Translation & Sermon by Nate Wilson, Christ The Redeemer Church, Manhattan, KS 02 Aug 2015
21 Why, it is for this purpose that y’all were called,
because even the Christ suffered on our behalf, leaving behind an example for you
in order that y’all might adhere to His tracks –
22 “Who never committed a sin, nor was deceptiveness found in His mouth,”
23 Who, while being insulted was not insulting back, [and] while suffering was not threatening, but He was giving [it] over to the One who judges justly .
24 Who Himself “carried our sins” in His body upon the tree,
in order that we might live in His righteousness after dying to our sins,
of Whom [it was written] “by His stripes y’all were healed.”
25 For
y’all were being “like wandering sheep,”
but now y’all have been returned to the Shepherd and Overseer of your souls.
· 100 years ago, two oil tycoons financed the printing and mailing of a series of tracts to every Christian teacher in the English-speaking world. These tracts were entitled The Fundamentals, a Testimony to the Truth. And these tracts contained articles written by well-credentialed scholars supporting the reliability of the Bible and the truth of the Gospel.
o In one article entitled “Christ and Criticism,” Sir Robert Anderson, LL.D. wrote, “The effects of this “Higher Criticism” are extremely grave. For it has dethroned the Bible in the home, and the good, old practice of “family worship” is rapidly dying out. And great national interests also are involved. For who can doubt that the prosperity and power of the Protestant nations of the world are due to the influence of the Bible upon character and conduct?”
o He maintained that Jesus was not a mere “superstitious and ignorant Jew” but rather the divine Son of God who offered the ultimate sacrifice for sin. “The fact that sacrifice prevailed among all races can be explained only by a primeval revelation. And the Bible student will recognize that God thus sought to impress on men that death was the penalty of sin, and to lead them to look forward to a great blood shedding that would bring life and blessing to mankind.”
o This was a defense of the true gospel.
· Some 10 years later, as Rockefeller was funding the distribution of Harry Emerson Fosdick’s anti-fundamentalist sermons, and as 1,200 Presbyterian pastors were signing the Auburn Affirmation that pastors did not need to believe in the Inerrancy of Scripture or the Virgin Birth or the Vicarious Sacrifice of Christ or His miracles or His bodily resurrection, J Gresham Machen wrote a classic book on Christianity & Liberalism,
o in it he exposed the sabotage of Biblical Christianity by Protestant seminary teachers like
§ Friedrich Schleiermacher, who taught that what the Bible says doesn’t matter in religion – all that matters is how you feel, and
§ Karl Bart, who followed Charles Darwin and taught that Genesis and the history and miracles of the Bible were myths, not real history, and
§ Albrecht Ritschl, who taught that human reason was more reliable than the Bible, and that, instead of preaching justification by Christ’s atonement, Christians should focus on righting social ills.
o Gresham Machen was alarmed at how people who followed these teachings were gaining influence at Princeton, where he taught New Testament Theology, and he eventually left Princeton to found Westminster Theological Seminary with Cornelius Van Till and John Murray, leaving Geerhardus Vos to be a lone orthodox voice at Princeton.
o In Chapter 6 of Christianity & Liberalism, Machen wrote, “Liberalism finds salvation... in man; Christianity finds it in an act of God. The difference with regard to the way of salvation concerns, in the first lace, the basis of salvation in the redeeming work of Christ. According to Christian belief, Jesus is our Savior, not by virtue of what He said, not even by virtue of what He was, but by what He did. He is our Savior, not because He has inspired us to live the same kind of life that He lived, but because He took upon Himself the dreadful guilt of our sins and bore it instead of us on the Cross... The essence of [the Liberal position] is that the death of Christ had an effect not upon God but only upon man... [I]t is true that the death of Christ is an example of self-sacrifice which may inspire self-sacrifice in others; it is true that the death of Christ shows how much God hates sin; it is true that the death of Christ displays the love of God. All these truths are found plainly in the New Testament. But they are swallowed up in a far greater truth – that Christ died instead of us to present us faultless before the throne of God.”
