| |
THE FIRST EPISTLE GENERAL OF
PETER
Commentary by A. R. FAUSSETT
[1]
[2]
[3]
[4]
[5]
INTRODUCTION
ITS
GENUINENESS is attested by @2Pe
3:1. On the authority of Second Peter, see the
Introduction. Also by POLYCARP
(in EUSEBIUS
[Ecclesiastical History, 4.14]), who, in writing to
the Philippians, quotes many passages: in the second
chapter he quotes @1Pe
1:13,21 3:9; in the fifth chapter, @1Pe
2:11. EUSEBIUS
says of PAPIAS
[Ecclesiastical History, 3.39] that he, too, quotes
Peter's First Epistle. IRENÆUS
[Against Heresies, 4.9.2] expressly mentions it;
and in [4.16.5], @1Pe
2:16. CLEMENT OF
ALEXANDRIA [Miscellanies,
1.3, p. 544], quotes @1Pe
2:11,12,15,16; and [p. 562], @1Pe
1:21,22; and [4, p. 584], @1Pe
3:14-17; and [p. 585], @1Pe
4:12-14. ORIGEN
(in EUSEBIUS
[Ecclesiastical History, 6.25]) mentions this
Epistle; in [Homily 7, on Joshua, vol. 2, p. 63],
he mentions both Epistles; and [Commentary
on Psalm 3 and on John], he mentions @1Pe
3:18-21. TERTULLIAN
[Antidote to the Scorpion's Sting, 12], quotes
expressly @1Pe
2:20,21; and [Antidote to the Scorpion's Sting,
14], @1Pe
2:13,17. EUSEBIUS
states it as the opinion of those before him that this was
among the universally acknowledged Epistles. The
Peschito Syriac Version contains it. The fragment of
the canon called MURATORI'S
omits it. Excepting this, and the Paulician heretics, who
rejected it, all ancient testimony is on its side. The
internal evidence is equally strong. The author calls
himself the apostle Peter, @1Pe
1:1, and "a witness of Christ's sufferings," and an
"elder," @1Pe
5:1. The energy of the style harmonizes with the
warmth of Peter's character; and, as ERASMUS
says, this Epistle is full of apostolic dignity and
authority and is worthy of the leader among the apostles.
PETER'S
PERSONAL HISTORY.--Simon, Or Simeon,
was a native of Bethsaida on the Sea of Galilee, son of
Jonas or John. With his father and his brother Andrew he
carried on trade as a fisherman at Capernaum, his
subsequent place of abode. He was a married man, and
tradition represents his wife's name as Concordia
or Perpetua. CLEMENT OF
ALEXANDRIA
says that she suffered martyrdom, her husband encouraging
her to be faithful unto death, "Remember, dear, our Lord."
His wife's mother was restored from a fever by Christ. He
was brought to Jesus by his brother Andrew, who had been a
disciple of John the Baptist, but was pointed to the
Saviour as "the Lamb of God" by his master (@Joh
1:29). Jesus, on first beholding him, gave him the
name by which chiefly he is known, indicative of his
subsequent character and work in the Church, "Peter" (Greek)
or "Cephas" (Aramaic), a stone (@Mt
4:18). He did not join our Lord finally until a
subsequent period. The leading incidents in his apostolic
life are well known: his walking on the troubled waters to
meet Jesus, but sinking through doubting (@Mt
14:30); his bold and clear acknowledgment of the
divine person and office of Jesus (@Mt
16:16 Mr 8:29 Joh 11:27), notwithstanding the
difficulties in the way of such belief, whence he was then
also designated as the stone, or rock (@Mt
16:18); but his rebuke of his Lord when announcing
what was so unpalatable to carnal prejudices, Christ's
coming passion and death (@Mt
16:22); his passing from one extreme to the opposite,
in reference to Christ's offer to wash his feet (@Joh
13:8,9); his self-confident assertion that he
would never forsake his Lord, whatever others might do (@Mt
26:33), followed by his base denial of Christ thrice
with curses (@Mt
26:75); his deep penitence; Christ's full forgiveness
and prophecy of his faithfulness unto death, after he had
received from him a profession of "love" as often repeated
as his previous denial (@Joh
21:15-17). These incidents illustrate his character as
zealous, pious, and ardently attached to the Lord, but at
the same time impulsive in feeling, rather than calmly and
continuously steadfast. Prompt in action and ready to avow
his convictions boldly, he was hasty in judgment,
precipitate, and too self-confident in the assertion of
his own steadfastness; the result was that, though he
abounded in animal courage, his moral courage was too
easily overcome by fear of man's opinion. A wonderful
change was wrought in him by his restoration after his
fall, through the grace of his risen Lord. His zeal and
ardor became sanctified, being chastened by a spirit of
unaffected humility. His love to the Lord was, if
possible, increased, while his mode of manifesting it now
was in doing and suffering for His name, rather than in
loud protestations. Thus, when imprisoned and tried before
the Sanhedrim for preaching Christ, he boldly avowed his
determination to continue to do so. He is well called "the
mouth of the apostles." His faithfulness led to his
apprehension by Herod Agrippa, with a view to his
execution, from which, however, he was delivered by the
angel of the Lord.
