An ongoing debate continues regarding how the Old Testament and, more specifically, Jewish tradition informs a believer’s understanding of salvation and their relationship to Christ. Without a proper understanding of how Jewish tradition informs New Testament soteriology, the believer risks landing in the extremes: either moving toward a form of supersessionism that cuts off any connection with their spiritual heritage or, alternatively, moving toward an amalgamation that misses the important distinctions between Jews and Christians as espoused by the New Testament. In Peter’s first letter, he candidly addresses this topic head-on with his fellow believers in mind. Specifically, in 1 Peter 2:4-10, the Apostle Peter shows how his Jewish tradition informs a proper understanding of a believer’s new identity in Christ through the internalization of the Holy Spirit.

The research begins by providing a brief historical analysis that addresses such topics as authorship, date, purpose, and audience followed by a literary analysis that engages a discussion around genre, sub-genre, and structure, which assists in understanding the overarching historical and literary context of the passage. Next, the interpretive analysis dives deeper into an exegetical analysis of 1 Peter 2:4-10, which supports the overarching argument. A canonical analysis follows, which explores certain Old and New Testament intertextual connections that provide additional support and solidify the interpretive process. Finally, a brief application of 1 Peter 2:4-10 ensues by relating the problems that Peter’s ancient readers faced to modern-day believers.

Historical Analysis

The historical backdrop of the book of 1 Peter provides the ancient context for understanding its message. Regarding authorship, internal evidence is explicit as to both the author and the recipients: “Peter, an apostle of Jesus Christ, to those who are elect exiles of the Dispersion” (1 Pet 1:1, English Standard Version). Other internal evidence exists. The author was an elder and an eyewitness to Christ’s sufferings, which also points to Peter as the author (1 Pet 5:1). J. Ramsey Michaels asserts that attempting to definitively identify the author of 1 Peter is futile.[1] The other option is that 1 Peter was written by a pseudonymous author. S. H. Mathews highlights the three most popular arguments against Petrine authorship: the language and style, the lack of quotations by Jesus, and the similarities between 1 Peter and other New Testament books, especially Paul’s letters to the Romans and Ephesians.[2] Acts 4:13 states that Peter was a common, uneducated man; thus, the argument regarding style asserts that Peter would not have been sophisticated enough to write the book of 1 Peter. However, no extant copies of Petrine texts exist to compare with 1 Peter, and it is possible that Peter used an amanuensis who provided certain stylistic features. Furthermore, although Peter was an eyewitness to Jesus, the fact does not require him to quote Jesus in his correspondence, and Peter does refer specifically to Christ and the crucifixion within the book (cf. 1 Pet 2:21-24). Finally, Peter and Paul both arise from the same Jesus tradition; thus, one would likely expect some overlap in content. Accordingly, for the remainder of the research, the assumption exists that Peter is the author of the book of 1 Peter.

Determining the date of 1 Peter depends heavily on the identification of the author and the content of the book. If the book is pseudonymous, then, according to Karen Jobes, a later date between AD 70 and 90 is reasonable.[3] However, Petrine authorship points to an earlier date. Michaels explains that scholars have often used John 21:18-19 as pointing to Peter’s martyrdom possibly under Nero’s persecution in Rome, but he also acknowledges that the time of Peter’s death is unknown.[4] Furthermore, Mathews observes that the topic of suffering within the book of 1 Peter may also suggest official persecution under Nero, especially in light of the author’s reference to Babylon, which is likely an allusion to Rome.[5] Regardless, Petrine authorship from the city of Rome is compatible with a date in the sixties.

Although several purposes for the book of 1 Peter are possible, Peter specifically states in 1 Peter 5:12, “I have written briefly to you, exhorting and declaring that this is the true grace of God. Stand firm in it.” It seems evident that Peter’s goal was to encourage his readers to stand firm in the face of suffering and persecution. The question remains as to the specific occasion and nature of the suffering that may have prompted Peter to initiate the correspondence. Various theories relating to the form of persecution exist. Paul Achtemeier notes that, although unlikely, the persecution could have originated from Nero (AD 54-68), Vespasian (AD 69-79), Domitian (AD 81-96), or Trajan (AD 97-117).[6] More likely, the Christians Peter wrote to experienced local persecution from the general population, because the believers were unwilling to participate in many of the local customs common throughout the Roman Empire.[7] The environment of suffering naturally leads to the questions regarding the identity of Peter’s audience and the location of such persecution.

The identification of Peter’s audience is challenging and will be addressed more fully in the section below. However, a brief introduction is relevant to the discussion of 1 Peter’s historical backdrop. Peter specifically identifies his audience at the outset of his letter as follows: “To those who are elect exiles of the Dispersion in Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia” (1 Pet 1:1). Certain scholars go so far as to assume that not only did Peter not write the letter, but that the audience identified in verse 1 is fictive.[8] However, the conclusion is highly unlikely. The key question surrounding Peter’s audience is whether they are primarily Jewish Christians or Gentile Christians. A verse that stands at the crossroads of the debate is 1 Peter 1:18, which suggests that Peter’s recipients have a futile inheritance from their forefathers. Jobes points out that another significant issue revolves around whether the terms foreigners (1 Pet 1:1) and resident aliens (1 Pet 2:11) should be interpreted literally or metaphorically.[9] The modern consensus is that the terms should be taken metaphorically, and that the audience was primarily Gentile.[10]

The exegetical focus of 1 Peter 2:4-10 centers around the idea that believers as living stones participate in the living Christ, the One who is the chosen Cornerstone. The historical backdrop potentially supervenes upon an interpretation of 1 Peter 2:4-10 in four ways. First, Peter, as an apostle and eyewitness to Jesus, is uniquely qualified to communicate the message of a believer’s new identity. Second, the dating and occasion of the book during a time of persecution emphasize that a believer’s new identity inaugurated in Christ is relevant for those facing severe persecution, trauma, and difficulty. Third, the identified purpose of Peter’s letter points to the idea that a believer’s placement in Christ as a living stone not only is a message of encouragement, but also assists in the process of standing firm when experiencing suffering. Fourth, the identification of a Gentile audience highlights the fact that a believer’s new identity does not only apply to individuals with a Jewish descent, but also to those with no Semitic lineage.