·
But, you say, “That stuff was a
century ago; we’ve moved past that.” No we haven’t! This stuff is still alive
and well today: Michael Hardin, editor on the Progressive Channel of Patheos, a website devoted to “engage in the global dialogue about religion and spirituality and to
explore and experience the world's beliefs” wrote just this year:
“Want to really know why modern Christianity looks the way it does? Because it
has turned the cross into nothing more than a transaction between the Father
and the Son or the Father and the satan. Either one stems from an economy of
exchange. The cross is so much more than that. The cross was the place where
God chose to be powerless and to be known as powerless. God reveals God’s self,
not as a deus ex machina, but as
a God who is willing to suffer and die at human hands. THIS God is pure love in
this event. THIS God is shown by the character of Jesus, by his prayers, by his
nonviolent resistance, by his forgiveness, by his trust in God, whom he
believed to be all-loving, pure love shown even here. Rejected and hated for
suggesting that God is love and in God there is no dark side, no shadow of
turning. Living out that vision to the very… last….. breath. The greatest of
all was great… at being a servant of all. God made peace on the cross, that
day, on that hill far away from The Holy Place. WITH ALL. EVERYBODY. NO
EXCEPTIONS... The Logos did not (just) become an Anthropos (a man), the Logos
became ‘sarx’, flesh, the Johannine term for skewed reality (not just physical
skin and stuff). The Logos became broken creation... in order to bring about a
new logic to a skewed reality. The Logos... shows that reality is grounded in
love.... When you begin your ecclesiology from a theology of the cross
(theologia crucis), you automatically nullify and completely deconstruct:
[among other things] Eternal Conscious Torment view of eternal punishment
(eschatology) [and] Penal Satisfaction[1]”
o You could hardly ask for a more classic restatement of what neo-orthodox theologians were saying over a hundred years ago. And if you were to sit in on the Sunday services of half of the churches in this town, you would hear more of the same false – or at least very incomplete gospel!
· Is this really a false gospel? What is it lacking? How do we grapple with this crazy polarization that has happened to Christianity? The Apostle Peter shows us the way forward at the end of chapter 2.
Notice the layout of this passage. Christ is introduced in verse 21, and then the beginning of verses 22, 23, and 24 each start in Greek with the relative pronoun “who,” referring back to Christ, and then there is one more relative pronoun “who” toward the end of verse 24 that introduces v.25. It is unfortunate that most modern English versions rendered these relative pronouns (“who”) as the plain pronoun (“He”) or omitted the pronoun altogether so that this pattern is obscured, but this is the structure of the verse as I see it: we have Christ introduced, followed by four descriptions of Him and His work in the following four verses!
o If you look only at verses 21-23 with humanistic worldview glasses on, it looks like a proof of the liberal/progressive theology of the cross in terms of Jesus just being a good example of all that a human being should be.
o But if you see the way those verses are framed on the front end by the discussion in chapter 1 of a supernatural salvation by grace through faith, and how they are framed on the back end in chapter 2 verses 24-25 with the language of substitutionary atonement rooted in Isaiah 53, the liberal theologians’ distortions of the theology of the cross can been seen in perspective, and we can see the whole picture.
o Then, while we can agree with many of the objectives of the liberals like helping the poor, taking good care of the environment, and being kind and thoughtful, we can point them to the deeper realities of the Gospel – the fuller perspective of the whole council of Holy Scripture.
o Handling the Word of God accurately is going to become increasingly rare, as the majority of people in our community subscribe to an entirely different religion, a human-centered worldview which is hostile to what the Bible actually says, but, being faithful to God’s word is what we are called to do.
o Now we covered verses 21-23 last Sunday, but I’ll review them briefly, as they give us the basis for the Humanist’s progressive gospel. They give us one reason that Christ died, and that was to be an example for us. You see, there is some truth in the liberal position:
· Jesus’ suffering was intended to be an “example” for us to follow. In the last sermon, I expounded on three ways that we can follow the example of Christ, as they are listed in this passage:
1. Avoiding sin and deceptiveness by being holy and truthful,
2. Not returning insults or seeking revenge, but rather returning insults with blessing,
3. and Trusting God to make things right.
· Remember the picture painted by the Greek word paradidou, translated “committed/entrusted/gave over” is that something was placed in your hands and, instead of hanging on to it, you pass it on to the person next to you – who is, in this case, Jesus, if we are walking with Him.
· In order to be “alongside/with” Christ and follow Him, you must suffer, because that is the path He chose. In suffering we can find fellowship with Christ.
· This mystical fellowship with a God who loves us and models how to live is Biblical, and it is something to seek and enjoy, but this is not the gospel.