After the ascension he took the
lead in the Church; and on the descent of the Holy Spirit
at Pentecost, he exercised the designed power of "the
keys" of Christ's kingdom, by opening the door of the
Church, in preaching, for the admission of thousands of
Israelites; and still more so in opening (in obedience to
a special revelation) an entrance to the "devout" (that
is, Jewish proselyte from heathendom) Gentile,
Cornelius: the forerunner of the harvest gathered in from
idolatrous Gentiles at Antioch. This explains in
what sense Christ used as to him the words, "Upon this
rock I will build my Church" (@Mt
16:18), namely, on the preaching of Christ, the true
"Rock," by connection with whom only he was given the
designation: a title shared in common on the same grounds
by the rest of the apostles, as the first founders of the
Church on Christ, "the chief corner-stone" (@Eph
2:20). A name is often given in Hebrew, not
that the person is actually the thing itself, but has some
special relation to it; as Elijah means Mighty Jehovah,
so Simon is called Peter "the rock," not that he is so,
save by connection with Jesus, the only true Rock (@Isa
28:16 @1Co
3:11). As subsequently he identified himself with
"Satan," and is therefore called so (@Mt
16:23), in the same way, by his clear confession of
Christ, the Rock, he became identified with Him, and is
accordingly so called (@Mt
16:18). It is certain that there is no instance on
record of Peter's having ever claimed or exercised
supremacy; on the contrary, he is represented as sent
by the apostles at Jerusalem to confirm the Samaritans
baptized by Philip the deacon; again at the council of
Jerusalem, not he, but James the president, or leading
bishop in the Church of that city, pronounced the
authoritative decision: @Ac
15:19, "My sentence is," &c. A kind of primacy,
doubtless (though certainly not supremacy), was given him
on the ground of his age, and prominent earnestness, and
boldness in taking the lead on many important occasions.
Hence he is called "first" in enumerating the apostles.
Hence, too, arise the phrases, "Peter and the Eleven,"
"Peter and the rest of the apostles"; and Paul, in going
up to Jerusalem after his conversion, went to see Peter in
particular.
Once only he again betrayed the
same spirit of vacillation through fear of man's reproach
which had caused his denial of his Lord. Though at the
Jerusalem council he advocated the exemption of Gentile
converts from the ceremonial observances of the law, yet
he, after having associated in closest intercourse with
the Gentiles at Antioch, withdrew from them, through dread
of the prejudices of his Jewish brethren who came from
James, and timidly dissembled his conviction of the
religious equality of Jew and Gentile; for this Paul
openly withstood and rebuked him: a plain refutation of
his alleged supremacy and infallibility
(except where specially inspired, as in writing his
Epistles). In all other cases he showed himself to be,
indeed, as Paul calls him, "a pillar" (@Ga
2:9). Subsequently we find him in "Babylon," whence he
wrote this First Epistle to the Israelite believers of the
dispersion, and the Gentile Christians united in Christ,
in Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia.
JEROME
[On Illustrious Men, 1] states that "Peter, after
having been bishop of Antioch, and after having preached
to the believers of the circumcision in Pontus, &c.
