The Inclusion of 1 Peter 2:9-10 and the Understanding of the Elect - Essay Example

Section/# Exegesis of Peter 2: 9-10 From the dawn of recorded religious observance, the precepts of the existenceof a remnant, a chosen people, and/or an elect have been projected by nearly each and every world religion. All too often, the precepts that have previously been enumerated have led people to a belief in a particular type of exclusivity. Although it is not the purpose of this individual analysis to examine exclusivity in all of the world religions, what will be examined is the way in which 1 Peter 2: 9-10 elaborates and sheds light on the level of exclusivity that can and should be represented within the Christian movement. Moreover, the level to which incorrect analysis of such a concept has been furthered through incorrect interpretation will be analyzed and discussed. Moreover, as a means of understanding the full nuance of the precepts that are discussed in the text in question, this brief exegesis will utilize T.H.E. R.O.A.D. approach which relies upon the following as a means of understanding the unique meanings and determinancies of the texts in question: type of scripture, historical setting, events surrounding the writing, discussion of recipient, occasion, author, and the date. In this way a more full and complete understanding of text as well as whatever nuances it may be able to impart to the researcher can be fully understood. As a means of understanding these particular factors, the individual can begin to gain a more full and complete appreciation for the way that the precepts of grace, mercy, and maranatha are expounded to the reader. In this way, the particular passage of 1 Peter 2: 9-10 has been chosen due to the fact that it gives a valuable warning to both the early believers of that time as well as to the new and old believers of our current era. As a way of understanding this warning, the final portion of this paper will build a teaching plan and outline for this text. Firstly, with regards to the type of scripture, it is without question that 1 Peter 2: 9-10 represents a didactical text. Didactical texts are traditionally understood to be those that seek to shed a new light on the will that God has for his people and/or the way in which this should be accomplished. Insomuch, the text itself helps to explicate the way in which the individual believer should seek to integrate an appreciating for their faith while at the same time passing it along to the unbeliever and seeking to integrate a sense of missionary zeal within the recipient of grace.1 Similarly, with regards to the historical setting of the text, this is one whose importance cannot be emphasized enough and will ultimately crop up throughout this essay in various forms. The historical importance of when the text was written most directly relates to the fact that Christ had only recently been crucified and the disciples were having a difficult time explaining the importance of the death and resurrection to those within the Jewish community that had at least begun to accept him. Moreover, for those outside of the Jewish community, the text served as a warning to not follow the same path of haughtiness and pride that had rendered the missionary work of the Hebrews all but effete. This particular contextual understanding has more to do with the events that were taking place at the time than any other factor. Saint Peter is widely believed to have penned this text in a time of religious persecution of the churches in Asia Minor. Moreover, the text also begins to bear a direct connotation to the means by which persecution engenders the possibility of congealing the believers into a very tight knit community which is unwilling to be extroverted and chooses instead to focus its energies on integrating a sense of “specialness” within. Obviously, such a set of actions and beliefs is not what the ultimate message of Christianity entails. As such, it was the function of this text, within the historical context, to integrate a sense of realization to the end reader that although they were special, there was no call to become introverted and covetous of the gift they had been given. With regards to the recipients, one cannot consider such a question without dealing with and understanding the importance that the direct connotations of “chosen” and “elect” infer within the text. Since the time of the Old Testament prophets, ideas concerning the “elect”, “God’s chosen people”, and “a holy nation” had been something that had culturally and religiously resounded with the Jewish nation. As a function of this “specialness”, it can easily be seen from a cursory review of history and scripture that these ideas resonated strongly with the tribes of Israel and for better or for worse defined the way in which they behaved with relation to their role within the world and their responsibility to provide the beacon of exemplification into the nations of the gentiles that surrounded them. However, as can be seen, the way in which this actually occurred in practice was much different