Literary Analysis

Throughout the previous few centuries, scholars have espoused various potential genres for 1 Peter. Mark Dubis explains that, in the early twentieth century, a common view was to assert that 1 Peter represented a baptismal homily, baptismal liturgy, or, more specifically, an Easter baptismal liturgy.[11] The genre of a letter is more likely, but the question remains as to the type of letter that Peter wrote. More recently, William Schutter suggests that 1 Peter is a circular letter, Michaels opens the possibility of an apocalyptic diaspora letter, Troy Martin identifies 1 Peter’s genre as a paraenesis, and Paul Holloway asserts that1 Peter is a consolatory letter.[12] In general, the consensus points to the genre of a letter, but the debate continues around the sub-genre or specific type of letter.

The First Epistle of Peter

Although form-criticism and tradition criticism that point to various forms and themes of the work have their place, the reason the popularity of the letter genre has increased is due to the basic structure and internal evidence of the text itself. Peter Davids recognizes the form of a letter because the book commences with a salutation in 1 Peter 1:1-2, moves to a thanksgiving in 1:3-12, and then proceeds to the body of the letter followed by a summary in 5:8-11, a greeting in 5:12-14, and a benediction in 5:14.[13] Thus, it seems reasonable to conclude that Peter’s work is some form of personal correspondence. Jobes notes that the popularity of a diaspora letter is on the rise and defines the sub-genre as a distinctively Jewish form “written by a recognized spiritual authority who urges a distinctive and holy way of life for those living in a society not conducive to it.”[14] Although the definition certainly fits the overarching perspective of 1 Peter,  Davids agrees with Jobes when asserting that it is questionable whether the diaspora letter can be identified as a distinct genre as the content of such writings are quite diverse.[15] In sum, in agreement with Davids, the genre of 1 Peter is first and foremost a Christian letter to distant churches with overtones that mirror a typical diaspora letter to Israel.[16]

As mentioned above, a relationship exists between the audience and the genre of 1 Peter. The question is whether the personal letter was written to Jewish or Gentile Christians. Upon first impressions, it appears that Peter’s letter is written to Jewish Christians because even the book’s opening salutation appears to reflect the opening of James’s letter written to the twelve tribes of Israel (Jas 1:1). Furthermore, Jesus is described as a cornerstone laid in Zion (1 Pet 2:6), and the recipients are referred to as “a chosen race” and a “holy nation” (1 Pet 2:9). The readers are also referred to as “aliens and strangers” (Pet 2:11). The letter appears to be written to Jewish Christians. However, Michaels points out that a near consensus exists that Peter wrote a personal letter not to Jewish Christians, but to Gentile Christians.[17] On reason for the consensus is that 1 Peter 1:18 refers to its readers as having an empty or futile heritage. Also, after stating that his readers are a chosen race and holy nation, Peter then adds “once you were not a people, but now you are God’s people” (1 Pet 2:10). It would be nearly impossible to think that Peter could refer to ancient Jews with such language. Thus, in agreement with Michaels, 1 Peter was written to Gentile Christians in Asia Minor, but importantly, Peter addressed these recipients “as if they were Jews.”[18] In sum, 1 Peter’s genre is a personal letter written to Gentile Christians facing localized persecution. The implications of the 1 Peter’s genre are significant.

The ramifications of the genre of 1 Peter include personalization and evangelization wrapped up in identity, the latter of which is the ultimate message of 1 Peter 2:4-10. First, the personal nature of the letter reflects the intimate nature of personal identity. When under attack and persecution, it is easy to lose one’s sense of self. The genre of a personal letter allows Peter to encourage recipients who are in need a solid foundation of identity to stand. Second, in the footsteps of Paul, Peter appears to use Jewish language and imagery to both extend a message of hope to all Gentiles, while simultaneously highlighting the grafting of Gentile believers into God’s community through Christ. As Michaels states, “The Jewish past became their past.”[19] The inclusive nature of the Jewish language not only pulls Gentiles into God’s community, but also avoids leaving Jews behind, as the notion of a displaced Israel is nowhere evident in 1 Peter. Finally, and most importantly, Peter’s use of Jewish imagery provides a clear illumination of the newly inaugurated personal identity obtained by the Gentile believers who are described as a chosen race, royal priesthood, and holy nation in Christ Jesus (1 Pet 2:9). It would be difficult to imagine a more appropriate genre than a personal letter to communicate the message of identity to a people under fire.

1 Peter 2:4-10 fits into the argument and presentation of the book as a whole in two significant ways. After the salutations of the first three verses, Peter’s letter commences with a strong statement of renewed identity by stating that God “has cause us to be born again to a living hope through the resurrection of Jesus Christ” (1 Pet 1:3). Accordingly, Caleb Friedeman makes a strong case that 1 Peter 2:4-10 structurally concludes the first major section of the letter, which spotlights the new existence of Peter’s audience.[20] Furthermore, by concluding the identity-focused first section of the letter, 1 Peter 2:4-10 provides the indicative foundation necessary for Peter’s imperative initiatives in the remainder of the book to be built upon. As Jobes explains, with the believer’s new identity intact, Peter is “now ready to instruct his readers how to discharge their role as people chose for God’s own possession.”[21] In sum, the literary genre and structure of the work provide the relevant framework for which to communicate how Peter’s Jewish tradition informs a proper understanding of a believer’s new identity.