[plainly inferred from @1Pe
1:1], in the second year of Claudius went to Rome to
refute Simon Magus, and for twenty-five years there held
the episcopal chair, down to the last year of Nero, that
is, the fourteenth, by whom he was crucified with his head
downwards, declaring himself unworthy to be crucified as
his Lord, and was buried in the Vatican, near the
triumphal way." EUSEBIUS
[Chronicles, Anno 3], also asserts his episcopate
at Antioch; his assertion that Peter founded that Church
contradicts @Ac
11:19-22. His journey to Rome to oppose Simon Magus
arose from JUSTIN'S
story of the statue found at Rome (really the statue of
the Sabine god, Semo Sanctus, or Hercules, mistaken
as if Simon Magus were worshipped by that name, "Simoni
Deo Sancto"; found in the Tiber in 1574, or on an island
in the Tiber in 1662), combined with the account in @Ac
8:9-24. The twenty-five years' bishopric is
chronologically impossible, as it would make Peter, at the
interview with Paul at Antioch, to have been then for some
years bishop of Rome! His crucifixion is certain from
Christ's prophecy, @Joh
21:18,19. DIONYSIUS OF
CORINTH (in EUSEBIUS
[Ecclesiastical History, 2.25]) asserted in an
epistle to the Romans, that Paul and Peter planted both
the Roman and Corinthian churches, and endured martyrdom
in Italy at the same time. So TERTULLIAN
[Against Marcion, 4.5, and The Prescription
Against Heretics, 36, 38]. Also Caius, the presbyter
of Rome, in EUSEBIUS
[Ecclesiastical History, 2.25] asserts that some
memorials of their martyrdom were to be seen at Rome on
the road to Ostia. So EUSEBIUS
[Ecclesiastical History, 2.25, and Demonstration
of the Gospel, 3.116]. So LACTANTIUS
[Of the Manner in Which the Persecutors Died, 2].
Many of the details are palpably false; whether the
whole be so or not is dubious, considering the
tendency to concentrate at Rome events of interest [ALFORD].
What is certain is, that Peter was not there before the
writing of the Epistle to the Romans (A.D.
58), otherwise he would have been mentioned in it; nor
during Paul's first imprisonment at Rome, otherwise he
would have been mentioned in some one of Paul's many other
Epistles written from Rome; nor during Paul's second
imprisonment, at least when he was writing the Second
Epistle to Timothy, just before his martyrdom. He may
have gone to Rome after Paul's death, and, as common
tradition represents, been imprisoned in the Mamertine
dungeon, and crucified on the Janiculum, on the eminence
of St. Pietro in Montorio, and his remains deposited under
the great altar in the center of the famous basilica of
St. Peter. AMBROSE
[Epistles, 33 (Edition Paris, 1586), p. 1022]
relates that St. Peter, not long before his death, being
overcome by the solicitations of his fellow Christians to
save himself, was fleeing from Rome when he was met by our
Lord, and on asking, "Lord, whither goest Thou?" received
the answer, "I go to be crucified afresh." On this he
returned and joyfully went to martyrdom. The church called
"Domine quo vadis" on the Appian Way, commemorates
the legend. It is not unlikely that the whole tradition is
built on the connection which existed between Paul and
Peter. As Paul, "the apostle of the uncircumcision," wrote
Epistles to Galatia, Ephesus, and Colosse, and to Philemon
at Colosse, making the Gentile Christians the persons
prominently addressed, and the Jewish Christians
subordinately so; so, vice versa, Peter, "the apostle of
the circumcision," addressed the same churches, the Jewish
Christians in them primarily, and the Gentile Christians
also, secondarily.
TO WHOM HE
ADDRESSES THIS EPISTLE.--The
heading, @1Pe
1:1, "to the elect strangers (spiritually pilgrims)
of the dispersion" (Greek), clearly marks
the Christians of the Jewish dispersion as
prominently addressed, but still including also Gentile
Christians as grafted into the Christian Jewish stock by
adoption and faith, and so being part of the true Israel.
@1Pe
1:14 2:9,10 3:6 4:3 clearly prove this. Thus he, the
apostle of the circumcision, sought to unite in one Christ
Jew and Gentile, promoting thereby the same work and
doctrine as Paul the apostle of the uncircumcision. The
provinces are named by Peter in the heading in the order
proceeding from northeast to south and west. Pontus was
the country of the Christian Jew Aquila. To Galatia Paul
paid two visits, founding and confirming churches.
Crescens, his companion, went there about the time of
Paul's last imprisonment, just before his martyrdom.
