paragraphs his desire for them to impact the world around them by their conduct (see 2:11-12) and their relationships (in the household/workplace and even marriage, 2:18-3:7).  Then looking beyond the immediately surrounding verses and paragraphs, we see that Peter’s desire is for his readers to impact a dying world while dying themselves, living and dying well for Christ’s sake. 

So though it is a parenthetical thought in its syntax, it’s almost like he states it this way because it’s a given, like it’s just understood.  Read it one more time with me. 

READ 1 PETER 2:13-17 AGAIN.

As we’ll see later on, this “[putting] to silence the ignorance of foolish people” is the same effect that Daniel’s righteousness had on the other presidents and the satraps who were trying to speak evil against him.  They were the ones who were ultimately killed in the lions’ den while Daniel was vindicated by God because of his righteous behavior.  His good deeds shut the mouths of his detractors, and Peter’s readers could do the same thing, responding with humble submission in the face of oppressive rule. 

To do this with consistency and joy can only come from the Spirit, and that creates a testimony that will heap coals on the heads of our oppressors. 

Looking then at the context of our passage for tonight, this is a call to civil submission.  I try to carefully select my titles so they’re painfully simple or they have two meanings.  The term “civil” can mean “befitting of a citizen,” like it’s my civil duty to obey the law, or it can mean “a condition of social order,” like the civil treatment of students.  So, just as this paragraph does, this statement can relate to our treatment of the Christian brotherhood, governmental authorities, submission to God or appropriate submission and honor to anyone else.

So there’s your introduction.  Let’s look now at our outline.  As I see it, the paragraph breaks into four parts and distinct but related ideas.  They are as follows:

I.              The Call to Civil Submission (vv. 13-10)

II.           The Consideration of Civil Submission (v. 15)

III.         The Contrast with Civil Submission (v. 16)

IV.         The Condensation of Civil Submission (v. 17)

I.              I.  The Call to Civil Submission (vv. 13-10)

Be subject for the Lord’s sake to every human institution, whether it be to the emperor as supreme,  ¹⁰ or to governors as sent by him to punish those who do evil and to praise those who do good.

BE SUBJECT…

“Be subject” is clearly passive, meaning that Peter is calling them to be on the giving end of the submission, on the receiving end of subjection.  This is striking in light of the context.  Just two paragraphs earlier, Peter was trying to get them to conduct themselves appropriately for who they already are in Christ.  He told them, “You are a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation” (2:9).  How could such a group be subject to any human authority?  Peter has no problem then, in the same breath, calling them to exercise their freedom in Christ to subject themselves to human authorities. 

Some commentators suggest that it was exactly because some of the Christians believed they did not need to submit to any man that Peter gave this charge.  Just because you are in ultimate subjection to God does not mean you are above the law now.  In fact, it is exactly the opposite; like Christ, we are to obey earthly authority in order to honor God’s sovereign authority (MacArthur).

Nevertheless, that Peter would call his readers to submit in their context was remarkable.  We’ve talked before about the political climate surrounding Peter’s letter.  I believe this was written toward the end of Nero’s 10-year rule as emperor.  Nero has few historical rivals as one who was tremendously antagonistic and oppressive toward Christians.  Plenty of dictators have hated Jews and Christians, but as far as persecution of Christians, Nero is in rare company.  Countless Christians suffered and died under his rule, and while there were certainly Christian sympathizers among the Roman public, many if not most believed that they deserved to be cruelly treated for their blasphemy of the Roman God’s and for a number of false charges as well. 

So these readers lived in a society where they were persecuted, and the common societal notion was that it was not only acceptable, but right to do so, that they should be persecuted. 

And in the middle of this, Peter says, “Subject yourselves for the Lord’s sake to every human institution.”  How could they do this?  Well, he does say…

FOR THE LORD’S SAKE…

This is a fantastic phrase, loaded with meaning.  Most importantly, it points to our submission as not being for ourselves.  We can reap fringe benefits from our submission, just like Joseph and Daniel did, who were not motivated by their own self exaltation, but rather were excellent followers who were elevated to positions of honor.