Interpretive Analysis

As mentioned above, the transformative initiative presented by Peter in 1:3 comes to a brilliant climax in the imagery provided in 1 Peter 2:4-10. Within the passage, Peter describes the new reality that his audience has been born into, which ultimately has a profound impact not only on how believers see themselves, but also how believers relate to God and others. Peter communicates his message by drawing upon his Jewish tradition, and, more specifically, six Old Testament passages from the Septuagint (LXX). As Jobes explains, Peter “creatively transposes them [the Old Testament passages] in light of the new reality inaugurated by Christ’s resurrection.”[22] Furthermore, the structure of Peter’s thought also affirms the relationship between Christ and humanity by juxtaposing the believers as living stones with Christ as the Living Stone (1 Pet 2:4), juxtaposing the believers as a spiritual house with Christ as its cornerstone (1 Pet 2:5-6), juxtaposing the believers’ absence of shame with Christ’s honor (1 Pet 2:6-7), and, finally, juxtaposing the believers’ new identity with unbelievers’ alternative reality and destiny (1 Pet 2:8-10).

Peter begins the pericope by referencing a building project as follows: “As you come to him, a living stone rejected by men but in the sight of God chosen and precious, you yourselves like living stones are being built up as a spiritual house, to be a holy priesthood, to offer spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ” ( 1 Pet 2:4-5). The initial phrase reflects the language of Psalm 33:6 in the LXX, προσέλθατε πρὸς αὐτὸν καὶ φωτίσθητε: “Come to Him and you will be enlightened” where the same lemma is used in verse 1 Peter 2:4 (προσέρχομαι). The basic idea is that as the Psalmist exhorted Israel to come to Yahweh, in like manner, Peter calls his readers to come to Christ. Nijay Gupta observes that προσέρχομαι is also used in cultic contexts when followers of Yahweh approached the temple of God (see Lev 9:7-8; 21:17-18, 21, 23; 22:3; Heb 4:16; 10:1, 22).[23] However, Peter’s audience is no longer to draw near to a building made of stone or certainly ever to enter the temples of local deities but, instead, come to Jesus Christ through faith.

Peter then introduces and summarizes the stone image in 1 Peter 2:4a. The imagery will be further developed in 1 Peter 2:6-8, but currently the Living Stone appears to be in a state of constant rejection by man since Peter utilizes the perfect tense to describe Christ’s rejection (ἀποδεδοκιμασμένον). Peter’s language appears to intentionally highlight the relationship between the rejection Christ experienced and the rejection and persecution that the Gentile believers faced. Next, Peter clarifies the reality of Christ’s position through the Christological statement that the Living Stone is both chosen and precious to God. Translators often render the preposition παρὰ with the dative (θεῷ) as “in the sight of” God chosen and precious. However, the phrase is not quite strong enough to adequately render the meaning of the preposition. It is not that God “sees” Christ as something that He is not through an adjudicated legal fiction. Instead, from God’s viewpoint and judgement, Christ is, in reality, both chosen and precious, which has significant ramifications for Peter’s readers.[24] Since the Living Stone is chosen and precious, Peter implies that the Gentile believers are also “acceptable to God” as chosen and precious “through Christ” (1 Pet 2:5b). Accordingly, the believers are living stones like the Living Stone. As Gupta explains, “Peter’s intention is to re-map their concept of worth based on the one doing the judging.”[25] At this point, overtones of participatory soteriology become evident. Jobes highlights the concept by stating, “When Peter describes those who come to Jesus Christ as ‘living stones,’ he is implying that their nature derives from the nature of the resurrected Christ.”[26]

Next, Peter explains in 2:5 that the living stones are being built into a spiritual house (οἶκος). A question that remains is what exactly Peter means by house. Jim Sibley explains that οἶκος can refer to a physical building or it can refer to a family or lineage such as the house of David.[27] Witherington is probably correct by noting that Peter may have wanted to refer to both the house as a temple and a family dynasty, which is why ἱερόν was not utilized.[28] In other words, the living stones, the Gentile believing community, is portrayed both as part of the familial lineage of God’s people (cf. 1 Pet 2:9) and God’s temple. The temple is not a literal temple built of stone, but, nonetheless, the dwelling place of God via the Holy Spirit. Once again, Jobes recognizes that the Living Stone’s placement alongside the living stones within the temple implies “the close relationship of Christ with believers and their common nature as human beings,” which is a living organism “by virtue of the resurrection.”[29]

Peter’s next two phrases are intimately connected as the apostle asserts that the living stones are to be priests that offer sacrifices to God. However, one must recognize the necessity of the adjectives for a proper interpretation. The priests must be holy, “a holy priesthood” (1 Pet 2:5). The sacrifices must be spiritual, not physical sacrifices, “spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ” (1 Pet 2:5). As Michaels asserts, it is impossible to dislocate the concept of holiness from the ethical obligations of believers.[30] However, it is also necessary to recognize that the attribute of holiness within the temple in the first century had more to do with God than man. As Jobes explains, it was God’s presence that sanctified or made the Jerusalem temple holy, not the ethical conduct of believers.[31] Similarly, although certainly God’s presence has an ethical component, it is the Holy Spirit that sanctifies or causes believers to be holy via God’s presence (cf. 1 Cor 6:19). The believers’ holiness due to the Spirit’s internalization is another layer in revealing the true identity of the Gentile believers. Believers are to be holy by living a life of holiness from the reality of their holy nature via the inhabitation of the Spirit.