· We must press on to verses 24-25 see the real gospel:
· This is covenantal language rooted in the Old Testament sacrificial system:
o “Carrying” the sin-offering to the altar to atone for “sin” – Leviticus 4:26 “And he shall offer up... on the altar... the fat of the sacrifice of peace-offering; and [thus] the priest shall make atonement for him concerning his sin, and it shall be forgiven him.” (Brenton’s English translation of the Greek Septuagint, cf. Lev. 9:10, 16:25, 2 Chron. 29:21).
· The wording Peter chooses here is also rooted in God’s law as to the curse which is the consequence of sin – namely death:
o In Genesis 2:16-17 “the Lord God gave a charge to Adam, saying, ‘Of every tree which is in the garden thou mayest freely eat, but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil--of it ye shall not eat, but in whatsoever day ye eat of it, ye shall surely die,’”
o this same curse is generalized in 2 Kings 14:6d “...every one shall die for his own sins,”
o and Ezekiel 18:4c, “...the soul that sins, it shall die.”
o Furthermore, regarding the specific mode in which Jesus died, the law of Deuteronomy 21:23b said, “...every one that is hanged on a tree is cursed of God.”
o By choosing this kind of language, Peter has left the topic of exemplary suffering and has shifted to the covenantal provisions of atonement when we are not good, when God is offended by our sin and cannot justly be loving, and where Jesus appeases God’s wrath against us by a propitiatory sacrifice of His perfect self.
· The wording Peter chose here quotes snippets of Isaiah 53 of the prophetic promises of a Messiah who would suffer death to save His people:
o Isaiah 53:12 “...his soul was delivered to death: and he was numbered among the transgressors; and he bore the sins of many... because of their iniquities.”
o The New Testament book of Hebrews explains that Jesus fulfilled this covenantal curse and messianic prophecy, saying, “He is also able to save to the uttermost those who come to God through Him... For such a High Priest was fitting for us, who is holy, harmless, undefiled, separate from sinners, and has become higher than the heavens; who does not need... to offer up sacrifices, first for His own sins and then for the people's, for this He did once for all when He offered up Himself.” (Hebrews 7:25-27 NKJV, cf. 9:28, 13:11)
o And Paul hammered it home in Galatians 3:13 “Christ has redeemed us from the curse of the law, having become a curse for us (for it is written, ‘Cursed is everyone who hangs on a tree’)”. (NKJV) The cross was made of tree-beams, and that was very significant in showing that Christ’s death involved Him being cursed.
o Do you see how impossible it is to be faithful to the Bible and still preach the modern humanistic “gospel” that ignores our sin and the substitutionary atonement of Christ? As we’ll see in the next chapter: “Christ also suffered once for sins, the just for the unjust, that He might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh but made alive by the Spirit” (1 Peter 3:18, NKJV) That’s the true gospel.
· But Jesus’ death and life was intended to be shared with us! Notice the result of Christ’s cursed death: “that we ourselves would die to our sins and live in His righteousness!”
o The substitutionary action is unmistakable. In Greek, the participle for “die” is plural, so it doesn’t refer to the singular “Christ” but rather to the plural “we!” He died “for” our sins, and, as a result, we have died “to” our sins! Can there be any sweeter sound than this? This is good news!
o “How shall we who died to sin live any longer in it? Or do you not know that as many of us as were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into His death? Therefore we were buried with Him through baptism into death, that just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life. For if we have been united together in the likeness of His death, certainly we also shall be in the likeness of His resurrection, knowing this, that our old man was crucified with Him, that the body of sin might be done away with, that we should no longer be slaves of sin. For he who has died has been freed from sin. Now if we died with Christ, we believe that we shall also live with Him, knowing that Christ, having been raised from the dead, dies no more. Death no longer has dominion over Him. For the death that He died, He died to sin once for all; but the life that He lives, He lives to God. Likewise you also, reckon yourselves to be dead indeed to sin, but alive to God in Christ Jesus our Lord. Therefore do not let sin reign in your mortal body, that you should obey it in its lusts. And do not present your members as instruments of unrighteousness to sin, but present yourselves to God as being alive from the dead, and your members as instruments of righteousness to God.” (Romans 6:2-13, NKJV)
o Satan and the world will try to get you to sin again, but you who have been united to Christ and placed your faith in Him can say, “I’m dead. This body can’t and won’t do that anymore. In Christ I am a new creation with a different life principle.”
