1 Peter Introduction Part 1 Bible Teaching

Welcome
Prayer
Music
Silence

When we come back we will stick our toes in the pool called 1st Peter and see what this Apostle of the Lord has for us.

1st Epistle of Peter
Meat
June 14th 2015

Why don’t we begin with talking about Peter himself.

Peter was named Simon (Simeon which means “hearing”) and is a very common Jewish name in the days of the New Testament.

Matthew 16:17 tells us that he was the son of Jona (his father and his mother is not named.

He had a younger brother called Andrew, who was the one who introduced Peter to Jesus (Joh 1:40-42) and like Philip his home turf was Bethsaida, a coastal town on the western shores of the Sea of Galilee.

He was therefore brought up by the water and was trained as a fisherman.

His biological father probably died while he was still young and he and his brother were brought up under the care of a man named Zebedee and his wife Salome (Mt 27:56; Mr 15:40; 16:1).

It seems that as a young person Simon, Andrew, James, and John all spent their boyhood and early manhood together.

It was in this setting that Simon and his brother Andrew probably obtained religious training and were potentially instructed in the Scriptures regarding the prophecies regarding the coming of the Messiah.

Nevertheless he probably had not formal training and when he appeared before the Sanhedrim Acts 4:13 says that he looked like “unlearned man.”

In the end I think it is very safe to assume that Simon was a Galilean through and through, and as such he was a marked man – maybe as much as a real cowboy coming off the plains and walking through downtown Salt Lake would be a marked man.

Galileans apparently had a character all their own. Again, maybe similar to a genuine cowboy.

Even if this is a hasty generalization the disposition of Peter alone (according to the text) fits the bill regarding being blunt, impetuous, and passionate.

Additionally, Galileans also spoke a peculiar dialect. A distinguishing characteristic was they couldn’t pronounce the guttural sounds and their pronunciation was thought to be rough in Judea.

It seems like this Galilean accent stuck to Simon all through his life as we know it betrayed him (as a follower of Christ) when he stood in the judgment-hall and it apparently was recognized again on the Day of Pentecost (according to Act 2:7).

Because “his wife’s mother is mentioned in Matthew, Mark and Luke it appears the old boy was married before he became an apostle.

If this was the case he was in all probability accompanied by her on his missionary journeys.

1st Corinthians 9:5 and Peter in 1st Peter 5:13 may allude to this.

Peter seems to have been settled at Capernaum when Christ entered on his public ministry and it is believed he was over thirty at this time. His house was large enough to give a home to his brother Andrew, his wife’s mother, and also to Christ, who seems to have lived with him too according to Mark 1:29,36 and 2:1).

Mark 2:4 intimates that the house was two stories tall.

So let’s go to “Bethany” beyond the Jordan.

John the Baptist had borne testimony that Jesus was the “Lamb of God.”

Andrew and John heard it, followed Jesus, and abode with him “where he was.”

They became convinced that he was the Messiah and Andrew went out and found Simon and brought him to Jesus.

Jesus at once recognized Simon, and declared that hereafter he would be called Cephas, which is interestingly enough an Aramaic name (that corresponds to the Greek name Petros, which means “a mass of rock detached from the living rock.”)

We never read Cephas again but the name Peter gradually displaces the old name Simon, though (in another point of intrigue and interest) Jesus Himself always uses the name Simon when addressing him.

None of the Gospel narratives really tell us what impression Jesus had on Simon when they first met.

All we know is when we read of them coming together again it is at the Sea of Galilee.

It was after an unsuccessful night of fishing that (Peter and Andrew, James and John) Jesus appeared and entered Peter’s boat.

He said:

“Launch out and let out the nets.”

I am totally inspired by this event as it will reoccur over and over again in the life of Peter and the Lord – and in the Lord’s interaction with each of us.

We labor and work and strive and toil all night to produce for ourselves and after an exhausting night Jesus steps up and says, “Okay. Now go try again.” Of course this time He is present and involved and leading the way. And He brings the fish to us. Love it.

