Christ’s Character and Destiny Shape Human Life



Christ’s Character and Destiny Shape Human Life

- a Chiastic Analysis of 1 Peter 2:1-12

1 Peter 1:1-12 shows how the lives of believers as well as the lives of disobedient people are shaped, positively in the one case and negatively in the other, by the Person of Christ and the pattern of His life. Christ is a stone, elect of God, honoured and vindicated over those who rejected Him. Believers too follow this pattern - becoming stones, elect of God, honoured and vindicated over those who oppose them. The disobedient follow a corresponding, but negative, downward path.

For both believers and the disobedient, choosing and being chosen both feature in the dynamics of this shaping. In the case of the former, believers are encouraged to good behaviour, to draw near and to believe (active) but they are also simultaneously elect of God and ultimately vindicated by Him (passive).

The purpose of this article is to attempt to show some of the ways the above patterns might be seen as “embedded” in the structure of 1 Peter 2:1-12. There are several attempts at describing the chiastic structure of these verses on the Internet, but I feel that these current analyses, although helpful, somewhat over-simplify the structures that Peter employs, and also that they do not really attempt to show how the structure embeds, and thereby emphasises, the message. I therefore very tentatively offer an initial attempt at analysis here.

The passage is exactly 200 words long in the Received Text, which as usual, will be used for the analysis. The mid-point of the passage comes, fittingly, at the centre of the quotation from Ps. 118:22:

“But the stone which rejected those building

This One (houtos) has become the head of the corner”

Before we start, I would like to point out that there is a growing number (although still a minority) of scholars who believe that the recipients of Peter’s two letters were Jewish Christians, rather than mixed churches made up of both Jewish and Gentile believers. I currently believe that the former is the correct view, and as a result I am slightly cautious about the appropriateness of always directly applying all of the (otherwise appropriate) verses in 1 Peter to us today. For example, the lovely declaration in verse 10 regarding “My People” which Peter applies to his hearers was originally a promise in Hosea about the restoration of Israel after its earlier separation from God through disobedience. Paul also quotes the same passage, as well as another from Hosea in a slightly different way (Rom. 9:23-26) but in a way which “allows” for the calling also of

Gentiles. It’s not entirely clear how Paul is able to do this, but I suggest that the place of calling, which Paul emphasises in v. 26, is the place of Exile, and so the place where Israel is called back to God is a place where Gentiles too can hear the call, and thus be included as “sons of the living God”. (Douglas Moo, on pp. 613-614 of his excellent Romans Commentary comes very close indeed to this view without specifically describing it). This view is, I believe part of the typological spiritual significance of the Exile and Return: Christ’s death and resurrection was the corresponding New Covenant event that enabled all, both Jews and Gentiles, to come equally to God. But Paul feels the need to explain how Hosea applies also to Gentiles; Peter doesn’t!

A chiastic structure in 1 Peter 2:1-12 is fairly widely recognised. The basic structure looks something like this:

At a very broad and basic level, we can see that this is a reasonable analysis. As

previously mentioned, I have some reservations about some current chiastic analyses (both generally and in the case of 1 Pet. 2:1-12). Often, the individual subsections of an analysis (A,B, C etc. in the analysis on the previous page) are themselves capable of a more detailed structural analysis than is often given and I will be attempting a more detailed analysis of our 1 Peter passage later.

My second comment concerns the purpose of the structures used by the biblical writers. This is often not deeply explored by current chiastic analyses where the recognition of a pattern often seems to be the main focus! Thus, in the case of the passage in 1 Peter, the structure or pattern, as it stands, whilst “theoretically interesting”, does not, in and of itself, clearly advance our understanding of Peter’s basic arguments in this section of his epistle. I would like to think that such structural analysis will help answer such questions as, “what is Peter’s ‘strategy’ in arranging his materials in this way?”, and “what is he trying to achieve in us as listeners and readers?” I hope to suggest some ways in which the meaning of the passage might be “embedded” in its structure.

Before we discuss how the above structural analysis might be further built upon in these ways, I would like to make some observations about this passage that “set the scene”, and will perhaps act as structural “pointers”.

Observation 1)

The start and end of a chiasm provide pointers to what is contained within it! Looking at A and A` it is clear that Peter wants to encourage his hearers to avoid wrong behaviours and follow and desire the “milk” that the Lord provides (The connection between avoiding malice etc. and desiring “milk” may not seem exactly obvious, but Paul also links the sorts of wrong behaviours described here to infants needing milk (1 Cor. 3:1-4)!) In the “inner” parts of the chiasm, Peter provides the highest possible motivation for doing these things—participation in the pattern of Christ’s Person and work!