The final question related to 1 Peter 2:4-5 pertains to the nature of the sacrifices offered to God by the holy priests, the living stones. Peter utilizes another key adjective in verse five. The sacrifices offered must be spiritual sacrifices. John Elliot emphasizes acts of praise and thanksgiving as representative of spiritual sacrifices.[32] In a slight contrast, Joel Green accentuates the concept of mutual love regarding spiritual sacrifices.[33] However, in light of Peter’s Gentile audience, Philip Richardson insightfully explores spiritual sacrifices in Hellenistic writings to determine what Peter might have expected his readers to understand. Specifically, Richardson observes that, in Philo’s writings, God does not look upon literal sacrifices, “but on the mind (διάνοια) and willingness of him who offers them.”[34] The Hellenistic perspective also aligns with 1 Peter 1:13, “Therefore, preparing your minds for action and being sober minded.” In other words, spiritual sacrifices are those initiatives that arise from the purity of the mind, which is prompted by the Holy Spirit who empowers upright behavior.[35] In sum, 1 Peter 2:4-5 clearly articulates a believer’s newly forged identity as living stones, chosen and precious, who are holy priests offering spiritual sacrifices by participating in the newly inaugurated reality revealed through Christ Jesus.

Peter now utilizes the Hebrew Scriptures to shore up his arguments. He begins by citing Isaiah’s prophecy, “For it stands in Scripture, ‘Behold, I am laying in Zion a stone, a cornerstone chosen and precious, and whoever believes in him will not be put to shame’” (1 Pet 2:6). Peter’s words are a clear allusion to Isaiah 28:16, “Therefore thus says the Lord God, ‘Behold, I am the one who has laid as a foundation in Zion, a stone, a tested stone, a precious cornerstone, of a sure foundation.’” Peter’s point is that when God used Isaiah to prophecy that a cornerstone would be laid as a solid foundation for Zion, the prophet was pointing forward to the building constructed in 1 Peter 2:5: The building comprised of Christ as the Living Cornerstone and believers as the living stones.[36] In light of the persecution and suffering experienced by the Gentile believers, Peter solidifies his message of hope through the words of Isaiah that those who believe in Christ as their foundation will never be rejected and never be put to shame. In other words, the worth, value, and identity of the believers resides in Christ and not in the opinion of the pagan people who are persecuting and ridiculing them.

Certain scholars have highlighted the possibility of an exegetically significant difference between Peter’s quote in verse six and the LXX. Specifically, the LXX states, “Behold, I am the one who has laid (ἐμβαλῶ) as a foundation in Zion” (Isa 28:16a); however, Peter states, “Behold, I am laying (τίθημι) in Zion a stone” (1 Pet 2:6). Paul Himes provides three reasons for asserting that Peter’s modification of the verb was likely deliberate, which include lexical, contextual, and structural reasons.[37] Lexically, Himes notes that ἐμβάλλω normally means throwing or casting and often has a negative connotation (e.g., Luke 12:5; Gen 37:22); contextually, ἐμβάλλω never has the connotation of appointment but τίθημι does; and, structurally, Peter uses the term τίθημι to frame verse 6-8 and highlight the contrast between believers and unbelievers.[38] It does not appear unreasonable that Peter deliberately utilized the term τίθημι instead of ἐμβάλλω, but not for the purpose of changing the meaning of the LXX but, instead, for the purpose of illuminating the messianic nature of the prophecy in Isaiah within Peter’s Jewish tradition in order for his readers to better understand Isaiah’s original intent.

Peter now moves in a different direction, and, for the first time within the pericope, he focuses on unbelievers by stating, “So the honor is for you who believe, but for those who do not believe, ‘The stone that the builders rejected has become the cornerstone’” (1 Pet 2:7). The key concept in the first phrase is the term honor. Jobes explains that the believers’ honor “is a share in the honor that God has bestowed on Christ, with whom they are united in the spiritual house.”[39] Once again, Peter alludes to the benefits of a believer’s union and participation in Christ and one of those benefits was honor. Peter seems to emphasize the term honor as a way of spotlighting the ironic contrast that his audience faced. The Gentile believers likely experienced shame from their pagan society while desiring honor; however, Peter is teaching his readers that they are the ones experiencing honor, and the pagans are the ones experiencing shame. Peter recognizes that if his audience understands that their identity resides in Christ and not in the opinions of their persecutors, then they will not only be honored by God, but will also experience the honor lavished on them in Christ.

In 1 Peter 2:7b, Peter quotes Psalm 118:22, which states, “The stone that the builders rejected has become the cornerstone.” Peter applies the Psalmist’s words to unbelievers as those who have rejected the Cornerstone, Jesus Christ. The quote from the Psalter also occurs in the Gospels (Mark 12:10; Matt 21:42; Luke 20:17). Michaels explains that the builders referred to in the Psalm applies to the Jewish religious leaders in the gospels, but, for Peter, the builders who reject the Cornerstone include any unbeliever, but specifically include the citizens of Rome who were harassing the Gentile believers.[40] Ultimately, as I. Howard Marshall summarizes, the quotation from Psalm 118 functions to assist Peter’s message that since the rejection of Christ was predicted in the Hebrew Scriptures, it should come as no surprise that their pagan friends would also reject Christ.[41] Peter, once again, provides comfort to the Gentile believers experiencing torment from other’s opinions and persecution by showing how his Jewish tradition informs a proper understanding of his readers’ new identity.

