I PETER II 4-10 — A RECONSIDERATION

BY

ERNEST BEST
St Andrews

This passage has received increasing attention m recent years and

the publication of one book wholly devoted to it *) and of two
others 2) which discuss it from their own particular slants in addition
to many articles 3 ) would appear to offer the occasion for a re-
examination of certain aspects of it.
Structure of the passage
As over against SELWYN 4) we must accept ELLIOTT'S argument 5 )
that neither ii 4-10 nor any portion of it represents a primitive hymn
quoted by P e t e r 6 ) . Few of the normal characteristics of early
Christian hymns appear 7 ). Nor can we argue that Peter derived
vv. 6-10 from a book of O.T. testimonies ; the existence of such a
book at this stage in the history of the Christian church is doubt-
ful 8 ) .
Vv. 4 f., the direct composition of Peter, are followed in vv. 6-8 by
the quotation of three O.T. texts (Isa. x x v i i i i ó ; ψ c x v i i 2 2 ; Isa.
viii 14 f.) interspersed with explanatory comments from Peter
and again in vv. 9 f. by the use of three more O.T. texts (Isa. xliii
20 f.; Ex. x i x 6 ; Hos. Ü25); these last three are not quoted so
1
) J H. ELLIOTT, The Elect and the Holy (Supplements to Ν Τ XII), Leiden,
1966
2
) Β GARTNER, The Temple and the Community τη Qumran and the New
Testament (Society for New Testament Studies, Monograph Series 1),
Cambridge 1965, Β LINDARS, New Testament Apologetic, London, 1961
3
) There is a most comprehensive bibliography in ELLIOTT, pp 231 ff
4
) E G. S E L W Y N , The First Epistle of Peter, L o n d o n , 1947, p p 268-81
5
) P P 133 ff
e
) The name Peter is used for reasons of convenience though the epistle is
not to be attributed to the Apostle Peter, see my forthcoming commentary
on 1 Peter in the New Century Bible
7
) R Ρ MARTIN, ''Aspects of Worship m the New Testament Church" in
Vox Evangelica II (ed R. Ρ Martin), London, 1963, pp 17 f
8
) C Η D O D D , According to the Scriptures, L o n d o n , 1952, Κ S T E N D A H L ,
The School of Matthew, Lund, 1954, PP 2°5~τ7 However recent discoveries
at Qumran have re-opened the possibility
 I PETER II 4-IO — A RECONSIDERATION 27I

directly as the others (Isa. xliii 20 f. and Ex. xix 6 are interlaced
and there is a possible reference to Isa. ix 2 ; only a few key-words
of Hos. ii 25 are given). All six texts are taken from the LXX.
What is the relationship of the O.T. texts to the words of Peter?
Vv. 4 f. and the later phrases of Peter may be regarded as midrashic
comment on the O.T. texts, vv. 4 f. in particular being regarded as
1
introductory to them ) , or the O.T. passages may be viewed as
proof texts of the statement made by Peter in vv. 4 f. etc. I n the
former case vv. 4 f. are to be interpreted in the light of the following
O.T. quotations ; in the latter case vv. 4 f. control the interpretation
of the quotations. These views are not in fact as far apart from one
another as they appear to be when set down as alternatives, nor are
they the sole possible views. The relationship of the beliefs of the
early church to the O.T. is complex; the first Christians did not
come to accept the unique position of Jesus because of what they
read in the O.T., nor after forming their conceptions in isolation
from it did they then seek confirmation fcr these conceptions in its
words. There were times when they used the words of Scripture to
confirm what they had already found to be true in their Christian
experience and times when through the conceptions of the O.T.
they came to understand their own experience more adequately
and to express it more worthily. Both of these aspects are present
in ii 4-10.
To see this we have first to examine how Peter used the O.T. in
his letter. (He invariably uses the LXX or an allied text). Leaving
ii 4-10 temporarily aside we see t h a t he makes formal quotations
of the O.T. at i 16, i 24-5, iii 10-12, iv 18, ν 5.
i 16 quotes Lev. xix 2. Prefaced by διότι γέγραπται it re-expresses
what has already been said in i 15 and does not introduce any
conception not already present therein, i 15 for its part is somewhat
stronger than i 16 in the extent of holiness to which it calls and in
the reference to God as the one who calls; moreover i 15 follows
naturally from i 13-14. I t is not therefore anticipatory midrashic
comment for i 16; the latter confirms the former and is not pro­
ductive of it.
x
) There is " a dependence of the formulation in vv. 4 f. upon that of
vv. 6-7 and 9. For two strata of formulation are evident whereby vv. 6-7(8)
and 9(10) represent a primary layer close to the wording of the O.T. and
vv. 4 f. a secondary stage of reflected reformulation. That is, vv. 4-5 offer an
interpretation of the O.T. passages adduced in vv. 6-7 and 9". (ELLIOTT,
p . 20; cf. p p . 17, 22 a n d S E L W Y N p p . 269, 280).
272 ERNEST BEST