· “I ‘live to righteousness’ – I live literally ‘in righteousness.’” What does it mean to be dead to sin and living in righteousness?
o “Sin” and “righteousness” have to do with either violating or upholding God’s standards of right and wrong.
o Psalm 119:144 connects righteousness explicitly to God’s law: “Thy testimonies are an everlasting righteousness: instruct me, and I shall live.” (Brenton)
o This is not speaking of a pull-yourself-up-by-your-own-bootstraps kind of obedience to the law – this is no human righteousness, rather it is the righteousness of Christ – His perfect obedience to God’s law – that gives us life.
o Paul explains in Romans 1:17, “For in it [the Gospel], the righteousness of God is revealed from faith to faith; as it is written, ‘The just shall live by faith.’” (NKJV)
o Wait, doesn’t Peter say that righteousness would make us live? How can Paul say that it is faith that makes us live? Which is correct?
o Both, of course. In God’s economy, righteousness equals faith. Our faith is in the righteousness of Christ to perfectly obey His father and also to save us. Our faith is not in ourselves to “do better.”
o Let me continue Paul’s argument with Romans 10:4-13: “For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to everyone who believes. For Moses writes about the righteousness which is of the law, ‘The man who does those things shall live by them.’ But the righteousness of faith speaks in this way... that if you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead, you will be saved. For with the heart one believes unto righteousness, and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation. For the Scripture says... [among other things] ‘Whoever calls on the name of the Lord shall be saved.’” (NKJV)
o Do you see that this has nothing to do with you saving the world from war and poverty and has everything with Jesus making everything right by His righteousness as we trust Him? Sure, that can lead to alleviating poverty, but being nice to people isn’t the Gospel, that will simply come as a result of believing the real Gospel.
· “For by His stripes y’all were healed.” Again Peter is quoting from Isaiah 53, this time from verse 5. These “wounds” or “stripes” are portrayed as the results of sin everywhere that this Greek word mwlwp- occurs throughout the Septuagint Bible.
· And continuing into v. 25, Peter keeps quoting from Isaiah 53, into v.6, with a clear repudiation of the modern liberal gospel which people like Oprah Winfrey preach that, “You are all right. Stop thinking that you and other people are bad and just believe in yourself and follow your feelings and everything will be all right.”
o Folks, that’s not good news; that’s sticking your head in the sand and asking for your butt to get kicked!
o The liberal gospel is also hopeless because it doesn’t provide any real power outside of yourself to save you, so it’s all up to us to make our world better. That’s bad news! Anybody who has a real knowledge of the world’s problems should be able to see that’s a recipe for despair!
o When we get trapped in that cycle of thinking that we have to do better and we realize that we are unable to do much better by our own effort, then we resort to depression, we start avoiding other people, and we even resort to self-injury and suicide.
· The real Gospel tells us, on the contrary, that we are not o.k.; we’re like “lost sheep.”
o The Imperfect tense of the verb indicates (not the kind of sheep that happened to get lost once or twice, but rather) a continual straying. Every time the shepherd let them out of the fold to forage – every stinking time – they wandered off in stubborn rebellion to the will of the shepherd.
o And, as I noted before in our recent study of Psalm 23, sheep can be ridiculously-helpless animals. I have read testimonies of multiple shepherds who said it was not uncommon for a sheep to wander off on its own, eat something it shouldn’t, then lie down to sleep, bloat up like a balloon, and be literally unable to stand up again, so it dies lying there on its back in some hidden hollow all bloated up. That’s us, hopelessly enslaved to destructive appetites, before dying with Christ to sin and living in His righteousness.
· I think that the Greek passive-voice spelling of this word “returned” should be interpreted here to mean that God caused us to return, not that we decided to return by our own choice. Again, that is good news (“gospel”) that God would reach out to rebellious, “straying,” distressed “sheep” and restore our souls (Psalm 23) when we could not fix ourselves.
· Jesus, of course, called Himself “the Good Shepherd” in John 10:11, (And why? Precisely because “He laid down his own life for His sheep” by dying on the cross!)
· Job called God the “Overseer” in (Job 20:29). That word in Greek is episkopon, from which we get the English word “Episcopal,” and it’s also translated “Bishop” or “Guardian” – it literally means “over-see.”