By way of example, if you want to stand out in a major way in this world for the Lord’s sake, submit.  When you go to work at a job, do exactly what you know you should do.  Be a self-starter, don’t sit around waiting to be told what to do.  Do your work completely and with excellence.  Speak well of others and treat your bosses with respect.  That is employee 101 stuff, and in this world, people to do what everyone is supposed to do stand out because most of the world are slackers.

But don’t do this for your own glory or self-promotion.  That may or may not come, but if that’s your motive you will burn out as you work in the flesh.  Rather, subject yourself for the Lord’s sake, not your own, and He may be glorified.  That also gives you a broad platform when people ask, “Say, why are you always working so hard?”  You can say, “Because I’m supposed to, and because that’s how I can best honor God.” 

Ask any police officer, store manager, parent or teacher, and they’ll tell you that it is incredibly refreshing when they encounter people who do what they’re told every time happily and without complaint.  That should be true of every Christian.

To subject yourself “for the Lord’s sake” is…

1)   NOT for your sake.

2)   Because of your subjection to Him.  MacArthur says, “We observe earthly authority to honor God’s sovereign authority.” 

3)   To be like Christ.  Obedience for His sake is obedience to be like him. 

TO EVERY HUMAN INSTITUTION…

Take a brief detour with me for a moment. 

True or false (and you don’t need to answer out loud): Any government is better than no government. 

Governments can be oppressive.  They can take our hard-earned money by force, they can impose stringent laws and require our obedience, they can be flighty in their decision-making, etc.  They can be oppressive.

But any government is better than no government.  If nothing else, governments secure and ensure some semblance of order.  They exist, says Peter, “to punish those who do evil and to praise those who do good” (v. 10)

And the same holds true for all levels of law and civil authority.  Though you may not enjoy being pulled over, we all enjoy the benefits of traffic laws.  Imagine driving on State Avenue if there were no speed limit, stop lights or stop signs.  It would be dangerous chaos just to get to Safeway or the post office!

I don’t know about you, but when I’m in an otherwise potentially dangerous situation, I feel way better when there are police around.  I am thankful for the Transportation Safety Administration who faithfully work to keep us safe when flying although I am on the brink of a panic attack every time I have to put my little tubes of toothpaste in those plastic bags and pray continually that I didn’t forget about something that may set the buzzer off at airport security: Belt? Check.  Watch? Check.  Keys…? What?! AAH!! BZZZZZ!!!  Phone?  AAH!!  “Right this way sir, we need to introduce you to the wand and we’ll be checking your bag as well.”  I get nervous, but I am totally thankful for the work they do to ensure our safety when flying.  All of these things have great benefit for us, and they at least command our respect.

And honestly, I try hard to thank them every time I go through the security checkpoint.  I also try to thank police officers, soldiers in uniform, veterans, basketball officials and others that I see either doing their part to preserve me and my way of life or as clear authorities in the given situation.  My attitude toward them ought to be one of consistent submission as to the Lord and even gratitude.

But remember that they command our respect because they are appointed by our ultimate authority: God. 

The whole of Scripture is clear on this, and the teachings of Jesus, Paul and Peter all affirm this principle.  Authorities are never in place on accident; they are there by design as God’s agents. 

Peter says, “whether it be to the emperor as supreme, or to governors as sent by him to punish those who do evil and to praise those who do good” (v. 10).  The “emperor” in the Roman context was Caesar.  Some of your translations may render this “king.”  This apparently was an odious word to the Romans, but it was used by the Greeks, and comes up in Greek here.  But regardless, the person is clear: it’s the Caesar. In this immediate context it’s Nero. 

We’ve already talked about what kind of a call this would be to submit to such a man, but Peter does not stop there; he says they must also submit to all of Nero’s governors and designees “as sent by him.”  When they would submit to governors and other civil authorities, it reflected on the one who appointed them. 

The same holds true for us in principle and practice.  We are to submit to all civil authorities with the same attitude as we would submit to God Himself, since He is the one who ultimately appoints and removes authorities. 