The quotation of Isa. xl 6-8 sustains in its last line the reference
in i 23 to the abiding word of God, though the Isaianic quotation
uses ρήμα and not λόγος. The reference to the word of God in i 23
developes out of the reference to rebirth in i 22-3 (cf. James i 18
for the idea) and is not suggested by Isa. xl 6-8 which does not
contain the conception of rebirth. Thus Isa. xl 6-8 is used to confirm
an idea already present in the context. There are some variations
in the LXX text of Isa. xl 6-8 at this point: the addition of ως; the
alteration of του θεοΰ ημών to κυρίου and of άνθρωπου to αυτής. These
may have been present in the text used by P e t e r 1 ) .
iii 10-12 come from ψ xxxiii 12-16; the second person singular
has been changed to the third person singular, probably consequent
upon the reading of ψ xxxiii 13 as a statement and not a question.
I Pet. iii 8-9 is either the concluding verses of the Haustafel (ii 3-
iii 7) or else a general statement of Christian behaviour in relation
to others, which Peter has added to it. The sentiments of v. 8,
though not expressed in exactly the same word, coincide with
similar sentiments in other epistles 2 ) ; v. 9 is similar to Rom. xii 14;
1 Thess. ν 15 and the words of Jesus in Luke vi 27-8. Since then
both these verses are part of the general paraenesis of the church
they are not derived from vv. 10-12, and indeed there is little
verbal or conceptual similarity apart from the general thought of
the avoidance of evil and the performance of good. Vv. 10-12 thus
confirm the general theme of the whole Haustafel and of iii 8-9 in
particular (note the introductory γαρ), and also supply a motive
for right action in iii 12. What precedes them is not midrashic
material preparing for them ; the course of the argument would not
really be affected if the quotation from the Psalm were omitted.
iv 18 comes from Pro v. xi 31 (the omission of μέν is the only
alteration), iv 17a is appropriate to the theme of a period of escha-
tological suffering about to overtake the church; iv 17b consoles
those who will endure it and proceeds naturally from i ν 17a, granted
t h a t there is consolation in seeing judgement fall upon others (and
this seems to be assumed), iv 18 again contrasts judgement in
relation to believers and unbelievers; it thus supports iv 17a and
iv 17b but would not itself have been productive of iv 17. Since
there is no indication that Peter is quoting at this point, not even an
x
) So F . J . A. H O R T , The First Epistle of St. Peter 1.1-11.17, L o n d o n , 1898.
2
) W . F . B E A R E , The First Epistle of Peter, Oxford, 1947, a d l o c ; S E L W Y N ,
p p . 412 f.
 I PETER II 4 - I O — A RECONSIDERATION 273