· Here Jesus is called the “shepherd and overseer of souls;”
o He provides for, leads, and protects like a shepherd, and
o He provides accountability, training, assistance, authority, and organization like an overseer.
o This is the goal, not that we fix every problem, but that we live in the safekeeping of Jesus Christ by faith. This is good news. This is the real gospel!
· “I have been crucified with Christ; it is no longer I who live, but Christ lives in me; and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave Himself for me.” (Galatians 2:20, NKJV)
· Gal.1:9b “...if anyone preaches any other gospel to you than what you have received, let him be accursed. (NKJV)
|
Patriarchal text |
NAW |
KJV |
NKJV |
ESV |
NASB |
NIV |
|
21 εἰς τοῦτοASN γὰρ ἐκλήθητεAPI, ὅτι καὶ[ii] Χριστὸς [iii]ἔπαθενAAI ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν[iv], ὑμῖν[v] ὑπολιμπάνωνPAP-NSM ὑπογραμμὸνASM ἵνα [vi]ἐπακολουθήσητεAAS τοῖς ἴχνεσινDPN αὐτοῦ· |
21 Why, it is for this purpose that y’all were called[vii], because even the Christ suffered on our behalf, leaving behind an example for you in order that y’all might adhere to His tracks[viii] – |
21 For even hereunto were ye called: because
Christ also suffered for us, leaving |
21 For to this you were called, because
Christ also suffered for us, leaving |
21 For to this you have been called, because Christ also suffered for you, leaving you an example, so that you might follow in his steps. |
21 For you have been called for this
purpose, since Christ also suffered for you, leaving you an example for you |
21 X To this you were called, because Christ X suffered for you, leaving you an example, that you should follow in his steps. |
|
22 ὃςNSM ἁμαρτίανASF οὐκ[ix] ἐποίησενAAI, οὐδὲ εὑρέθηAPI δόλος ἐν τῳ στόματι αὐτοῦ· |
22 “who never committed a sin, nor was deceptiveness found in His mouth[x],” |
22 Who did no sin, neither was guile found in his mouth: |
22 "WHO COMMITTED NO SIN, NOR WAS DECEIT FOUND IN HIS MOUTH"; |
22 He committed no sin, neither was deceit found in his mouth. |
22 WHO COMMITTED NO SIN, NOR WAS ANY DECEIT FOUND IN HIS MOUTH; |
22 "He committed no sin, and no deceit was found in his mouth." |
|
23 ὃς λοιδορούμενοςPPP-NSM οὐκ ἀντελοιδόρειIAI, πάσχωνPAP-NSM οὐκ ἠπείλειIAI, παρεδίδουIAI δὲ τῳ κρίνοντιPAP-DSM δικαίωςADV · |
23 who, while being insulted[xi] was not insulting back, [and] while suffering was not threatening[xii], but He was giving [it] over to the One who judges justly[xiii]. |
23 Who, when he was reviled, reviled not again; when he suffered, he threatened not; but committed himself to him that judgeth righteously: |
23 who, when He was reviled, did not revile in return; when He suffered, He did not threaten, but committed Himself to Him who judges righteously; |
23 X 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. |
23 |
23 When [they hurled their] insult |
|
24 ὃς τὰςAPF ἁμαρτίας ἡμῶν αὐτὸς ἀνήνεγκενAAI ἐν τῳ σώματι αὐτοῦ ἐπὶ τὸASN ξύλονASN, ἵνα ταῖς ἁμαρτίαις [xiv]ἀπογενόμενοιADP-NPM τῃ δικαιοσύνῃ ζήσωμενAAS · οὗ τῳ [xv]μώλωπιDSM αὐτοῦ[xvi] ἰάθητεAPI. |
24 Who Himself “carried our sins” in His body upon the tree, in order that we might live in His righteousness after dying to our sins, of Whom [it was written] “by His bruises y’all were healed.” |
24 Who his own self bare our sins in his [own] body on the tree, that we, being dead to sins, should live unto righteousness: by whose stripes ye were healed. |
24 who Himself bore our sins in His [own] body on the tree, that we, having died to sins, might live for righteousness—by whose stripes you were healed. |
24 He himself bore our sins in his body on
the tree, that we might die to sin [and] live to righteousness. X By his wounds you |
24 [and] He Himself bore our sins in His
body on the |