Observation 2)

There are 5 individuals or groups being described. They are 1) Jesus, 2) God (the Father), 3) Peter’s believing hearers and listeners—referred to as “you” in these verses, and who I will sometimes refer to as “us”, 4) the “disobedient ones” who I will treat as a single group, who are “headed up” by the Jewish leaders or “builders” who rejected Jesus, but who include all who reject Him and 5) those of the nations or Gentiles who speak against the Christians (v. 12).

From the passage, we can suggest two possible structural outlines (next page) of the relationships between the people and groups:

In the passage, the interactions between these 5 individuals and groups (indicated above) are described and outworked.

Observation 3)

Peter presents a remarkable and marvellous privilege that believers have—namely that things that are true of Jesus become true for us through our participation in Him.

1) Jesus is a living stone (v. 4); we become living stones (v. 5).

2) Jesus is elected by God (v. 4); we are elected by God (v. 9a).

3) Jesus is honoured/precious (v. 4); we are honoured/precious (v. 7a). (Note: many translations of v. 7a are, I believe, wrong translations—even though what they say is nevertheless gloriously true!)

4) Jesus is rejected by men, but God honours Him, and causes the men who oppose Him to stumble (vs. 7b-8); Christians are opposed by men, but God will vindicate the Christians and refute those who oppose them at the “day of visitation or overseeing” when God comes to overturn their slanderous words (verse 12). (Glorifying God in v. 12 refers to acknowledging the truth—and in this case, also acknowledging their own lies and guilt—see the commentaries!)

Developing (& hopefully improving!) the Original Chiastic Structure

I want to work with the original structure as given earlier, and hopefully improve on it in a step-by-step way . . .

“Expansion” of Section B from that depicted in the original diagram

The four aspects of Jesus’ life and ministry (as living stone, as elect, as precious and as opposed by men) appear in section B. In this section, only one of these, Jesus as a living stone, is taken up and applied to believers, (“You also as living stones . . “. The other three aspects are not “applied” to believers in B, but they are developed immediately after in relation to Christ in sections C and C` (and to us, by stages in the rest of the chiasm that comes after B as we will see later!) Thus, we have a slight “complication” that B not only treats our imitation of

Christ as living stones, but it also contains within itself the teaching that Jesus is rejected by men, but elect and precious to God. In fact, the internal structure of B seems to be a miniature version or plan of sections B, C, C`, B` as a whole.

Thus we can offer the following suggested analysis of section B seen within the larger context:

Notes:

1) This interesting “Christological” central feature of B tends not to be emphasised in chiastic analyses of the passage since it doesn’t readily correspond to what is found in B`.

2) I have labelled the internal divisions of B in purple, but using the same notation as the blue notation of the main chiasm—to emphasise that B (which is structured B, C`, C, B`) is a sort of “miniature version” of the B, C, C`, B` in the main chiasm.

3) I’ve highlighted (using the big red arrow!) the fact that the topics in the centre of B—the rejection of Jesus by men and His status as elect and precious (honoured) before God in C and C` are taken up and developed in C and C`. The two small red arrows also show the Scriptural connection between B and C,C` - the word dio (“because of this”) thus explains B in terms of the Scriptural citations in C, C`.

4) Now B itself has a clear internal chiastic structure, but B` is not just the “inverse” of B; there is development too based on C and C` ! Thus, in B` we as believers offer sacrifices acceptable to God. This, a) contrasts with Jesus’ rejection by men in C (since acceptance and rejection are opposites, and also men and God are opposites in their treatment of Jesus) and this also, b), compares God’s electing and honouring of Jesus in C` with our acceptability to God through Jesus. (The person sacrificing is represented by the sacrifice, so the acceptance of the sacrifice is the acceptance of the person.) This is an indication that, like the imitative pattern with the “living stones”, so also these other features of Christ’s Person and work will be produced in believers, and that these wonderful truths will be developed as the chiasm proceeds.

5) In fact, the four characteristics of Christ are found in the following sections:

1) living stone B

2) rejected by men C` - developed further in C`.

3) elect of God C—developed further in C

4) honoured/precious to God C—developed further in C

These four characteristics, as applied to believers, are found in the following sections:

1*) living stones B`

4*) honoured/precious to God C

3*) elect of God B`

2*) opposition of Gentiles/nations A`

We note that, after the living stones, the other three characteristics of Christ are structured chiastically (i.e. in reverse order) when applied to believers compared

original order in which they appeared when applied to Christ.