Ancyra was subsequently its ecclesiastical metropolis. Men
of Cappadocia, as well as of "Pontus" and "Asia," were
among the hearers of Peter's effective sermon on the
Pentecost whereon the Spirit decended on the Church; these
probably brought home to their native land the first
tidings of the Gospel. Proconsular "Asia" included Mysia,
Lydia, Caria, Phrygia, Pisidia, and Lyaconia. In Lycaonia
were the churches of Iconium, founded by Paul and
Barnabas; of Lystra, Timothy's birthplace, where Paul was
stoned at the instigation of the Jews; and of Derbe, the
birthplace of Gaius, or Caius. In Pisidia was Antioch,
where Paul was the instrument of converting many, but was
driven out by the Jews. In Caria was Miletus, containing
doubtless a Christian Church. In Phrygia, Paul preached
both times when visiting Galatia in its neighborhood, and
in it were the churches of Laodicea, Hierapolis, and
Colosse, of which last Church Philemon and Onesimus were
members, and Archippus and Epaphras leaders. In Lydia was
the Philadelphian Church, favorably noticed in @Re
3:7, &c.; that of Sardis, the capital, and of
Thyatira, and of Ephesus, founded by Paul, and a scene of
the labors of Aquila and Priscilla and Apollos, and
subsequently of more than two whole years' labor of Paul
again, and subsequently censured for falling from its
first love in @Re
2:4. Smyrna of Ionia was in the same quarter, and as
one of the seven churches receives unqualified praise. In
Mysia was Pergamos. Troas, too, is known as the scene of
Paul's preaching and raising Eutychus to life (@Ac
20:6-10), and of his subsequently staying for a time
with Carpus (@2Ti
4:13). Of "Bithynia," no Church is expressly named in
Scripture elsewhere. When Paul at an earlier period
"assayed to go into Bithynia" (@Ac
16:7), the Spirit suffered him not. But afterwards, we
infer from @1Pe
1:1, the Spirit did impart the Gospel to that country,
possibly by Peter's ministry, In government, these several
churches, it appears from this Epistle (@1Pe
5:1,2, "Feed," &c.), were much in the same states as
when Paul addressed the Ephesian "elders" at Miletus (@Ac
20:17,28, "feed") in very similar language; elders or
presbyter-bishops ruled, while the apostles exercised the
general superintendence. They were exposed to
persecutions, though apparently not systematic, but rather
annoyances and reproach arising from their not joining
their heathen neighbors in riotous living, into which,
however, some of them were in danger of falling. The evils
which existed among themselves, and which are therefore
reproved, were ambition and lucre-seeking on the part of
the presbyters (@1Pe
5:2,3), evil thoughts and words among the members in
general, and a want of sympathy and generosity towards one
another.
HIS OBJECT
seems to be, by the prospect of their heavenly portion and
by Christ's example, to afford consolation to the
persecuted, and prepare them for a greater approaching
ordeal, and to exhort all, husbands, wives, servants,
presbyters, and people, to a due discharge of relative
duties, so as to give no handle to the enemy to reproach
Christianity, but rather to win them to it, and so to
establish them in "the true grace of God wherein they
stand" (@1Pe
5:12). However, see on 1Pe 5:12, on the oldest
reading. ALFORD
rightly argues that "exhorting and testifying" there,
refer to Peter's exhortations throughout the
Epistle grounded on testimony which he bears to
the Gospel truth, already well known to his readers by the
teaching of Paul in those churches. They were already
introduced "into" (so the Greek, @1Pe
5:12) this grace of God as their safe
standing-ground. Compare @1Co
15:1, "I declare unto you the Gospel wherein ye
stand." Therefore he does not, in this Epistle, set
forth a complete statement of this Gospel doctrine of
grace, but falls back on it as already known. Compare @1Pe
1:8,18, "ye know"; @1Pe
3:15 2Pe 3:1. Not that Peter servilely copies the
style and mode of teaching of Paul, but as an independent
witness in his own style attests the same truths. We may
divide the Epistle into: (I) The inscription (@1Pe
1:1,2). (II) The stirring-up of a pure feeling in
believers as born again of God. By the motive of hope
to which God has regenerated us (@1Pe
1:3-12); bringing forth the fruit of faith,
considering the costly price paid for our redemption from
sin (@1Pe
1:14-21). Being purified by the Spirit unto love
of the brethren as begotten of God's eternal word, as
spiritual priest-kings, to whom alone Christ is precious
(@1Pe
1:22 2:10); after Christ's example in suffering,
maintaining a good conversation in every relation
(@1Pe
2:10 3:14), and a good profession of faith as
having in view Christ's once-offered sacrifice, and His
future coming to judgment (@1Pe
3:15 4:11); and exhibiting patience in
adversity, as looking for future glorification with
Christ, (1) in general as Christians, @1Pe
4:12-19; (2) each in his own sphere, @1Pe
5:1-11. "The title "Beloved" marks the separation of
the second part from the first, @1Pe
2:11; and of the third part from the second, @1Pe
4:12" [BENGEL].