Of course the nets were full and this was an absolute miracle in Peter’s eyes. And Peter, in the presence of God, did what all people do when faced with Him and His glory –

He cast himself at the feet of Jesus and cried,

“Depart from me; for I am a sinful man, O Lord.”

And we come face to face with the heart of Peter – humble, real, honest – and yet so impetuous he believed he could tell the Lord what to do because he apparently believed he knew what was best.

Peter would constantly learn and relearn this very lesson over the course of his life – it is not the ways of Man but the mind of God that matters.

After telling Jesus to depart from him Jesus addressed him with the most assuring words a sinful man could hear:
“Fear not.”

It was here that Jesus told Peter of his life as a disciple and said follow me.

Simon responded immediately to the call and after this we find him in the constant presence of our Lord.

After accepting the call of a disciple he is then called to be an apostle and to be a “fisher of men.”

The parallels between his former occupation as a fisher and his new calling as a fisher of men are uncanny.

As a fisher of men he would weather the stormy seas of life, storms of oppression and opposition. IT would be a life where he would have to rely upon the goodness of God to fill his nets and bear fruit.

He could and would use his abilities and he certainly would suffer but it would be God who made Him a success rather than the other way around. Such is the life of ever fisher of fish.

Over the course of his walk with Jesus he takes a more and more prominent part in all the leading events of the Lord’s life.

It was Peter who utters the notable professions of faith both at Capernaum and again at Caesarea Philippi.

At Caesarea Jesus said in response to his profession:

“Thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church.”

Paradoxically, after making such a remarkable statement from the Lord Peter, thinking once again that he could counsel the Lord on things, rebuked Jesus when he said He was going to die.

In return Peter received the strongest recorded reprimand Jesus ever gave to a disciple, saying to him in Matthew 16:23:

“Get thee behind me, Satan: thou art an offence unto me: for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but those that be of men.”

Peter accompanied Jesus (with James and John) to the mount of Transfiguration.

And at this point in the narrative we might ask ourselves about the one not included in the group – Andrew.

Have you ever given much thought to Andrew, brother of Peter?

He was the one who introduced Peter to the Lord and He was one of the four who were raised in the same house on the Sea.

We have the makings for a lot of hurt feelings and jealousy and anger in such a situation don’t we?

What can we say?

First, Andrew was with his band of brothers when they came to Jesus and asked about when the end of the age would be and when He would return to the earth.

But besides this scripture tells us very little about the man but LISTEN what it does say helps us understand something about Peter’s brother.

What was Andrew’s reaction to witnessing Jesus as the Lamb of God?

He went and got his brother and introduced them.

Who was it that introduced that lad with loaves to Jesus when the multitude was without food? Andrew.

And then we read that a Greek came to the apostles to inquire about Jesus and guess who took the Greek and introduced him to Jesus – that’s right, Andrew.

So instead of Andrew continuing to be part of the four throughout the ministry of the Lord I think we find him doing what he was made to do – introducing people to the Lord.

Sharing Him and His Messiahship to any and all who would hear.

A great lesson (in the life of Andrew) on our doing and being what we are meant to do and be by God and not anything more or less.

Peter was involved in a number of things with the Lord. Walking on water was a big one full of spiritual lessons and implications.

But I personally think the story of the collectors of the temple tax coming to Peter (Exodus 30:15 tells us that every Israelite twenty years and older were required to pay it) and telling him that Jesus had not paid His tax to be quite revealing in the way God worked with Peter – and how He works with us as well.

There was a need for funds and what did Jesus have Peter, a former fisherman who left his nets to follow Him? He has Peter return to his old profession and cast a line into the sea. And when he trusted Jesus and went and did as he was told he caught a fish with gold in its mouth, gold that Jesus told Peter to

“take and give unto them for me and thee.”

To me the event was very symbolic. Peter had left his profession of fishing to follow the Lord. A call came for money and what does Jesus have Peter do – go back to the very thing he left behind.

But this time Peter is shown clearly that God is in charge of all things – and that He would provide when provisions are needed.

Peter would have had to toil long and hard to catch enough fish to pay the temple tax for two.