Peter immediately moves into providing another Old Testament quote by stating that to unbelievers, Christ is not a cornerstone, but instead, a “stone of stumbling, a rock of offense (σκανδάλου)” (1 Pet 2:8a). The quotation is an allusion to Isaiah 8:14, “And he [the Lord] will become a sanctuary and a stone of offense and a rock of stumbling to both houses of Israel.” Peter focuses only on the portion of Isaiah 8:14 that addresses those who reject the stone. When reflecting upon Jesus’s accusation that Peter, as the rock, was also a rock of offense (σκάνδαλον+), it is difficult to miss the irony (Matt 16:23). However, Peter’s point, as Jobes recognizes, is that each individual has the opportunity to either reject or embrace Christ, the Cornerstone.[42]

Once Peter finishes quoting Isaiah 8:14, he then provides one of the most controversial statements within the pericope: “They stumble because they disobey the word, as they were destined to do” (1 Pet 2:8b). The first phrase is rather straightforward; Peter relates the rejection of the Cornerstone with sin. Rejection of Christ is not an amoral decision based on individual religious preferences but, instead, a decision that has both internally ontological and externally ethical ramifications as the Spirit’s inhabitation not only changes the believer’s spiritual DNA but also their motives and behavior (cf. Rom 4:1-25; Gal 3:6-29). The second phrase is less straightforward. The phrase, εἰς ὃ καὶ ἐτέθησαν, translated “as they were destined to do” (1 Pet 2:8b) by the ESV points to God’s intent. Did God intend, destine, or determine (ἐτέθησαν) that certain individuals would stumble and disobey by rejecting Christ? The larger context of Scripture suggests otherwise (cf. Ezek 33:11; 1 Tim 2:4). Helpfully, Armin Panning recognizes that Peter uses τίθημι in 2:6 to convey the appointment of the Cornerstone and to simultaneously communicate the result of the appointment: Believers “will not be put to shame” (1 Pet 2:6b).[43] Accordingly, by applying the same logic to the use of the verb τίθημι in 2:8b, Armin contends that it is not the appointment to unbelief that is determined but the resultant punishment for unbelief that is determined.[44] Scot McKnight summarizes the concept well by stating, “God’s act of appointing Jesus as the living Stone has become both honor for believers and judgement for unbelievers; this was God’s design, and everything happens according to his will.”[45]

Peter now moves toward a flurried climax in 2:9-10 through the use of several identity designations that might remind the modern reader of Tchaikovsky’s conclusion to his 1812 Overture. The rapid-fire sequence of identity commences as follows: “But you are a chosen race (γένος), a royal priesthood, a holy nation (ἔθνος), a people (λαὸς) for his own possession” (1 Pet 2:9a). Peter draws heavily from Exodus 19:5-6, which states, “You shall be my treasured possession among all peoples … and you shall be to me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation.” Peter clearly applies three key terms of ethnic identity to Christians and the Church: γένος, ἔθνος, and λαὸς. In other words, as Gupta explains, Peter links and transfers the imagery and identity of his Jewish tradition onto Christians.[46] David Horrell observes that most commentators focus on appropriating Israel’s identity in terms of ecclesiological or Jewish character designations, but they often lack focus on ethnoracial terms of identity as presented by Peter.[47] Based on the ethnic categories utilized by Peter (γένος, ἔθνος, and λαὸς), Horrell convincingly argues that, although Christian identity draws on a Jewish tradition applied to ecclesiology, it is better to utilize the language of ethnicity and race to refer to the new identity appropriated by Christians through Christ.[48] Denise Kimber Buell agrees by stating, “Early Christians perceived ethnicity/race as concepts flexible enough to encompass both the radical transformation of identity attributed to the conversion process and the stability of identity hoped for in its wake.”[49] The payoff is significant. If Peter’s identity-designations move beyond ecclesiological categories and into an ethnoracial reality, then the door opens to the possibility that Peter is more aligned with the participatory soteriology that Paul engages so forcefully in his letters. In other words, Peter may be pointing toward an ontological “in Christ” reality that occurs through both a common spiritual race and a common spiritual culture appropriated via the infusion of the Holy Spirit.[50]

Peter’s next step is to explain the result of the newly forged identity: “So that you may proclaim the excellencies of him who called you out of darkness into his marvelous light” (1 Pet 2:9b). Gupta insightfully connects the dots between the role of the priesthood and the missional focus of Peter’s initiative; the priests have the job of proclaiming.[51] Channeling Luther, Jobes points out that all believers with their newly forged identity are to not only offer spiritual sacrifices, but also proclaim their new in Christ reality to all the nations, thus playing their part in the inauguration of Christ’s “on earth as it is in heaven” existence (Matt 6:10).[52] In sum, informed by Peter’s Jewish tradition, all believers are grafted into an ethnoracial reality of God’s people via their newly forged identity for the purpose of proclaiming Christ.

Peter completes the book’s opening salvo with a final recapitulation of identity by reengaging the topic of God’s possession of His people, “Once you were not a people, but now you are God’s people; once you had not received mercy, but now you have received mercy” (1 Pet 2:10). Peter’s words appear to be a clear allusion to Hosea 2:23, “And I will have mercy on No Mercy, and I will say to Not My People, ‘You are my people’; and he shall say, ‘You are my God’” (Hos 2:23). Peter appears to be arguing that his audience is the fulfillment of the prophetic words spoken by Hosea, which is another clear application of Peter’s Jewish tradition. The message of Hosea was traditionally viewed as God’s promise to reconstitute the Jewish people sent into exile. However, God had something much more expansive in mind. As Jobes eloquently and summarily explains, “God’s regathered royal priesthood and holy nation – his newly chosen race, according to Peter – would be those who had been reborn as the children, not of Abraham, but of God the Father himself through the resurrection of Jesus Christ.”[53] Without question, the totality of 1 Peter 2:4-10 points back to Peter’s Jewish tradition to inform and illuminate the believer’s new identity forged through participating in Christ Jesus. Peter’s audience is to understand themselves not as society perceives them, but as they really are in Christ Jesus.

Canonical Analysis

A comprehensive intertextual analysis of 1 Peter 2:4-10 is beyond the scope of this brief study. However, a few important Old and New Testament connections will provide insight into the passage from a canonical perspective. Although numerous Old Testament echoes, allusions, and quotes have already been explored above due to the nature of the pericope, one more is worth mentioning. The remainder of the canonical analysis will focus on New Testament connections.