Thus we can apply a “colour code” to the chiasm in which we use one colour (bright yellow) for the characteristics of Christ, and a lighter version (pale yellow) for the characteristics of us that develop in consequence as shown above.

Expansion of Sections C and C`:

In C, we see that God has elected (chosen) Jesus and that He is precious/honoured by God. Both these aspects are demonstrated in the Scriptural quotation where God says of Jesus, “Behold, I lay in Zion a stone, corner-foundation, elect and precious”. Jesus is chosen and honoured by being made the chief corner stone. I think Zion refers primarily to the temple as the centre of Jerusalem—here spiritually understood as Christ and the Church— in accordance with the New Testament’s characteristic Christological fulfilment of OT prophecy.

This is followed by further OT references which describe the good consequences for believers of Christ’s being elected and honoured in this way: not only are believers not ashamed, they too become positively honoured/precious (the same Greek root word for honoured/precious (timeo) used for Christ in verses 4 and 6 is used of believers in v. 7). Here, God acts sovereignly in elevating Christ; our elevation follows as a consequence of our believing on Christ.

When we come to C` we find a different situation—namely those disobedient ones who have rejected Jesus and a different “approach” to this situation is taken by God. The problem here is that the elevation of Christ to being the chief cornerstone takes place against a prior rejection of Christ by the “builders” - the Jewish religious authorities, and Christ’s elevation acts in a reciprocal manner to their stumbling—God’s rejection of them as builders—in a way which makes the God’s judgement appropriate—they rejected Christ, now they stumble and fall before Him. I think this difference explains an interesting feature of C and C` discussed below and as shown in the expanded version on the next page.

With reference to the diagram on the next page, we can see that, in C, God sovereignly places or appoints the Corner-Foundation Stone (a and b) and this is followed by corresponding honour for those believing. The honour (d) is placed within the two “believings” (c and c`); the two “believings” thus form an inclusio for the honour.)

In C` however, Christ’s 1) being rejected by the builders but 2) becoming nevertheless the “Head of the Corner” Stone and 3) the cause of the falling of those who opposed Him occurs embedded within the “inclusio” of the disobedience of men in general, and of the “builders” in particular. Here, the structure suggests that the rejection of the stone by Israel’s leaders was in some sense prior in time (though not in the sovereign purposes of God) to the exaltation of Christ to being the Head of the Corner with a corresponding and reciprocal stumbling of the builders. The builders are not actually rejected, but they reject themselves, stumbling over the Corner Stone by their continued offence and opposition to Him.

Finally in this section, we note that the Greek root word tithemi—to appoint or lay—forms an inclusio for the section as a whole. But we note also that there is

a distinction drawn between the active way in which God appoints Christ (He lays, tithemi, the Foundation Stone in Zion) but the appointment, etethesan, of the disobedient to stumbling and offence is presented in passive terms “they were appointed”. It is a paradox that their active disobedience in rejecting Christ co-exists side-by-side with God’s appointing of them to disobedience. Paul deals in Romans 9:14-33 with precisely this question—this passage paralleling our section of 1 Peter in many remarkable ways including the same quotations from Isaiah and Hosea.

These are deep truths: Israel’s failure made necessary the New Covenant (since as Paul puts it in Galatians, “if a law had been given that could bring life, then righteousness would indeed be by the law” (Gal. 3:21)). But Israel’s failure also caused all the glory to come to Christ, the obedient Son, and through Him the fulfilment of the promise to Abraham that through his Seed, the Gentiles too would be blessed.

Expansion of Section B`

Section B` corresponds to B, but it also represents a development of the ideas present in B. Here is an expanded version of B`:

Notes:

1) B` has a chiastic structure. The fourfold description in a) is balanced by the fourfold description in a`). In the middle we have our response to God’s gracious calling of us from darkness to light: we too speak out regarding His “virtues” - a word which corresponds structurally to the marvellous quality of His light. We are to declare the wonderful attributes of God.

2) We can see that there are clear connections between B` and B, but there is also development as we go from B to B`.

Thus, in B, we are described as a holy priesthood and a spiritual house (the “house” here being the temple. But in B`, we have “expanded” to include the people of God in the nation as a whole! We are now a royal priesthood and a holy nation etc. There are actually two types of expansion — expansion “outwards” to include the whole spiritual nation, and expansion “upwards” as a royal priesthood: like Christ who was a priest/king after the order of Melchizedek, we to are “kings and priests unto our God”. The difference between B and B` has, we can infer, been effected by what is described in the C sections—namely God’s exaltation of Christ and His elevation and dominance over those who opposed Him.