than had actually been instructed via the teachings of the many Old Testament prophets. As a function of this primary misunderstanding, the role and position of the nation of Israel was fundamentally altered from what the divine plan had originally been. Biblical scholars have of course disagreed with the reasons behind why the God head chose to abandon this primary understanding of “chosen” and “elect”. Ultimately, culture and nationality are inseparable aspects and integral components in seeking to determine a greater and deeper application of the text. Due to the fact that our traditional understanding of the nature of God is one which is immutable and omnipotent, it is rather pointless to envision a situation in which God would be surprised as to the result that might occur. As such, the most pointed and powerful reason for why the situation unfolded as it did within the Old Testament has been understood by a litany of theologians and Biblical scholars to be so that that it would provide a powerful exemplification for what too high an estimation of personal/religious worth ultimately leads. In this way, the haughty and arrogant nature that the Jews exhibited with regards to their special place within the world was indicative of a primary misunderstanding of their role and what the ultimate intention was with regards to why they had been blessed and protected by God in the way they had been. In reality, the chosen status had not been utilized as a means of spreading the words that God had entrusted the Jewish nation; rather, they had instead been used as an excuse to behave in highly racial and xenophobic ways with regards to the populations that surrounded Israel and were ultimately religiously hungry for the precepts and words that Israel had been charged with. This misunderstanding must be emphasized due to the fact of the ultimate end towards which it leads. As a function of this the interpreter of these particular texts within the New Testament book of 1 Peter take on a distinctly new and more nuanced meaning than what could otherwise be assumed. With regards to New Testament theology, the way in which the “elect” and “chosen” was defined was significantly different than what had been defined within the Old Testament. As a function of the primary failure of the Jewish nation to accept and act upon their role as the world-wide example of what a kingdom with God as its ultimate priest exemplified, Christ’s birth, death, and resurrection was necessitated as a means of opening the message of the hope and mercy that God’s love provided to each and every one of Earth’s inhabitants.2 The fundamental shift that was of course seen is with regards to the fact that the ethnically defined nation of the Jews were no longer tasked with the sole representation of God’s love and the message of salvation upon the face of the Earth. As Christ detailed throughout his earthly ministry, this responsibly had ultimately been taken from the nation of the Jews and had been passed on to the Gentiles as a function of the ultimate failure and pride that the Jewish nation had exhibited with the original charge they had been given. Secondly, with regards to the “occasion”, it should be understood that the true impetus for the text being expounded upon in the first place was the loss of status of election that the Jewish people had formerly enjoyed at the expense of the rest of the world. It is of vital importance to understand the primal reason why this charge was removed from the Jewish people due to the fact that many New Testament Christians have taken a similar if not identical approach that the Jewish nation had done with relation to their special charge as keepers of the faith. The ultimate goal was not to build a fence around the precepts and doctrines that had been created and given to those who had accepted the message; rather, the ultimate goal was to encourage the new members of the faith to actively engage with those that had not accepted the message and present to them. As a function of this, the true evangelical components of maranatha are clear to the reader and/or believer. Moreover, as a function of the fundamental break between the Old and New Testament theology which has herein been briefly detailed, the reader/researcher can note that the a stark warning is inherent with regards to pursuing the same flawed way of thinking that the understanding of the terms “elect”, “chosen”, and “remnant” ultimately entail.3 It should of course be mentioned that what the Jewish nation did with their chosen status is not something that can be defined as uniquely “Old Testament” in practice or in theory. As a function of understanding this, one need not look very far into the world of current Christianity to note a litany of different branches of the religion that take an exclusivist approach to the teachings of the New Testament and the way in which the parishioners of these aforementioned denominations view their role within the global community. Although it is most certainly not the express purpose of this exegesis to enumerate upon the actual