24 He himself bore our sins in his body on
the tree, so that we might die to sins [and] live for righteousness; X by his wounds you |
|
25 ἦτεIAI-2P γὰρ ὡς πρόβαταNPN πλανώμεναPPP-NPN [xvii], ἀλλ᾿ [xviii]ἐπεστράφητεAPI νῦν ἐπὶ τὸν ποιμέναASM καὶ ἐπίσκοπονASM τῶν ψυχῶν ὑμῶν. |
25 For y’all were being “like wandering sheep[xix],” but now y’all have been returned to the Shepherd and Overseer of your souls[xx]. |
25 For ye were as sheep going astray; but are now returned unto the Shepherd and Bishop of your souls. |
25 For you were like sheep going astray, but have now returned to the Shepherd and Overseer of your souls. |
25 For you were straying like sheep, but have now returned to the Shepherd and Overseer of your souls. |
25 For you were [continually] straying like sheep, but now you have returned to the Shepherd and Guardian of your souls. |
25 For you were like sheep going astray, but now you have returned to the Shepherd and Overseer of your souls. |
|
Isaiah 53:4-6 LXX οὗτος τὰς ἁμαρτίας ἡμῶν φέρει[xxi] καὶ περὶ ἡμῶν ὀδυνᾶται... 5... τῷ μώλωπι αὐτοῦ ἡμεῖς ἰάθημεν. 6 πάντες ὡς πρόβατα ἐπλανήθημεν, ἄνθρωπος τῇ ὁδῷ αὐτοῦ ἐπλανήθη·... |
אָכֵן חֳלָיֵנוּ הוּא נָשָׂא וּמַכְאֹבֵינוּ סְבָלָם 5 וּבַחֲבֻרָתוֹ נִרְפָּא-לָנוּ: 6 כֻּלָּנוּ כַּצֹּאן תָּעִינוּ אִישׁ לְדַרְכּוֹ פָּנִינוּ |
NAW Translation of the Hebrew Masoretic text of Isa. 53:4-6 Surely our griefs He Himself carried, and our sorrows, He bore them.... 5. ... and by His stripes there is healing for us. 6. All we like the flock have strayed, each has faced toward his own way... |
||||
[i] Where the
traditional Patriarchal edition of the Greek Bible is challenged by the Textus Receptus or by the modern critical
editions, I note that. When an English translation adds words not in the Greek
text, but does not indicate it has done so by the use of italics (or greyed-out
text), I put the added words in [square brackets]. When one English version
chooses a wording which is different from all the other translations, I
underline it. When a version chooses a translation which, in my opinion, either
departs too far from the root meaning of the Greek word or departs too far from
the grammar form of the original Greek word, I use strikeout. And when
an English version omits a significant word which is in the Greek text, I
insert an X. (Sometimes I will place the X at the end of a word if the Greek
word is singular but the English translation is singular.) I have also tried to
use colors to help the reader see correlations between the Greek original and
the various translations.
[ii] The fact that the kai preceeds the word “Christ” and the fact that Christ is the one who led the way into suffering lead me to translate this “even the Christ” rather than “Christ also,” the latter of which makes it sound like we lead with suffering and Christ follows. This is a fine distinction and not one I wish to make a big deal over.
[iii] Jesus’ suffering includes not only His suffering on the cross, but all the consequences of sin that He willingly suffered in the process of taking on human flesh and living as a human being. A few mss (P81, א, Ψ) substitute “died” for “suffered” which, in Greek, merely involves switching the first and third letters of the word with each other. Scholars are agreed that this variation is not the original, but it doesn’t make a great deal of difference, because Jesus’ death was indeed the most significant part of His suffering.
[iv] Although a minority of the total Greek manuscripts, all manuscripts older than the 8th Century read ‘υμων (“you” instead of “us”), so the Byzantine text is questionable, but it does not make a difference whether or not in this verse the apostle explicitly included himself among those for whom Christ suffered, because Peter includes himself elsewhere.