And to make sure that they get this, he says “every human institution,” not just the godly ones.  So from the lowest tax collector to Nero himself, they were not to destroy their testimony by their failure to submit to God’s appointed authorities.

And the same holds true for us today.  From the librarian to the meter maid to the city councilman to the President himself, this attitude must be consistent.

Let me add here, that I am not saying that we should always do everything that they say, any more that Daniel prayed to King Darius.  He did not, and if the authorities command us to violate God’s clear commands, we respectfully defer to Scripture.  So don’t misunderstand; I’m not talking about blind obedience without discernment; I’m talking about a submissive spirit that is confident in the sovereignty of God. 

Because this is where our confidence and submission come from.  I can be submissive to the President not because he is a godly man, but because I have a rock solid confidence in the sovereignty of God.  God is in ultimate control of all things and He never makes mistakes, so the authorities that He places in power are there on purpose, every time. 

II.            The Consideration of Civil Submission (v. 15)

For this is the will of God, that by doing good you should put to silence the ignorance of foolish people.

For reasons I mentioned before, I think this seemingly parenthetical thought is actually central to the whole passage, because of the clear rationale in view.

This is another one of those verses that tells us why Peter wrote this whole letter; he wrote in order that his readers would honor Christ in very adverse circumstances. 

But as citizens of heaven, why should they submit to earthly kings?  Why should they subject themselves to fallen men?  Well, there are a few reasons. 

1)   Subjection is good.  To subject ourselves “for the Lord’s sake to every human institution” is a good thing, says Peter.  Kind of like when Paul says, “Children, obey your parents in the Lord, for this is right,” it requires little explanation.  But if we need it, we have it, because…

2)   As we have already seen, it is Christ-like.  Just as we are like Christ when we forgive and when we love others, we are also like Him when we submit. 

3)   It is God’s will (v. 15a), and it will effectively silence the ignorance of foolish people. 

Peter is gracious to suggest that these foolish people speak from mere ignorance.  But this word has more of an active sense to it; these people were willfully ignorant, speaking without any sense of spiritual perception, hence they were “foolish.” 

Peter would have them silenced by the good manner of conduct of his readers.

For most of us, our idea of spiritual persecution is having someone snicker at us for being silly Christians.  That’s about as far as our suffering for Christ goes.  This of course is not consistent with the rest of Church history.  Countless millions of Christians have died for the sake of the name that elicits anything from wonder to scoffing to outright furious rage in our world today as in theirs: the name of Jesus Christ.

I’ve talked before about the idea that our suffering may be perfectly appropriate for what we can handle, or we may not be maximizing our opportunity for influence.  But while our suffering may be limited, it is no less real.  In fact, the suffering for Christ that we experience today is the most common type of suffering: words. 

People talk. They talk too much.  When it comes to Christ, it seems, everybody has something to say.  Many will call Him a good teacher but reject that He is their only hope for salvation.  Others hate everything about Him.  Very few don’t care.  But most people who talk, either attacking Christ or His followers, speak from ignorance.  And how can someone who has no personal relationship with Christ do any differently? 

Again, Peter calls them foolish.  These people are alienated from the life of God.  They have no biblical or supernatural wisdom, and should not be expected to act or speak with understanding, but rather foolishness. 

III.         The Contrast with Civil Submission (v. 16)

Live as people who are free, not using your freedom as a cover-up for evil, but living as servants of God.

As new creatures in Christ, they have a new freedom to submit.  They are not in bondage to sin, and they are, as we have mentioned, a royal priesthood.  As such, Peter warns them again not to use their freedom in Christ as an excuse to break the laws of men and destroy their testimony. 

Rather, they are to exercise their freedom in Christ to submit to their authorities as an extension of their submission to God. 

We are slaves (doulos) of God.  We are not in bondage to sin, but rather bound to do His will, and as such it is our responsibility and joy to subject ourselves to Him. 

IV.         The Condensation of Civil Submission (v. 17)

Honor everyone. Love the brotherhood. Fear God. Honor the emperor.

Here Peter punctuates this section with a serious of imperatives. 