names of these branches of Christianity or elaborate upon how they do not fulfill the gospel requirement for what has been lain out in 1 Peter 2: 9-10, as well as many additional places within the New Testament, their inclusion into this discussion has been made as a function of acquainting the reader/researcher with the fact that although the scriptures of the New Testament have gone further and elaborated to far greater extent with regards to the role that the believer has with relation to those non-believers within the world, the message itself has of course not been wholly and/or fully accepted by each and every branch of the Christian religion as exhibited today.4 For this purpose alone, the interpretation and understanding of the key concepts and morals which these two texts espouse is of primal importance to the reader/researcher and/or theologian. The first text of 1 Peter 2:9-10 states, “But you are a chosen people, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, God’s special possession, that you may declare the praises of him who called you out of darkness into his wonderful light” (CITE). Thus far this analysis has mentioned the Old Testament precepts of the elect and how the chosen people of God had shirked their ordained position in favor of an arrogant and haughty interpretation of what this status ultimately meant. In this way, the way in which the wording and meaning of the preceding text engages the reader helps to more solidly define the purpose for why this meaning of “chosen” should be incorporated into New Testament theology. The first statements of the text do not differ much if at all with the traditional interpretation of Old Testament theology. In this way, the same interpretation of chosen and elect is related to the reader; however, the second part of this first text strikes at the ultimate meaning for why this level of “specialness” exists in the first place. Rather than providing for an arrogant interpretation of why these individuals who have been called should interpret this, the text states that the goal of this “royal priesthood” is to “declare the praise of him who brought out of darkness into his wonderful light” (CITE). Such a purpose necessarily precludes any selfish accrual of self-worth or arrogance of a function of this “chosen” status. Due to the fact that the ultimate end of such a status is to proclaim the goodness and love of God to those remaining in darkness, the reader can easily notice the key and enumerated differential between the New Testament call t maranatha as compared to the Old Testament duties that were charged to the Jewish nation. As the first half of this analysis has focused upon the redirection that 1 Peter 2:9 engenders with regards to the New Testament theology and the way in which the believer should engage with his/her faith, the second part of this exegesis will be concentric upon 1 Peter 2:10, the text immediately following and acting as somewhat of a couplet for the first. Likely due to the fact that the Old Testament interpretation of what “chosen” and “priesthood of nations” actually meant and signified, the second text seeks to close the door with regards to how the believer should integrate with such a definition which has been lain out in the first text. As a way to drive this meaning home, the second text states the following “Once you were not a people, but now you are the people of God; once you had not received mercy, but now you have received mercy” (CITE). In this particular way, the haughty nature which one might be tempted to engage their faith and/or their belief in their own superiority to others that have not known of the mercy of God and accepted his ultimate sacrifice as a remission of sin are warned of their humble origin. This is of particular interest due to the fact that although there are warnings against being a haughty and arrogant people throughout the Old Testament, to the knowledge of this author, no such similar dictum exists within the Old Testament as has herein been related within 1 Peter 2:10. As a function of this warning, the text goes on to highlight the fact that before the gift of mercy specified, the recipients were completely and totally in darkness. This discussion of the reality of being lost in darkness of strong importance due to the fact that an understanding of this is necessary for the first part of the text, 1 Peter 2:9, to actually engage with the individual. Although many may regard this passage as somewhat redundant to the first, it is necessary in the fact that so much misinterpretation of this “chosen” status had been effected and realized within the past that a clear reduction in the self-esteem of the reader/believer is necessary to categorize the level to which praise and glory should be the ultimate outgrowths of this level of mercy; not arrogance and pride. Moreover, the second text helps to show the key distinction between the receipt of grace and the differential that this has been made in the hearts and minds of the believer. In this way, the comparison must be made between the lyrics of the