There is a further development—this time in the nature of our actions rather than our “status”: in B, we are described as offering acceptable sacrifices unto God—which is the role of priests in the temple/tabernacle. In B` the sphere of operations has more the “kingly” aspect of conquest—the declaration ( of God’s “virtues”. Christ was high priest, offering Himself; now we are priests. God speaks, and His word makes Christ to be the Chief Corner-Stone. Again He

speaks and calls us from darkness to light. Now it is our turn to speak and declare God’s virtues - it is our massive privilege to be “light bearers” through speech! (In Rev. 19:15, Jesus rides forth as the Word of God with His army, and a sword proceeds from His mouth.) In B we offer sacrifices to God, now in B` we are privileged to speak about God!

3) In B`, we are strikingly described as a “race elect”. We therefore follow in imitation of Christ who was described as elect in C.

4) In fact, Christ Himself is not mentioned either in B` nor, as we shall see, in A`. These are the final components of the chiastic structure, so it seems then that structurally, the role of the Church as representing Christ and carrying on His work is perhaps implied by the way Peter has structured this passage. It is perhaps significant also that Jesus does not, in this passage have a specifically “active” role —He is appointed by God, He is believed on by us etc. The exception to this is that in 2:5 it is through Jesus Christ that our sacrifices are acceptable to God and we know from Hebrews that this is an active mediatorial/intercessory role. Elsewhere in 1 Peter, Christ’s role as One who suffers and bears our sins in order to bring us to God is clearly taught.

Expansion of Section A`

Our passage ends, as it began, with an exhortation to holy living. Both A and A` initially present this in terms of avoiding bad things, followed by encouragement to positively do good things. The “good things” in A are “internal” in the sense they they have to do with the Christian’s longing for Jesus Christ the Lord. In A` however, there is, as with B`, an “external” component in which the overturning of the “bad speaking” by the Gentiles against the believers will occur at “the day of visitation”. It is not really very clear to me what this means, but I am suggesting in this article that it seems to correspond to God’s overturning of the rejection of Christ as described in C`. (The Baker Exegetical Commentary on 1 Peter by Karen Jobes presents this as a valid comparison!) The way Peter describes this however, seems to have a hopeful element—that the “Gentiles” or “nations” may actually be brought to repent of their slander and genuinely glorify God. God’s “visitation” is a sort of “inspection for judgement” - the Greek word, episcope is related to “seeing” (as does our English word “visit” - related to words like visible etc.). According to many commentaries, it is not necessarily the Final Judgement that is being referred to here, rather God’s gracious provision of

an opportunity or opportunities for repentance and faith. A very similar verse is Matt. 5:16.

Section A` therefore combines aspects of A and of C`. As regards C`, our “exaltation” and the reversal of the accusations against us correspond to Christ’s exaltation and the overturning of the “status” of those who rejected Him.

Conclusion

I have attempted to analyse the structure of 1 Pet. 2:1-12, and have found it to be rather complicated! In addition to the detailed structures in each of the sub-sections, there seem to be two larger scale structures superimposed upon each other! The first of these is the basic chiastic structure, and the second is a specifically “thematic” structure based around a four-fold pattern of Christ as the Stone honoured by God which is reproduced either directly or “analogously” in us as believers, and which also includes the overturning of the actions of those who rejected Christ or spoke against the believers. All of this is enclosed within exhortations to good behaviour.

I would like to try to attempt to indicate all these structures in a single diagram (next page) though it may be rather confusing for which I apologise!

I’ve used bright yellow boxes to indicate the fourfold aspect of Christ’s Person and pale yellow boxes for the way in which our Christian lives are patterned after His in these four respects. The locations of the four aspects are indicated in the two columns on the right.

The final box in the diagram has been labelled A`/C` since it corresponds to both of these, and I’ve given it three colours corresponding to the pale green of A and the yellow and pale turquoise of C`.

A final comment:

The passage helps Christian believers where they are— both in time and in the stage of maturity in Christ that they have reached. The passage looks back in time to Christ’s rejection by men and His election, honouring and vindication by God the Father. In the present believers have the exhortations to good behaviour, the offering of acceptable sacrifices and speaking out God’s virtues and their current status as living stones, elect and honoured by God. In the future is the promise of vindication by God against the slanderous accusations made against them.

................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download