HONOR EVERYONE

This mentality clearly would set them apart from the world. In a society where slaves were often viewed as nonpersons with no rights, Peter commands his readers to treat all men with an attitude of respect as in the image of God, whether or not they deserve it. 

LOVE THE BROTHERHOOD

Here he gets more specific, getting past mere honor to love, as he had done previously.  Peter was among the apostles when Jesus said, in John 13:34-35, “A new commandment I give to you, that you love one another: just as I have loved you, you also are to love one another.  ³⁵ By this all people will know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another."

He knew that this would be a way for them to live very separately and distinctly from the world, which is why he visits this concept yet again.  He had done so in 1:22 and the start of chapter 2.  The believers’ love for each other would strengthen their testimony collectively.

FEAR GOD

Believers are to fear God, as is plain throughout Scripture. I think this is contrasted starkly with fearing men.  Peter’s writing doesn’t contain a drop of the fear of men for their power is limited.  For God, however, our appropriate reverence, awe, terror and affection are collectively our fear of Him, and these things drive us to honor His instituted authorities.

In the same way that my children obey the babysitter because they fear me, so we ought to subject ourselves to civil authorities from our fear of God.

HONOR THE EMPEROR

Finally Peter brings the discussion full circle once again as he tells his readers again, as he did in verse 13, to honor the emperor. If his readers could apply this, it would give credibility and visible authenticity to their faith.

CONCLUSION

1)        How do you (or should you) pray for your authorities?

2)        How does praying for your authorities impact your own attitude toward them?

3)        What does your attitude toward your authorities tell others about your love for Christ?

4)        If your testimony were based solely on your attitude toward your parents, how powerful would it be?  And could others tell that you love Christ? 

5)        When is the last time you thanked a civil authority?  What were the circumstances?  Who was it?  Why did you do it? 

6)        If Peter expected his readers to submit to Nero and his governors, what would he expect of us?  Is it easier or more difficult to submit in our situation than theirs? 

Many of you are familiar by now with the classic Christian masterpiece Pilgrim’s Progress.  Do you remember the scene when Christian and Faithful come to Vanity Fair?  In case you’ve forgotten, let me refresh your memory.    

Bunyan is kind enough to give us the history of Vanity Fair. 

READ selections from pages 91-93.

Now why would I read that?  Clear from what I read and more that I didn’t, Vanity Fair represents the world, where its lusts and sinful passions tempt us and would call for our attention, and would divert us from our path to the Celestial City. 

Peter was well aware of the dangerous distractions of this world, and that the world would hate his readers because of their difference from the world.  And it will certainly hate us in the same way.

Like Christian and Faithful, we should first be clothed differently from the world; we are covered with the righteousness of Christ and with an outer garment of holy behavior that is visible to the world, and looks offensively different from what it wears. 

Second, our speech should be different as well.  The way we talk and what we talk about ought to set us apart and even make us the object of occasional scorn and ridicule by a world that hates Christ.  If your speech is like that of the world, you should expect to fit in well in this Vanity Fair that we now live in.

Third, our gaze – like that of Christian and Faithful – ought to be perpetually on heaven so as to not be distracted by this world or be drawn into sin itself.  We want to communicate, like the Pilgrims, that our “trade and traffic are in heaven.”  That is where our hearts are, and that is where we belong.

The merchants and patrons of Vanity Fair hated that the Pilgrims were not like them.  And they were shocked that the Pilgrims would buy none of their wares, but wanted only the truth.  The situation for Peter’s readers was apparently similar. 

READ 1 PETER 4:3-6. 

They were surprised!  And the situation is not that different for us today.  If we do what we are supposed to do, if we abstain from the passions of the flesh, we can expect that we will make serious waves in our world. 

So in our passage for this evening, we find one of the paragraphs that tell us very clearly why Peter is writing.  He wants to see God glorified among the pagan cultures of the Roman Empire, and the way that is going to happen is through the testimony of the persecuted saints.  When those who were persecuting Peter’s readers would see their righteous reactions, they would be caused to glorify God; they’d have to do something with that information.  They’d become more accountable for their rejection of Christ or they’d be driven to Christ.  Either way, they would glorify Him.