song “Amazing Grace” and the analysis of 1 Peter 2:10. Whereas the believer was merely nothing prior to conversion and ultimately unworthy of the grace and mercy they received, they have been elevated to a “holy nation”, “royal priesthood”, and “chosen people” as a function of this acceptance. What is of most importance in the exegesis of 1 Peter 2:10 is the way in which the receipt of mercy serves as the vehicle towards accomplishing the status that is detailed within 1 Peter 2:9. Without the receipt and acceptance of this mercy and the existence of God’s grace which ultimately makes this mercy possible, the individual would doubtless still be lost in darkness. Furthermore, this acts as a tacit warning to the believer as it is now their responsibility to realize the importance of the gift they have chosen to accept and their mission and responsibility to others still in darkness. This of course encourages the individual to accept a responsible approach to the “chosen” status that they have been charged with. The gospel commission referenced in Matthew 28:19, “Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit”.5 Rather than being a static term, as it was understood within the confines of the Old Testament, this status denotes an ultimate responsibility that the believer must embrace in order to claim the mercy and grace that has been given to them. Furthermore, the second text acts as a type of feedback loop in which the reader is presented first with the gift and privilege that the receipt of the gospel provides to the individual. Likewise, the second serves as a type of warning and responsibility with regards to what the recipient must be amenable to as a function of the acceptance of the grace and mercy specified within the text. With respect to authorship and date, these are two aspects of T.H.E. R.O.A.D. analysis that are perhaps the most difficult to definitively nail down. As a function of this difficulty, this student will merely present the opinions that have been put forward by a variety of scholars and allow the reader to draw inference upon these due to the highly contested nature of authorship and date of this New Testament book.6 Firstly, many scholars have pointed to the fact that the events that take place in the text definitively point to the year 81 AD; or the beginning of the reign of Diocletian the Roman Emperor under whose reign the persecution of the Christians began in earnest. However, it must be noted that such a date would have put the text long after the death of Peter and necessitated it being written by perhaps one of his followers, one that knew him well and wished to dedicate the letter to him, or someone else entirely. Moreover, the date is of significance to know and to understand based upon the fact that the central theme of persecution within the text and the means whereby the Christian should engage with such a negative eventuality are of central importance. Due to the fact that the texts within, as well as the particular language and types of speech that are written appear to be similar to that of those spoken by Peter within the Acts, it would lead the reader to assume that Peter is indeed the author and that perhaps some portions the letter had been edited or added after his death by one of his scribes or even by Paul himself. Lastly, this brief analysis will seek to provide the reader with a teaching plan and/or outline for the text in question. As a means of integrating this text into the extent beliefs and importance of doctrine that currently exists within the body of believers, the historical importance of the warning and its overall timelessness should be stated on the very first place. Moreover, the texts can and should be realized and understood as well as taught in two distinct parts. The first should be explicated within the understanding of the New Testament theology that has provided a priceless and unrequited gift of salvation. The second should necessarily be that of the way in which the gift interacts with the believer and instills him/her with the chosen status that had previously been unavailable. Finally, this previously unavailable grace that has turned an unworthy should into something of great esteem and a member of a “holy nation” within the eyes of God should ultimately be explicated as a function of the warning which has been discussed at great length within this analysis. Finally, with relation to the lexographical understanding of the text, this student has employed LOGOS software to seek to understand the very core of the Greek that was used to help inform the English translation which has subsequently been studied herein. In this way, both the lexographical and grammatical nuances that make up the key thoughts and derivations of precepts within these two texts will be expounded upon. The original Greek for the text simply reads, “humeis de genos eklekton, basileion hierateuma, ethnos hagion, laos eis peripoiesin, opos tas aretas exaggeilete tou ek skotous humas kalesantos eis to thaumaston autou phos”. The first of these that stands out with relation to the