Regarding the Old Testament, it was noted above that the language of 1 Peter 2:9, which referred to a chosen race, a royal priesthood, and God’s possession, were clear allusions to Exodus 19:5-6. However, D. A. Carson emphasizes that Peter’s language also draws from Isaiah 43 in the LXX, “… to give drink to my chosen race (γένος), my people (λαόν) whom I have preserved” (Isa 43:20-21, translation mine).[54] Peter takes the idea of a chosen race, Abraham’s descendants, as spoken by Isaiah and applies it directly to his Christian readers. Furthermore, the language of God’s people (λαόν) in Isaiah 43 is also reflected in Peter’s words in 1 Peter 2:9a and, according to Carson, highlights God’s desire to rescue the exiled Jews, which is exactly what Peter has in mind for his Christian readers.[55] The allusion to Isaiah 43 provides an additional layer of support, alongside Exodus 19:5-6, for Peter’s argument, which is the appropriateness of drawing on his Jewish tradition to inform his readers’ understanding of their new identity.

The New Testament also provides several relevant echoes and allusions to 1 Peter 2:4-10. First, two literarily relevant near passages written by Peter are located in 1 Peter 1:1 and 5:13. The former refers to the “elect exile of the Dispersion” (1 Pet 1:1, ESV). The latter verse sends greetings from “Babylon,” which appears to be a symbolic reference to the capital of the exile (1 Pet 5:13). The significance of the Dispersion and Babylon reference is to highlight Peter’s continuous effort to link his Jewish tradition to his Christian readers in an attempt to clearly communicate their new identity in 1 Peter 2:4-10.

Moving literarily further away but still within the words of Peter, it is difficult to avoid a conversation around the references to stones within the New Testament. In response to inquiries asked by the high-priestly families in Jerusalem, Peter states, “This Jesus is the stone that was rejected by you, the builders, which has become the cornerstone” (Act 4:11-12). In Acts, Peter applies the concepts in Isaiah 8:14 and 28:16 to the Jewish people. However, the context of 1 Peter 2:4-10 expands and suggests that the “stone of stumbling” applies to any and all who reject Christ (1 Pet 2:8a). Jobes also observes that the source for Peter’s stone imagery was likely Jesus Himself in light of the references in the Synoptics (Mark 12:10-11; Matt 21:42-44; Luke 20:17-18).[56] The significance of the intertextual relationships is that it adds credibility to Peter’s message of identity in 1 Peter 2:6-8 when his audience recognizes his language aligns with various other sources including the words of Jesus (see also Rom 9:32-33; Eph 2:20-22). Ultimately, in 1 Peter 2:4-10, the echoes, allusions, and quotes of Old and New Testament passages are weaved together into a beautiful mosaic that provides reciprocal beams of light, illuminating both the meaning of the author and the understanding of the recipient.

Application

Walking across the 1 Peter 2:4-10 hermeneutical bridge is likely a rather straightforward affair for anyone who has struggled with the emotional angst that occurs when living for the opinion of others or being somehow belittled for not going along with the crowd. As adolescents, youth ministries might call it succumbing to peer pressure but, as the believer ages, often very little changes. A friend once defined the devil’s biggest lie as follows: “My value and worth come from my performance plus other peoples’ opinions.”[57] A friend, a relative, a co-worker looks down on the believer, and she immediately begins to question her value and worth. She feels as if she must be less valuable than other people. She does not think or feel that she is good enough. Inevitably, the people around her will likely try to convince her that if she only thought, felt, or acted the way they did, then she would be good enough. It appears that Peter’s audience was facing the same issue that most believers face today. The early Christians were likely experiencing the emotional wear and tear that arises from being constantly berated and belittled by the opinions of others. Peter’s answer to his readers is just as applicable and effective today as it was a couple thousand years ago. Believers are not who others say they are; their identity is not based on other people’s opinions. Instead, a believer is who God says they are. They are children of God. They are heirs to the throne. In Peter’s words, they are “a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people for his own possession” (1 Pet 2:9). The way a believer thinks about herself must align with the way God thinks about her; otherwise, the believer is not aligning her thinking with God’s truth. Accordingly, Christian counseling and Christian discipleship are fields ripe for the application of Peter’s message. When a counselor or mentor highlights the reality of a believer’s identity in Christ via the inhabitation of the Holy Spirit, rather than the delusion of placing one’s identity and worth in the opinions of others, then freedom is just around the corner (cf. Gal 1:10; 5:1).

Conclusion

Peter’s letter of hope to the distant persecuted believers is much more than a pep talk or a simple word of encouragement to a group of Gentile Christians. Peter moves well beyond motivational speaking and into the realm of intertextual exegesis, ancestral heritage, and practical solutions. Peter’s masterful use of the Old Testament not only assists his readers in understanding his own Jewish heritage, but, more importantly, it allows his audience to re-map their understanding of themselves as God’s people through their spiritual ancestry. Without question, in 1 Peter 2:4-10, the Apostle Peter shows how his Jewish tradition informs a proper understanding of a believer’s new identity in Christ through the internalization of the Holy Spirit. Peter pounds home the message that his beloved readers are not who their persecutors say they are, but, instead, they are who God says they are. They are chosen; they are precious; they are living stones; they are building blocks; they are a holy priesthood; they are honored; they are a chosen race; they are a royal priesthood; they are a holy nation; they are possessed by God; they are God’s people; and they are recipients of mercy. The practical implication of the believers’ new identity in Christ is freedom – a freedom that provides an escape route from the debilitating persecution and opinions of others. Peter has provided God’s solution to mankind’s identity crisis and now is the time for modern believers to appropriate their identity in Christ and live accordingly.