So Peter gets down to the nitty gritty, in the trenches, and issues an urgent Call followed by an urgent Command. 

And despite how your translations may render it, there is but one command in our passage for this evening, and it comes at the beginning of verse 12:  “Keep your conduct among the Gentiles honorable.”  There is a separate Call in verse 11 that we’ll see in a moment.  But these two things, the Call and the Command and closely linked, as the Call is prerequisite.  It must come first before any success is to be found in the carrying out of the command. 

And it’s also important to note the placement of this paragraph in light of the greater context.  In the preceding passage he offered instruction about the readers’ identity in Him as living stones, a holy priesthood, and the rest, having formerly no identity, but now identified with Christ and with one another through Christ.

Then in this passage he calls them to personal holiness (as members of a holy nation) for sake of their testimony before the Gentiles.  Then he goes on to list specific, practical ways to keep their “conduct among the Gentiles honorable,” including submission to ungodly authorities, mutual submission in the home, etc. 

So let’s read the passage together and then we will unpack our outline. 

READ 1 PETER 2:11-12

I.     THE CALL  (v. 11)

Beloved, I urge you as sojourners and exiles to abstain from the passions of the flesh, which wage war against your soul.

“Beloved.”

The people that Peter is addressing are near to him.  They are his sheep, like his own family. 

Peter is here demonstrating what he commanded in 1:22: Having purified your souls by your obedience to the truth for a sincere brotherly love, love one another earnestly from a pure heart

So these were not just throwaway suggestions; he had a vested interest in the holiness of these people.

“I urge you.”

The term “urge” carries a sense of, well…urgency.  This is a desperate appeal, since it is a matter of life and death…and not only for themselves, but for the souls they would look to impact. 

Peter’s tone here communicates the appropriate sense of desperation in the severity of the situation, for they must fight not only for their own holiness, but also for the holiness of their persecutors and those who may be impacted by their witness.

His desperation also communicates the appropriate sense of the dependency upon their wills and consciences to effect any lasting change.  I say this because he is not simply commanding them to change, or commanding them to love Christ more.  To quote Hiebert, Peter understands that “True holiness is not procured by the application for a compelling external authority, but by awakening and strengthening the personal desire and will of those being appealed to” (154).

That makes a lot of sense.  I’d much rather call someone to obedience for God’s sake than for mine.  As I am pleading for people to do the right thing, my plea is genuine, since I know that that is the only means to lasting change.  I can modify someone’s behavior for a moment; they may do the right thing from fear of punishment.  But when you actually want to effect lasting change, an appeal to the heart is necessary.  That’s why Peter is pleading with them as he is in this passage. 

On what grounds does he make his plea?

“…as sojourners and exiles”

He makes his plea on the ground of their personal status, or what they are.

Peter appeals to them as people who don’t belong in this world!  Christian and Faithful used these words, saying that they were “Pilgrims and Strangers in the world” to their accusers at Vanity Fair.  That’s why they wouldn’t act like the locals; they’re not of that world.  Peter’s readers were NOT of this world, and their conduct needed to reflect that. 

The two words used here, rendered by the ESV “sojourners and exiles” are rendered by other translations as “aliens and strangers” (NASB, NAU, NIV), “strangers and pilgrims” (KJV), “sojourners and pilgrims” (NKJ) and “strangers and sojourners” (YLT).  So you can see that they’re used pretty interchangeably.  The basic meaning is that as “sojourners,” they are passing through, spending a period of time with the people of this land where they do not belong.  They are not citizens of this dying world, and they should not act like it.

As “exiles,” they are being temporarily caused to spend time away from their home, and they dare not forget that they belong to another place. 

The danger for any exiles or sojourners would be that they might become like the people among whom they are sojourning.  So Peter pleads with them…

“…to abstain from the passions of the flesh”

This sounds like passive language, but it is not.  If, as Peter suggests, the passions of the flesh wage war against the soul, then to abstain from them is a militant defensive maneuver.  This is a kid in a candy store with no adults around him.  This is a hungry dog in a butcher shop with no leash or master.  This is a teenage girl who overhears a bit of juicy gossip and can either pass it along or put a stop to it.  It’s a young man surfing the TV channels late at night when everyone else is in bed. 