But when walking with the Lord it was simply a matter of him acting in faith, doing as Jesus directed, going back to the vocation of his youth, tossing in a line, and bringing in a single fish with enough gold in its mouth to take care of the need.

Note that Peter did have to act – he had to go and do as Jesus told him. He did have to hook the line, bait it, and cast it but this time God, like when He had earlier filled his nets, took care of the rest – all of it.

As the end of the Lord’s life was drawing to an end Jesus sent Peter and into the city to prepare a place where he should keep the feast with his disciples.

Then Jesus told Peter that he would deny Him.

He did. And it broke his heart.

On the morning of His resurrection Peter ran to the empty tomb with John and boldy entered it.

Luke says that they saw the “linen clothes laid by themselves.”

Nothing is exchanged between jesus and peter in the upper room when the Lord appears but speaking to Peter on the shores of Galilee Jesus asked him three times:

Do you love me.” And then gave Him directives – “feed my lambs, feed m sheep, feed my sheep.”

Peter was once again saddened. Jesus foretold of his coming demise which apparently caused Peter to impetuously asked Jesus about the destiny of John.

After all of this Peter sort of disappears and we hear nothing of him again till he joins the others at the ascension (as described in Act 1:15-26).

Prior to Pentecost it was Peter who suggested that they apostles cast lots and choose an apostle to replace Judas.

Because this was prior to the Holy Spirit falling I wonder about the wisdom of the act seeing that Mathias was relegated to obscurity thereafter while Paul – who was called by Jesus certainly did much.

And of course Peter played a prominent role on the day of Pentecost (Acts 2:14-40) being the one who stepped up and spoke.

Once filled with the Holy Spirit Peter was really a different man in terms of His ways and the mantle of apostle rested evenly upon him.

No longer do we see him (with the exception of being called out by Paul) as swaying between rash courage and weak timidity, but became a steadfast intrepid preacher of Christ in Jerusalem and abroad.

Cephas indeed, as Simon, the man of the flesh, seems to have been consumed by Peter, the man of the Spirit.

After the miracle at the temple gate (recorded in Acts 3:1-26) some persecution arose against the Christians, and Peter was cast into prison.

There he boldly defended himself and his companions at a council (Act 4:19,20).

Then a fresh outburst of violence came against the Christians which led to all the apostles being cast into prison – but being delivered were found the next day teaching in the temple.

Peter stepped up to defend them again and this time received a beating and was let go.

About this time Peter left Jerusalem. He worked for some time in Samaria, then returned to Jerusalem and reported to the church there the results of his efforts (Act 8:14-25).

He remained there for a period and it was during this time that he met Paul for the first time since his conversion.

Then he left Jerusalem again on a missionary journey to Lydda and Joppa (Ac 9:32-43).

Shortly thereafter Peter – at first relunctantly – opened the door of the Christian church to the Gentiles by the admission of Cornelius of Caesarea.

After remaining for some time at Caesarea, he returned to Jerusalem (Acts 11:1-18) where he defended his actions in reference to the Gentiles.

We then read of him being cast into prison by Herod Agrippa (Acts 12:1-19)
but again, in the night, an angel of the Lord opened the prison gates, and he escaped and went and hid in the house of Mary.

Acts 15 tells us that he took part in the deliberations over the Gentiles held in Jerusalem. It was here that Peter and Paul met again.

After this Peter is not mentioned in Acts again.

I personally find this highly symbolic.

Peter, the senior apostle of the Lord while He was here calling to the House of Israel was now about to fade just as the nation was heading into the sunset of its existence.

Paul, the titular head of the Gospel to the Gentiles, once Peter met him again face to face, really began to show his face while Peter began to fade.

Peter seems to have gone down to Antioch after the council at Jerusalem, and there to have been guilty of dissembling, for which he was severely reprimanded by Paul (Ga 2:11-16), who “rebuked him to his face.”

After this he appears to have carried the gospel to the east, and to have labored for a while at Babylon, on the Euphrates (we will read about this in 1st Peter 5:13).

There is no satisfactory evidence that he was ever at Rome. Where or when he died is unknown. He probably died somewhere between A.D. 64 and 67.