(III). The conclusion.
TIME AND
PLACE OF WRITING.--It was plainly
before the open and systematic persecution of the
later years of Nero had begun. That this Epistle was
written after Paul's Epistles, even those written during
his imprisonment at Rome, ending in
A.D. 63, appears
from the acquaintance which Peter in this Epistle shows he
has with them. Compare @1Pe
2:13 with @1Ti
2:2-4; @1Pe
2:18 with @Eph
6:5; @1Pe
1:2 with @Eph
1:4-7; @1Pe
1:3 with @Eph
1:3; @1Pe
1:14 with @Ro
12:2; @1Pe
2:6-10 with @Ro
9:32,33; @1Pe
2:13 with @Ro
13:1-4; @1Pe
2:16 with @Ga
5:13; @1Pe
2:18 with @Eph
6:5; @1Pe
3:1 with @Eph
5:22; @1Pe
3:9 with @Ro
12:17; @1Pe
4:9 with @Php
2:14 Ro 12:13 @Heb
13:2; @1Pe
4:10 with @Ro
12:6-8; @1Pe
5:1 with @Ro
8:18; @1Pe
5:5 with @Eph
5:21 Php 2:3,5-8; @1Pe
5:8 with @1Th
5:6; @1Pe
5:14 with @1Co
16:20. Moreover, in @1Pe
5:13, Mark is mentioned as with Peter in Babylon. This
must have been after @Col
4:10 (A.D.
61-63), when Mark was with Paul at Rome, but intending to
go to Asia Minor. Again, in @2Ti
4:11 (A.D.
67 or 68), Mark was in or near Ephesus, in Asia Minor, and
Timothy is told to bring him to Rome. So that it is likely
it was after this, namely, after Paul's martyrdom, that
Mark joined Peter, and consequently that this Epistle was
written. It is not likely that Peter would have entrenched
on Paul's field of labor, the churches of Asia Minor,
during Paul's lifetime. The death of the apostle of
the uncircumcision, and the consequent need of someone to
follow up his teachings, probably gave occasion to the
testimony given by Peter to the same churches,
collectively addressed, in behalf of the same truth. The
relation in which the Pauline Gentile churches stood
towards the apostles at Jerusalem favors this view. Even
the Gentile Christians would naturally look to the
spiritual fathers of the Church at Jerusalem, the center
whence the Gospel had emanated to them, for counsel
wherewith to meet the pretensions of Judaizing Christians
and heretics; and Peter, always prominent among the
apostles in Jerusalem, would even when elsewhere feel a
deep interest in them, especially when they were by death
bereft of Paul's guidance. BIRKS
[Horæ Evangelicæ] suggests that false teachers may
have appealed from Paul's doctrine to that of James and
Peter. Peter then would naturally write to confirm the
doctrines of grace and tacitly show there was no
difference between his teaching and Paul's. BIRKS
prefers dating the Epistle A.D.
58, after Paul's second visit to Galatia, when Silvanus
was with him, and so could not have been with Peter (A.D.
54), and before his imprisonment at Rome, when Mark was
with him, and so could not have been with Peter (A.D.
62); perhaps when Paul was detained at Cæsarea, and so
debarred from personal intercourse with those churches. I
prefer the view previously stated. This sets aside the
tradition that Paul and Peter suffered martyrdom together
at Rome. ORIGEN'S
and EUSEBIUS'
statement that Peter visited the churches of Asia in
person seems very probable.
The PLACE
OF WRITING was doubtless Babylon on
the Euphrates (@1Pe
5:13). It is most improbable that in the midst of
writing matter-of-fact communications and salutations in a
remarkably plain Epistle, the symbolical language of
prophecy (namely, "Babylon" for Rome) should be
used. JOSEPHUS
[Antiquities, 15.2.2; 3.1] states that there was a
great multitude of Jews in the Chaldean Babylon; it
is therefore likely that "the apostle of the circumcision"
(@Ga
2:7,8) would at some time or other visit them. Some
have maintained that the Babylon meant was in Egypt
because Mark preached in and around Alexandria after
Peter's death, and therefore it is likely he did so along
with that apostle in the same region previously. But no
mention elsewhere in Scripture is made of this
Egyptian Babylon, but only of the Chaldean one. And though
towards the close of Caligula's reign a persecution drove
the Jews thence to Seleucia, and a plague five years after
still further thinned their numbers, yet this does not
preclude their return and multiplication during the twenty
years that elapsed between the plague and the writing of
the Epistle. Moreover, the order in which the countries
are enumerated, from northeast to south and west, is such
as would be adopted by one writing from the Oriental
Babylon on the Euphrates, not from Egypt or Rome. Indeed,
COSMAS INDICOPLEUSTES,
in the sixth century, understood the Babylon meant to be
outside the Roman empire. Silvanus, Paul's
companion, became subsequently Peter's, and was the
carrier of this Epistle.