Abstaining from the passions of the flesh in moments like these is anything but passive.  It takes aggressive, determined action.  It takes an iron resolve and a conscious decision to not be defiled by these passions.  It takes a greater desire for God to be glorified than to indulge these lusts. 

The passions themselves are not the issue.  The term is a familiar one: epithumia.  It refers to the object of intense desire.  It can be God, candy, fame, a car, sex, or any other thing that we want passionately.  However, while the term itself is neutral, the majority of its uses in the New Testament are evil, but that’s because, as humans, the things we want most passionately are generally evil, not because it’s an evil term. 

And let’s go a step further. 

“…which wage war against your soul.”

Peter personifies these sins themselves.  He gives them personal attributes, as the sins “wage war against [their] soul.”  His verbs are even more personal; according to Hiebert, “The verb ‘war’ indicates an attitude of enmity and active hostility.  The figure is not that of hand-to-hand fighting, but of a planned military expedition against a military objective.  Those lusts constitute an army of soldiers engaged in constant warfare against the soul, aimed at capturing the believer and making him useless to God” (156).  And I would add that each temptation is an arrow flying at the believer, and sin itself is strategizing against us, allying itself with our flesh. 

We often hear it said that Christians constantly engage in spiritual battle.  We fight against spiritual forces in the heavenly places, we fight against the spiritual stranglehold that devil has on this world in our workplaces, schools, even homes.  We even find ourselves fighting against our own flesh – our own corrupt, decaying, fallen shells of humanity that stick around long after we’ve been made spiritually alive.  And this flesh wants to sin!

But to stop there is to take our situation too lightly.  We fight against not just resident sin in our hearts, but specific sins that wage war against our soul.  This is the battleground whether we like it or not. 

So, why is it important to “abstain from the passions of the flesh?”  Why is this so foundational?  In short, our Christian testimony fundamentally depends on our personal holiness. 

If you want to impact a dying world while dying yourself, the key is your own personal holiness.  The foundation for your own personal testimony is poured in your prayer closet.  When you are all alone with God is the most concentrated time for the forging your character.  For instance, if you are unwilling to commit a certain sin when you’re all alone, you’re not likely to commit that same sin when other people are around.  Compromise generally rears its ugly head when nobody is looking, not when you’re around people who are holding you accountable or who may think less of you if they knew you were so sinful. 

On the flip side, when you will commit sins by yourself that you wouldn’t dare commit with other people around, you can know that that hypocrisy will eventually become evident.  Be sure that your sin will find you out.

But when you’re cultivating a godliness of character on your own, on a personal level, you are better equipped to maintain your boldness for God when trials arise.  And there is no end to what God can do with a person like that who is committed to Him. 

This is why Peter emphasizes the personal holiness of his readers. 

II.  THE COMMAND (v. 12)

Keep your conduct among the Gentiles honorable, so that when they speak against you as evildoers, they may see your good deeds and glorify God on the day of visitation.

“Keep your conduct among the Gentiles honorable”

Now Peter shifts from the inward to the outward, from the personal to the interpersonal, and his language is stronger.  Rather than a suggestion or an appeal, this is an actual command.  There’s not much to the adjective rendered here “honorable.”  It can refer to external beauty, so we are talking about the externally-observable conduct of these believers, but regardless, it’s just good behavior. 

“…so that when they speak against you as evildoers”

During this time, the Christians were accused of all sorts of evils that are inconsistent with Christian living. 

While both Hebrew and Gentile Christians were disliked by Rome, the Gentile Christians were viewed as apostate from the polytheistic religion of Rome.  And many of them were bad characters before getting saved, only lending credibility to all sorts of false claims. 

Cook says, “It is not surprising that strong prejudices were entertained, and that calumnies (slanderous attacks) invented by the deadly enemies of the Cross were readily believed by the Gentiles” (Hiebert 159).  Hiebert goes on to suggest that “It was the general acceptance of those vicious charges against the believers in Rome that enabled Nero to use Christians as the scapegoat by which he divested himself of the charge of ordering the burning of Rome in A.D. 64.” 