But prior to doing so, Peter – impetuous Peter – put his hand to writing.

This first epistle is addressed to “the strangers scattered abroad”, i.e., to the Jews of the Dispersion (or Diaspora).

He seems to write to confirm to his readers the doctrines they had been already taught.

Some people in the past (and present) have referred to Peter has been called “the apostle of hope” and this is because this epistle abounds with words of comfort and encouragement aimed at sustaining a “lively hope.”

The epistle was written from Babylon, on the Euphrates, which was at this time one of the chief seats of Jewish learning.

It has been noticed that in the beginning of his epistle Peter names the provinces of Asia Minor in the order in which they would naturally occur to one writing from Babylon.

Now, it seems that the authorship of first Peter has never been heavily disputed.

There have been questions on the second epistle which we’ll get to when we get to it.

There are some questions, however, which I think are important to consider when reading this work.

First, this epistle purports to have been addressed “to the strangers scattered throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia.”

All these were provinces of Asia Minor.

The only question is, who they were who are thus designated as “strangers scattered abroad,” (or strangers of the dispersion) because the Greek reads
“parepidhmoiv diasporav.”)

There have been various opinions regarding this:

First, of course, that they were native-born Jews, who had been converted to the Christian faith.

Eusebius, Jerome, Grotius, Beza, Mill, Cave, and others all held this opinion.

The principal argument for this stance looks to the line “strangers scattered abroad,” and also a couple of verses that use language which some scholars say would only be used toward Jews.

For instance in 1st Peter 2:9 the apostle writes:

“But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should shew forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light.”

Or consider 1st Peter 3:6 where Peter writes:

“Even as Sara obeyed Abraham, calling him lord: whose daughters ye are, as long as ye do well, and are not afraid with any amazement.”

Passages like these – really only these – suggest to some that Peter was talking to Jews who converted to Christianity and who were scattered abroad.

The second stance has been that the persons to whom it was sent were all of Gentile origin.

Supporters of this opinion were Procopius, Cassiodorus, and more recently Wetstein.

This belief is based on passages like

1st Peter 1:18 Forasmuch as ye know that ye were not redeemed with corruptible things, as silver and gold, from your vain conversation received by tradition from your fathers;

Or where Peter writes and says:

1st Peter 2:10 Which in time past were not a people, but are now the people of God: which had not obtained mercy, but now have obtained mercy.

OR

1st Peter 4:3 For the time past of our life may suffice us to have wrought the will of the Gentiles, when we walked in lasciviousness, lusts, excess of wine, revellings, banquetings, and abominable idolatries:

A third opinion has been that they were Gentiles by birth, but had been Jewish proselytes, or” proselytes of the gate,” and had then been converted to Christianity.

This is the stance presented by Michaelis, chiefly on the ground that the line in 1st Peter 1:1, “strangers of the dispersion,” is followed by the name of a heathen country or people, in the genitive ease, which describes the Jews who were dispersed there but combined with the evidence that suggest that they were not native-born Jews this position may hold some water.

A fourth stance says that the persons referred to were not Jews in general, but those of the ten tribes who had wandered from Babylon and the adjacent regions into Asia Minor.

A fifth opinion has been that the persons referred to were Christians, converted from both Jews and Gentiles, with no particular reference to their extraction; that there were those among them who had been converted from the Jews, and those who had been Gentiles, and that the apostle addresses them as Christians, though employing language such as the Jews had been accustomed to, when speaking of those of their own nation who were scattered abroad.

Bible commentators Lardner, Estius, Whitby, Wolffus, and Doddridge all stand on this – so does the jack ass McCraney.

I think it is perfectly clear that Peter was writing to any Christian – sometimes speaking to those who had come out of Judaism and sometimes speaking to those who were once pagans.

In other words:

The address of the epistle is general, not directed particularly either to the Jews or to the Gentiles. This is why he writes in 1st Peter 5:14,

“Peace be with you all that are in Christ Jesus.”

Obviously there were Christians there who had been Jews but it’s also obvious that there were those who had been Gentiles prior to becoming Christians as well.