introductory γάρ, it may be t h a t iv 18 should not be regarded as a

formal quotation but rather resemble a use of the O.T. to which we
shall shortly t u r n ; in it Peter uses O.T. words and clauses to
advance his argument ; there is not, however, very much new in v. 18
over and above what is found in v. 17.
ν 5b quotes Prov. iii 34 in exactly the same form as in Jas. iv 6
(θεός replaces κύριος). The sequence of thought within v. 5 is
natural ; v. 5a after commanding the obedience of the 'younger' to
the 'elders' emphasises the need for humility on the part of all, and
then supports this in v. 5b with the quotation which refers to
humility. This leads on to v. 6 which continues the thought of
humility in relation to God. The quotation does then at this point
carry forward the argument but it is in preparation for v. 6 rather
than as that which is commented on in advance in v. 5a.
Apart from these direct quotations which generally confirm what
has preceded there are a good many passages where O.T. phrases
and clauses are worked into the course of the argument χ ) . Did we
not know the O.T. we would be unable to pick them out from
Peter's own words because they are not introduced by any formula
of quotation and are an integral part of the argument. Even though
with the help of the O.T. we can isolate them we cannot be certain
that Peter when he used them was consciously aware t h a t he was
using O.T. words; they may have passed from the O.T. into the
general diction of the early church and Peter have adopted them as
words and phrases known to his fellow-Christians. I t is probable,
however, t h a t he knew most of them came from the O.T., and this
must be certainly true of the longer ones. By using O.T. words and
phrases in place of his own he is obviously giving to his own argu­
ments t h a t authority which he allowed the O.T. to possess. I t is
indeed remarkable how many quotations, direct and indirect,
there are in 1 Peter. The only Pauline epistle which has more is
Romans; both 1 and 2 Corinthians have fewer though they are
actually much longer than 1 Peter. The other books which have
more are the synoptic Gospels, Acts, Hebrews and Revelation. I n
proportion to length Revelation is the only book to exceed 1 Peter
in its frequency of use of the O.T. ; Hebrews has about the same
proportion as 1 Peter.
x
) T o d e t e r m i n e t h e m I h a v e used t h e list given in W E S T C O T T a n d H O R T ,
checking i t a g a i n s t t h o s e given in h e a v y b l a c k t y p e in N E S T L E (22nd edn.),
and as a r e s u l t a d d i n g a reference in i 25.

Novum Test. XI 18
274 ERNEST BEST

Only one of those listed by W H ought to be omitted: i 23, ζώντος

θεοΰ και μένοντος, for the participles should be taken here with λόγου
and not θεοΰ ; the allusion to Dan. vi 26 thus disappears. The
remainder are i 17, 18, 25b, ii 3, 11, 12, 17, 22, 24, 25, iii 6a, 6b, 14 f.
22, iv 8, 14, 17, ν 7. Of these only two are independent clauses:
(a) ii 3 which quotes ψ xxxiii 9 ; in using it και ΐδετε has been drop­
ped and γεύσασθε changed to έγεύσασθε. Thus adapted the O.T.
words are used within the argument; they neither confirm what
preceded nor were commented on in it.
(b) ii 22 is from Isa. liii 9 and there are in ii 24 f. further allusions
to this chapter of Isaiah. In utilizing Isa. liii 9 Peter has changed
άνομίαν to άμαρτίαν which adapts it to his argument ; otherwise the
quotation follows one form of the LXX text ; probably Peter knew
this variant text since there is no apparent motive for the change
within his context. In ii 18 ff. Peter adduces the example of Christ's
sufferings to those Christian servants who have to endure hard
masters, and having introduced these sufferings he goes on beyond
the immediate point to speak of their redemptive value. The
example of Christ is thus given in O.T. words and the argument
carried a stage further with the quotation.
Typical of the kind of way in which Peter incorporates his lesser
quotations are:
(a) ii 17, where τον θεον φοβεΐσθε, τον βασιλέα = Prov. xxiv 21; in
the original the verb is in the singular and both nouns, joined by και,
form the object; Peter has also omitted υιέ. The change to the
plural is forced on him by his context and the omission of υιέ follows
naturally. He has presumably joined βασιλέα to a new verb to
preserve the rhythm of his sentence.
(b) iii 6b, where μή φοβούμεναι πτόησιν = Prov. iii 25; the verbal
form of the original (aor. subj.) has been changed to the participle
and the participle qualifying πτόησιν changed to the more general
μηδεμιαν. The change of verbal form adapts the quotation to the
context and the alteration of the word qualifying πτόησιν generalises
the exhortation.
(c) iv 14b, where το του θεοΰ πνεύμα αναπαύεται = Isa. xi 2; Peter
has changed the verb from the future to the present, a necessary
change to bring home his point; he has also added the article to
πνεύμα and made the Spirit rest on his readers rather than on the
king of Davidic lineage.
(d) i 18; here the words άργυρίω and έλυτρώθητε come from Isa.
 I PETER II 4-ΙΟ — A RECONSIDERATION 275