In other words, it was because of the general dislike of Christians and the belief of common slanderous charges that Nero’s campaign against them was so successful. 

And what sorts of things were they accused of?  Commentator Peter Davids gives us some insight:

“It was often the very abstaining ‘from fleshly desires’ that caused pagans to despise Christians (we already read 1Peter 4:4).  They accused them of a number of crimes, such as practicing murder, incest, and cannibalism in their secret church meetings  (from expressions such as ‘love feasts,’ ‘brother and sister,’ ‘eating the body,’ and ‘drinking the blood,’ transferred to pagan contexts), and especially of disturbing the peace and good order of the Empire (sounds like the Pilgrims at Vanity Fair!).  Thus Tacitus (a first century senator and Roman historian) claimed that ‘They were hated because of their vices’ (Ann. 15.44), and Seutonius (another first century Roman historian) refers to them as ‘a class of people animated by a novel and dangerous superstition’ (Nero 16.2).  Such slander was the common fare of public discourse and, when brought to the attention of the authorities, became the basis of judicial persecution” (Davids). 

What is the remedy when such ideas are so generally accepted?  What were Peter’s readers to do?

“…they may see your good deeds”

Their good deeds were their most powerful weapon in the defense of their own reputation and the name of Christ.  It is not hard for a believer who is being obedient to the commands of God to NOT engage in the types of sins that these believers were charged of.  Anyone who would take the time to examine the lives of these believers would understand that.  A close look at their testimony should not only refute the false claims of their enemies, but even shame them. 

“…and glorify God on the day of visitation.” 

The term “day of visitation” is an Old Testament term drawn from Isaiah 10:3, meaning a day of judgment.  It’s used indirectly elsewhere, but the Isaiah passage is the only true parallel. 

Because I think it’s simple enough to see it as just, “the day when God visits us.”  Some people get hung up on whether it’s the Second Coming or when men appear before Him in judgment. It has no bearing on the application.  The real issue is God’s glory. 

I think it’s very clear from the context that Peter’s desire is to see all the Gentiles come to faith in the Savior.  He wants the pagans who are afflicting his readers to be convicted of their sins through the godly testimony of his readers.  When the former persecutors of Christians would come to faith in Christ, they would happily and greatly “glorify God on the day of visitation.” 

I don’t believe that this is a desire to see the oppressive Gentiles receiving their just desserts for afflicting Peter’s readers.  That is inconsistent with Peter’s character, the context, and the tone of his writing.

But we do know that in the end – whether as those who have come to faith in Him or not – all men will glorify God in their confession of Christ as Lord (Phil. 2:9-11). 

Beyond simply refuting the false claims of their adversaries, the testimony of these believers was intended to point others to Christ, and so is ours!

CONCLUSION

So, should we really expect better treatment than Christian and Faithful received at the hands of the merchants and patrons of Vanity Fair?  Not if we are in fact, living faithfully.

On page 101, two short paragraphs after Faithful was martyred at Vanity Fair, Christian meets Hopeful, his companion and faithful friend who saves his life in more than one way on their journey to the Celestial City.  Hopeful and others were saved through the testimony of Christian and Faithful and how they conducted themselves at Vanity Fair.  Once again, from Pilgrim’s Progress.  

READ selection from page 101.

You never know who is going to be impacted or even saved by the power of your testimony.  Real life is much fuller than all of fiction with similar stories to these.  What a joy it must be to see another person come to Christ based on your testimony in the fires of affliction!  How much more so when that person may end up as great an encourager and help as Hopeful was to Christian. 

1.    Are you different from this vain world in the outward covering of your character, your speech and your affections? Or do you blend right in, in our own Vanity Fair?

2.    Do you expect better treatment by the world than Peter’s readers received? Why? 

3.    Are you cultivating your own personal holiness for sake of your testimony?

4.    What sins will you commit privately that you’d never commit publicly?  Will you confess this as hypocrisy and repent of it?

5.    If unbelievers were looking closely at your life, would they be more or less convinced of the genuineness of your faith in Christ?