STYLE.--Fervor
and practical truth, rather than logical reasoning, are
the characteristics, of this Epistle, as they were of its
energetic, warm-hearted writer. His familiarity with
Paul's Epistles shown in the language accords with what we
should expect from the fact of Paul's having "communicated
the Gospel which he preached among the Gentiles" (as
revealed specially to him) to Peter among others "of
reputation" (@Ga
2:2). Individualities occur, such as baptism, "the
answer of a good conscience toward God" (@1Pe
3:21); "consciousness of God" (Greek), @1Pe
2:19, as a motive for enduring sufferings; "living
hope" (@1Pe
1:3); "an inheritance incorruptible, undefiled, and
that fadeth not away" (@1Pe
1:4); "kiss of charity" (@1Pe
5:14). Christ is viewed less in relation to His past
sufferings than as at present exalted and hereafter to be
manifested in all His majesty. Glory and hope
are prominent features in this Epistle (@1Pe
1:8), so much so that WEISS
entitles him "the apostle of hope." The realization of
future bliss as near causes him to regard believers as but
"strangers" and "sojourners" here. Chastened fervor, deep
humility, and ardent love appear, just as we should expect
from one who had been so graciously restored after his
grievous fall. "Being converted," he truly does
"strengthen his brethren." His fervor shows itself in
often repeating the same thought in similar words.
In some passages he shows
familiarity with the Epistle of James, the apostle of
special weight with the Jewish legalizing party, whose
inspiration he thus confirms (compare @1Pe
1:6,7 with @Jas
1:2,3; @1Pe
1:24 with @Jas
1:10; @1Pe
2:1 with @Jas
1:21; @1Pe
4:8 with @Jas
5:20, both quoting @Pr
10:12 5:5 with @Jas
4:6, both quoting @Pr
3:34). In most of these cases Old Testament quotations
are the common ground of both. "Strong susceptibility to
outward impressions, liveliness of feeling, dexterity in
handling subjects, dispose natures like that of Peter to
repeat afresh the thoughts of others" [STEIGER].
The diction of this Epistle and of
his speeches in Acts is very similar: an undesigned
coincidence, and so a mark of genuineness (compare @1Pe
2:7 with @Ac
4:11; @1Pe
1:12 with @Ac
5:32; @1Pe
2:24 with @Ac
5:30 10:39; @1Pe
5:1 with @Ac
2:32 3:15; @1Pe
1:10 with @Ac
3:18 10:43; @1Pe
1:21 with @Ac
3:15 10:40; @1Pe
4:5 with @Ac
10:42; @1Pe
2:24 with @Ac
3:19,26).
There is, too, a recurrence to the
language of the Lord at the last interview after His
resurrection, recorded in @Joh
21:15-23. Compare "the Shepherd . . . of . . . souls,"
@1Pe
2:25; "Feed the flock of God," "the chief Shepherd," @1Pe
5:2,4, with @Joh
21:15-17; "Feed My lambs . . . sheep"; also "Whom
. . . ye love," @1Pe
1:8 2:7, with @Joh
21:15-17; "lovest thou Me?" and @2Pe
1:14, with @Joh
21:18,19. WIESINGER
well says, "He who in loving impatience cast himself into
the sea to meet the Lord, is also the man who most
earnestly testifies to the hope of His return; he who
dated his own faith from the sufferings of his Master, is
never weary in holding up the suffering form of the Lord
before his readers to comfort and stimulate them; he
before whom the death of a martyr is in assured
expectation, is the man who, in the greatest variety of
aspects, sets forth the duty, as well as the consolation,
of suffering for Christ; as a rock of the Church he
grounds his readers against the storm of present
tribulation on the true Rock of ages."
|
|