interpretation of the text is the work “eklekton” from whence English ultimately derives the word “elect”. Although it has been translated as a “chosen race” in English – one can also easily infer how and why alternative methods of interpretation can readily denote that the body of believers is an “elect” and distinct sub differentiation of the rest of humanity. In this brief phrase “humeis de genos eklekton” one can ultimately understand nearly half of the meaning of the passage. This further has the implication of calling and being called out. In this way, the reader can infer that verse 10 also utilizes the Greek word for “out” by transforming “ek”, the Greek word for out, to “kalesantos” which quite literally means to be called. These two words were put together in verse 10 to form the word “ekklesia” – or to called out or sequestered from. This most closely translates t other way in which a particular group or assembly is selected. Although the ideas of the gift of grace and mercy are expounded upon in many other places throughout the New Testament, the texts of 1 Peter 2:9-10 are one of the best exemplifications of the way in which these two should work hand in hand as both an explanation of the way in which the gift of grace and mercy is bestowed, as well as a warning against the development of pride or arrogance, as well as an introduction to the responsibilities that such a gift necessarily entails to the recipient. Although each and every text within the New Testament and within scripture in general deserves a thorough exegesis, these two texts in general are of extreme importance due to the fact that they espouse the way in which the believer should integrate with his or her newfound faith, exhibit this belief to others, and view their own personal lives as a function of this acceptance. Furthermore, as has been previously related within this analysis, the fact of the matter is that all too often the community of believers, even today, still clings to a flawed acceptance of their role and net worth within the community of believers.7 As a function of this explanation of the correct way in which the person of faith should approach their status of “chosen”, the reader/researcher can come to infer that the main purpose that Peter was trying to expound was that the mere receipt of grace and mercy alone is what sets the individual apart with regards to their chosen status. Such an identification along with the introduction of the gospel message serves to set the tone of the way in which the believer should accept their role within the Christian community. It is further the belief of this author that the inclusion of 1 Peter 2:9-10 serves as a way to challenge the conventional beliefs that had been held at the time as well as long before with regards to the understanding of the “elect” and how these individuals should behave with regards to the rest of the population that may still live in darkness. Letting these texts guide the reader, one comes to understand that the over-arching intent is ultimately with relation to the way in which the believer should seek to let their light shine out among all humanity rather than jealously guarding the precious gift they have been bestowed. Moreover, Peter was doubtless attempting to provide the Jews a paradigm shift with regards to the way that the cultural interpretation of the gift of election and chosen status should be interpreted. Finally, it should be understood as not only relevant to the Jewish nation of that time but also to the individuals today. Whereas it might be easy to cast aspersions on the way that the Jewish nation engaged their beliefs with regards to being God’s chosen people and/or the remnant among the earth, the fact of the matter is that all humanity is just as prone to being corrupted as were the people of the times in which the Old Testament concerned. References Billings, J. Todd. 2010. "Participatory Biblical Exegesis: A Theology of Biblical Interpretation – By Matthew Levering." International Journal Of Systematic Theology 12, no. 2: 242-245. Academic Search Complete, EBSCOhost (accessed February 24, 2013). Elliott, John. A home for the homeless : a sociological exegesis of 1 Peter, its situation and strategy. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1981. Feldmeier, Reinhard. The first letter of Peter a commentary of the Greek text. Waco, Tex: Baylor University Press, 2008. Harkins, Angela Kim. 2006. "THEOLOGICAL ATTITUDES TOWARD THE SCRIPTURAL TEXT: LESSONS FROM THE QUMRAN AND SYRIAC EXEGETICAL TRADITIONS." Theological Studies 67, no. 3: 498-516. Academic Search Complete, EBSCOhost (accessed February 24, 2013). ROBINSON, JAMES T. 2012. "READING OTHER PEOPLE READING OTHER PEOPLES SCRIPTURE: THE INFLUENCE OF RELIGIOUS POLEMIC ON JEWISH BIBLICAL EXEGESIS." English Language Notes 50, no. 2: 77-88. Academic Search Complete, EBSCOhost (accessed February 24, 2013). The Holy Bible: NIV. 1 Peter 2:9-10, Matthew 28:19 Young, Frances. Biblical exegesis and the formation of Christian culture. Cambridge New York: Cambridge University Press, 1997. Read More