Bible book
1 Peter
Commentary by Robert Jamieson, A. R. Fausset, and David Brown
Save this book and all its available chapters on this device.Book introduction
Introduction to 1 Peter
Commentary chapters
Bible book
Commentary by Robert Jamieson, A. R. Fausset, and David Brown
Save this book and all its available chapters on this device.Book introduction
Commentary chapters
THE FIRST EPISTLE GENERAL OF
PETER
[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
and 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
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."