These considerations make it clear that the epistle was addressed to those Christians in general who were scattered throughout the various provinces of Asia Minor Which are specified in 1Pe 1:1, whether they had been Jews or Gentiles.

It is probable that the great body of them had been converted from the heathen, though there were doubtless Jewish converts intermingled with them; and Peter uses such language as would be natural for one who had been a Jew himself’ in addressing those whom he now regarded as the chosen of God.

I think it is a mistake to suggest that the epistle was written ONLY to Jews who converted. The text doesn’t seem to support this.

One last point before we wrap it up for today.

There is some internal evidence in the epistles of Peter that the author was well acquainted with the writings of the apostle Paul.

Peter himself speaks of his acquaintance with the epistles of Paul, and ranks them with the inspired Writings, saying:

2nd Peter 3:15-16:

“Even as our beloved brother Paul also, according to the wisdom given unto him, hath written unto you; as also in all his epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other Scriptures, unto their own destruction.”

Quite frankly anyone who compares the epistles of Peter with those of Paul will see that Peter was at least influenced by the writings of the Apostle of the Gentiles that he could have just become familiar with the modes of expression Paul applied that he naturally fell into using them himself.

Consider the following:

Paul wrote in Ephesians 1:3. “Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ,”
Peter wrote in 1st Peter 1:3. “Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ.”

Paul wrote in Colossians 3:8 –
“But now ye also put off all these; anger, wrath, malice, blasphemy, filthy communication out of your mouth.
Peter wrote in 1st Peter 2:1. Wherefore laying off all these; anger, wrath, aside all malice, and all guile malice, blasphemy, filthy and all hypocrisies, and envies, blasphemies out of your mouth and all evil speakings.
Paul wrote in Ephesians 5:22 “Wives, submit yourselves unto your own husbands, as unto the Lord.”
Peter wrote in 1st Peter 3:1. Likewise ye wives selves to your own husbands as be in subjection to your own husbands unto the Lord.
Paul wrote in Ephesians 5:21 “Submitting yourselves one to another in the fear of God.”
Peter wrote in 1st Peter 5:6. “Yea, all of you be selves one to another in the fear subject one to another
Paul wrote in 1st Thessalonians 5:6. “Therefore let us not sleep, as do others; but let us watch and be sober.”
Peter wrote in 1st Peter 5:8 “Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour.”

Paul wrote 1st Corinthians 16:20 “All the brethren greet you. Greet ye one another with an holy kiss.”
Peter wrote in 1st Peter 5:14. “Greet ye one another with a kiss of charity. Peace be with you all that are in Christ Jesus. Amen.”

Paul Romans 8:18 “For I reckon that the sufferings of this present time are not worthy to be compared with the glory which shall be revealed in us.”
Peter 1st Peter 5:1: “The elders which are among you I exhort, who am also an elder, and a witness of the sufferings of Christ, and also a partaker of the glory that shall be revealed.”

Paul Romans 4:24: “But for us also, to whom it shall be imputed, if we believe on him that raised up Jesus our Lord from the dead”
Peter 1st Peter 1:21: “Who by him do believe in God, that raised him up from the dead, and gave him glory; that your faith and hope might be in God.”

Paul Romans 13:1,3,4 Let every soul be subject unto the higher powers. For there is no power but of God: the powers that be are ordained of God.
3 For rulers are not a terror to good works, but to the evil. Wilt thou then not be afraid of the power? do that which is good, and thou shalt have praise of the same:
For he is the minister of God to thee for good. But if thou do that which is evil, be afraid; for he beareth not the sword in vain: for he is the minister of God, a revenger to execute wrath upon him that doeth evil.

Peter 1st Peter 2:13-14: Submit yourselves to every ordinance of man for the Lord’s sake: whether it be to the king, as supreme; Or unto governors, as unto them that are sent by him for the punishment of evildoers, and for the praise of them that do well.

I suppose we could suggest any number of reasons for these parallels. Holy Spirit speaks the same language. Influence of Paul on Peter. Plaguerism. We really don’t know. But what we do know is Peter certainly endorsed the thinking and writings of Paul.