_________________________________

[1] J. Ramsey Michaels, 1 Peter, ed. David Allen Hubbard and Glenn W. Barker, vol. 49, Word Biblical Commentary (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Academic, 2018), lxiii.

[2] Steve H Mathews, “Rhetorical Criticism for Expository Preaching: An Analysis of 1 Peter 2:4-10,” Journal of Biblical Theology 5, no. 3 (July 2022): 59–61.

[3] Karen H. Jobes, 1 Peter, Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2005), 19.

[4] Michaels, 1 Peter, 49:lviii–lxi.

[5] Mathews, “Rhetorical Criticism for Expository Preaching,” 62.

[6] Paul J. Achtemeier, 1 Peter: A Commentary on First Peter, ed. Eldon Jay Epp, Hermeneia (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1996), 28–32.

[7] Ibid., 34–36.

[8] Will Robinson and Stephen R. Llewelyn, “The Fictitious Audience of 1 Peter,” The Heythrop Journal 61, no. 6 (2020): 939.

[9] Jobes, 1 Peter, 22.

[10] Ibid.

[11] Mark Dubis, “Research on 1 Peter: A Survey of Scholarly Literature since 1985,” Currents in Biblical Research 4, no. 2 (February 2006): 206.

[12] Ibid., 206–7.

[13] Peter H. Davids, The First Epistle of Peter, 2nd ed., The New International Commentary on the New Testament (Eerdmans, 1990), 13.

[14] Jobes, 1 Peter, 54.

[15] Davids, The First Epistle of Peter, 14.

[16] Ibid.

[17] Michaels, 1 Peter, 49:xlvi.

[18] Michaels, 1 Peter, 49:xlvi. For a robust analysis contra Michaels, which asserts an audience of Jewish believers, see Jim R Sibley, “You Talkin’ to Me? 1 Peter 2:4–10 and a Theology of Israel,” Southwestern Journal of Theology 59, no. 1 (Fall 2016).

[19] Ibid., 49:l.

[20] Caleb T. Friedeman, “The Rhetorical Design of 1 Peter 2,9-10,” Biblica 101, no. 1 (2020): 124, 130–31.

[21] Jobes, 1 Peter, 164.

[22] Jobes, 1 Peter, 142. For a detailed intertextual analysis pertaining to stone passages, see Jocelyn A Williams, “A Case Study in Intertextuality: The Place of Isaiah in the ‘Stone’ Sayings of 1 Peter 2,” The Reformed Theological Review 66, no. 1 (April 2007).

[23] Nijay K. Gupta, “A Spiritual House of Royal Priests, Chosen and Honored: The Presence and Function of Cultic Imagery in 1 Peter,” Perspectives in Religious Studies 36, no. 1 (2009): 71.

[24] For the various uses of παρὰ  with the dative case, see William Arndt et al., A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature, 3rd ed. (Chicago: University of Chicago, 2000), 757.

[25] Gupta, “A Spiritual House of Royal Priests, Chosen and Honored,” 71.

[26] Jobes, 1 Peter, 148. The intention here is not to suggest a form of theosis, but that 1 Peter 2:4-10 appears to move beyond a forensic understanding of salvation and into a new spiritual reality participating in Christ via the inhabitation of the Spirit.

[27] Sibley, “You Talkin’ to Me? 1 Peter 2:4–10 and a Theology of Israel,” 72.

[28] Ben Witherington, III, Letters and Homilies for Hellenized Christians: A Socio-Rhetorical Commentary on 1-2 Peter (Downers Grove: IVP Academic, 2010), 114–15.

[29] Jobes, 1 Peter, 148–49.

[30] Michaels, 1 Peter, 49:101.

[31] Jobes, 1 Peter, 149.

[32] John H. Elliott, 1 Peter: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary, Anchor Bible (New York: Anchor Bible, 2001), 422.

[33] Joel B. Green, 1 Peter, Two Horizons New Testament Commentary (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 2007), 61.

[34] Philip Richardson, “What Are the Spiritual Sacrifices of 1 Peter 2:5?: Some Light from Philo of Alexandria,” The Evangelical Quarterly 87, no. 1 (January 2015): 10. See also the connection between the mind and presenting sacrifices to God in Romans 12:1-2.

[35] Ibid., 16.

[36] At no time does 1 Peter 2:4-10 place Peter himself into a foundational role in the building, contra Roman Catholic tradition. See Jobes, 1 Peter, 151.

[37] Paul A. Himes, “Why Did Peter Change the Septuagint?: A Reexamination of the Significance of the Use of Τίθημι in 1 Peter 2:6,” Bulletin for Biblical Research 26, no. 2 (2016): 237–41.

[38] Ibid., 237–44.

[39] Jobes, 1 Peter, 152. See also Francis W. Beare, The First Epistle of Peter, 3rd ed. (Oxford: Blackwell, 1970), 124.

[40] Michaels, 1 Peter, 49:105.

[41] I. Howard Marshall, 1 Peter, The IVP New Testament Commentary Series (Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 1991), 73.

[42] Jobes, 1 Peter, 153–54.

[43] Armin J. Panning, “What Has Been Determined (Ετέθησαν) in 1 Peter 2:8?,” Wisconsin Lutheran Quarterly 98, no. 1 (2001): 50–52.

[44] Ibid.

[45] Scot McKnight, 1 Peter, The NIV Application Commentary (Grand Rapids: Zondervan Academic, 1996), 109.

[46] Gupta, “A Spiritual House of Royal Priests, Chosen and Honored,” 73.

[47] David G. Horrell, “‘Race’, ‘Nation’, ‘People’: Ethnic Identity-Construction in 1 Peter 2.9,” New Testament Studies 58, no. 1 (January 2012): 124.