[v] Nestle-Aland lists four Greek manuscripts dating between the 11th and 15th centuries which read ημιν. The reading of the Textus Receptus and of the KJV (“us”) appears to be based on these rather than on the thousands of earlier and later Greek manuscripts which read “y’all.” Again, it doesn’t create a problem, because the apostle also consciously followed in the suffering of Christ, whether or not he included himself explicitly in the wording here. cf. 1 Cor. 11:24
[vi] Following two hapex legomena, this intensive word for “follow” appears to be used primarily for religious adherence. Note the contrast in the Septuagint Pentateuch between being a “follower” of idols and a “follower” of God: Leviticus 19:4,31; 20:6; Deut. 12:30; Joshua 6:8; 14:8,9,14; Job 26:3; Isaiah 55:3; Mark 16:20; 1 Timothy 5:24 (this is all the rest of the occurrences of epakolouth- in the Greek Bible).
[vii] “Called” cf. 1:15, 2:9 & 20
[viii] The word translated “tracks/steps” appears most often in the Greek Bible in translating the Hebrew phrase “soles of the feet” (Deut. 11:24) or “palms of the hand” (2 Ki 9:35) - Also the “wheel-rims” of a chariot (Judges 5:28) and the “hooves” of cattle (Ezek. 32:13). It is the hard contact-point of the body with the ground and therefore also the physical track made in the earth by this part of the body (Gen. 42:9-12 – spying out the roadways) and extends figuratively to a way of life exemplified by a person (Rom. 4:12 – “walking in the steps of our father Abraham’s faith”).
[ix] The “no” here actually negates the verb “committed,” not the object “sin,” so I translated it “never committed” rather than “no sin.”
[x] Peter quotes Isaiah 53:9 (... ἀνομίαν οὐκ ἐποίησεν, οὐδὲ εὑρέθη δόλος ἐν τῷ στόματι αὐτοῦ) adding his personal testimony that not only did Jesus do no violent sin (חמס the Masoretic word in Isa 53:9), not only was Jesus not “lawless” (the LXX of Isa 53:9), Jesus didn’t even commit any kind of sin (hamartia here in 1 Peter 2:22).
[xi] OT example of what reviling looked like is recounted in Numbers 20:1-5. A NT example comes in John 9:28-29. cf. scriptural injunction and judicial sentence against loidoria in Prov. 20:3 & 1 Cor 6:10
[xii] Unlike the priests in Acts 4:17. This does not preclude authorized threats at other comings of Christ (Isa. 66:14, Hab. 3:12, Zech. 9:14, etc.).
[xiii] This being God the Father (1 Pet. 1:17, James 4:12, Rev. 6:10, 11:17-18, 16:5-7) who is already standing “by” (para in v.20). Cf. 1 Pet. 5:11. Clement of A. rendered “unrighteously” which changes the meaning!
[xiv] This verb occurs nowhere else in the Bible
[xv] This is the only occurrence of this word in the N.T. It is used a few times in the Greek O.T. (Genesis 4:23; Exodus 21:25; Psalms 38:5; Isaiah 1:6; 53:5) where it is mostly translated “bruise”
[xvi] This word is not in the critical editions because there are several early manuscripts which omit it, but is in the Siniaticus and in Isa. 53:5 (Both the Hebrew Masoretic text and the Greek LXX text), and in the majority of the Greek manuscripts of 1 Peter. Even the modern versions which follow the critical text instead followed the Majority text by rendering it “by His wounds” rather than “by the wounds.”
[xvii] Critical editions spell this participle in the masculine gender (πλανωμενοι), following the agreement of the Sinaiticus, Alexandrinus, and Vaticanus, and just about no other manuscript. That would cause the participle to refer to “you” and not to “sheep.” The spelling I used is found in the earliest papyrus (P72), throughout the majority of the Uncials, and in the vast majority of minuscules. It is neuter, matching “sheep.” Since the two are being compared as similar, it doesn’t really amount to different meanings.
[xviii] Is this verb passive, as the KJV translates it and W&H parse it, or is it active, like all the modern English versions render it? Are we the ones who return, or does the shepherd return the sheep? Because all the other occurrences of this passive form of epistrephw appear to have active meanings (Matthew 10:13; Mark 5:30; 8:33; John 21:20), I don’t think a big deal should be made of this being passive, but the passive form does fit theologically.
[xix] cf. “wandering sheep” in Psalm 119:176; Isaiah 13:14; 53:6; Jeremiah 50:17; Matthew 18:12
[xx] Later on in chapter 5, Peter will call the church “elders” both “shepherds” and “overseers” under the authority of Christ, whom he then calls the “arch-shepherd.”
[xxi] This is merely a different tense of the same verb found in 1 Peter 2:24.