[48] Ibid., 138, 143.

[49] Denise Kimber Buell, “Race and Universalism in Early Christianity,” Journal of Early Christian Studies 10, no. 4 (2002): 436.

[50] Once again, the ontological change is not a form of deification or theosis, but instead an ontological transformation of being occurring within man’s spirit (cf. Rom 8:16).

[51] Gupta, “A Spiritual House of Royal Priests, Chosen and Honored,” 74.

[52] Jobes, 1 Peter, 160-61. Note that Jobes clarifies that the point of Luther’s initiative was neither to encourage nor deny clerical authority, but to highlight the theme of obedience as presented in Exodus 19.  For further reflections on the relationship between the missional hermeneutics and participatory soteriology, see Michael J. Gorman, Becoming the Gospel: Paul, Participation, and Mission (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2015).

[53] Jobes, 1 Peter, 164.

[54] D. A. Carson, “1 Peter,” in Commentary on the New Testament Use of the Old Testament (Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2007), 1030.

[55] Ibid., 1031.

[56] Jobes, 1 Peter, 146.

[57] Prior to his death, I had the opportunity to briefly work together with Robert McGee, and I owe him a debt of gratitude for his work in applying the gospel to our everyday lives through an understanding of a believer’s identity in Christ. See Robert McGee, The Search For Significance: Seeing Your True Worth Through God’s Eyes, Revised. (Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 2003), 100.

Bibliography

• Achtemeier, Paul J. 1 Peter: A Commentary on First Peter. Edited by Eldon Jay Epp. Hermeneia. Minneapolis: Fortress, 1996.
• Arndt, William, Frederick W. Danker, Walter Bauer, and F. Wilbur Gingrich. A Greek-English Lexicon of the New Testament and Other Early Christian Literature. 3rd ed. Chicago: University of Chicago, 2000.
• Beare, Francis W. The First Epistle of Peter. 3rd ed. Oxford: Blackwell, 1970.
• Buell, Denise Kimber. “Race and Universalism in Early Christianity.” Journal of Early Christian Studies 10, no. 4 (2002): 429–468.
• Carson, D. A. “1 Peter.” In Commentary on the New Testament Use of the Old Testament, 1015–1044. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2007.
• Davids, Peter H. The First Epistle of Peter. 2nd ed. The New International Commentary on the New Testament. Eerdmans, 1990.
• Dubis, Mark. “Research on 1 Peter: A Survey of Scholarly Literature since 1985.” Currents in Biblical Research 4, no. 2 (February 2006): 199–239.
• Elliott, John H. 1 Peter: A New Translation with Introduction and Commentary. Anchor Bible. New York: Anchor Bible, 2001.
• Friedeman, Caleb T. “The Rhetorical Design of 1 Peter 2,9-10.” Biblica 101, no. 1 (2020): 124–131.
• Gorman, Michael J. Becoming the Gospel: Paul, Participation, and Mission. Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2015.
• Green, Joel B. 1 Peter. Two Horizons New Testament Commentary. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 2007.
• Gupta, Nijay K. “A Spiritual House of Royal Priests, Chosen and Honored: The Presence and Function of Cultic Imagery in 1 Peter.” Perspectives in Religious Studies 36, no. 1 (2009): 61–76.
• Himes, Paul A. “Why Did Peter Change the Septuagint?: A Reexamination of the Significance of the Use of Τίθημι in 1 Peter 2:6.” Bulletin for Biblical Research 26, no. 2 (2016): 227–244.
• Horrell, David G. “‘Race’, ‘Nation’, ‘People’: Ethnic Identity-Construction in 1 Peter 2.9.” New Testament Studies 58, no. 1 (January 2012): 123–143.
• Jobes, Karen H. 1 Peter. Baker Exegetical Commentary on the New Testament. Grand Rapids: Baker Academic, 2005.
• Marshall, I. Howard. 1 Peter. The IVP New Testament Commentary Series. Downers Grove: InterVarsity, 1991.
• Mathews, Steve H. “Rhetorical Criticism for Expository Preaching: An Analysis of 1 Peter 2:4-10.” Journal of Biblical Theology 5, no. 3 (July 2022): 55–75.
• McGee, Robert. The Search For Significance: Seeing Your True Worth Through God’s Eyes. Revised. Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 2003.
• McKnight, Scot. 1 Peter. The NIV Application Commentary. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Academic, 1996.
• Michaels, J. Ramsey. 1 Peter. Edited by David Allen Hubbard and Glenn W. Barker. Vol. 49. Word Biblical Commentary. Grand Rapids: Zondervan Academic, 2018.
• Panning, Armin J. “What Has Been Determined (Ετέθησαν) in 1 Peter 2:8?” Wisconsin Lutheran Quarterly 98, no. 1 (2001): 48–52.
• Richardson, Philip. “What Are the Spiritual Sacrifices of 1 Peter 2:5?: Some Light from Philo of Alexandria.” The Evangelical Quarterly 87, no. 1 (January 2015): 3–17.
• Robinson, Will, and Stephen R. Llewelyn. “The Fictitious Audience of 1 Peter.” The Heythrop Journal 61, no. 6 (2020): 939–950.
• Sibley, Jim R. “You Talkin’ to Me? 1 Peter 2:4–10 and a Theology of Israel.” Southwestern Journal of Theology 59, no. 1 (Fall 2016): 59–75.
• Williams, Jocelyn A. “A Case Study in Intertextuality: The Place of Isaiah in the ‘Stone’ Sayings of 1 Peter 2.” The Reformed Theological Review 66, no. 1 (April 2007): 37–55.
• Witherington, III, Ben. Letters and Homilies for Hellenized Christians: A Socio-Rhetorical Commentary on 1-2 Peter. Downers Grove: IVP Academic, 2010.