Iii 3 ; the verbal form has been modified and the noun changed from
μέτα with the genitive to the dative.
(e) i i n ; πάροικους and παρεπίδημους are from ψ χ χ χ ν η ί ΐ 3 ; they
have been altered from the nominative singular (in the first person
context) and intervening words omitted to suit Peter's context.
In each case Peter has used the O.T. words to advance his
argument ; if we were to omit them the sequence of thought would
be harmed and points of exhortation would be completely lost.
They are thus neither prepared for by preceding midrashic comment
nor are they used to confirm an argument already explicitly present
in the context. We should also note t h a t in proportion to their size
the modifications which Peter introduces are much greater than
where he uses texts as confirmation of his argument. When not
confirming his argument Peter tends to use single words or phrases
rather t h a n complete clauses.
We have now to examine ii 4-10 to see if Peter's usage of the O.T.
elsewhere in his epistle affords us any clue to his use of it in this
passage.
Isa. xxviii 16 is quoted in ii 6, being introduced by a formula of
quotation *). In the quotation τίθημι replaces εμβάλλω; the adjective
πολυτελή and the twofold reference to the foundations are omitted.
Where the quotation re-appears at Rom. ix 33 we also find τίθημι
and εν, not εις, with Σιών, εγώ is omitted, έπ' αύτω probably added; 2 )
we may thus assume these alterations already existed in the text as
known to P e t e r 3 ) . The main structure of Isa. xxviii 16 remains
unchanged. The reference to the foundations is probably omitted
because the cornerstone is regarded as a stone at ground level over
which men may stumble and not one sunk in the foundations which
would make this impossible 4 ) . The alterations here are no greater
than we should expect when Peter introduces a text to confirm
what he has already said, and Isa. xxviii 16 takes up the description
of Christ in ii 4 as λίθον έκλεκτόν εντιμον. Moreover διότι which
introduces the quotation is also used at i 16, 24 to introduce con­
firmatory quotations; this accords with its normal meaning in
giving a reason for what has preceded.

x
) We cannot accept SELWYN's argument that έν γραφή does not refer to
Scripture.
2
) έπ* αύτφ is read in Codex Alexandrinus of the LXX.
3
) Cf. L I N D A R S , pp. 177 ff., SELWYN pp. 272 ff.
4
) Cf. L I N D A R S p. 180; ELLIOTT, p. 24.
276 ERNEST BEST

V. 7b is a straightforward quotation of ψ cxvii 22 with λίθος

changed from the accusative to the nominative to accommodate
the quotation to the context. On the one hand it takes up another
conception of v. 4, viz., that Jesus was rejected by men; on the
other it begins to introduce a new conception, viz., the relationship
of Jesus to those who do not believe; this is a natural extension of
the argument, ψ cxvii 22 thus in part confirms v. 4 and in part
carries the argument further, but without the clinching statement
of v. 8 this would not be apparent.
V. 8a: λίθος προσκόμματος και πέτρα σκανδάλου are abstracted
from the words of Isa. viii 14 but the case of every one of the four
nouns has been altered in a manner wholly typical of the way in
which Peter uses phrases drawn from Scripture to advance his
argument ; and as we have already pointed out this is indeed what
it does, introducing an idea not in ii 4 f. ; v. 8b carries the new
argument further and is not a mere rewriting of v. 8a. Isa. viii 14 is
probably introduced at this point because the primitive church had
already associated it with Isa. xxviii 16 ; the two are used together
at Rom. ix 33. Probably ψ cxvii 22 was also associated with the
other two texts in a 'stone' complex 1 ) . We have thus quite clearly
moved from confirmation to a new stage in the argument and this is
continued in vv. 9-10.
V. 9 is introduced by ύμεΐς ; combined with Sé this suggests that a
contrast is being drawn with what has just preceded, i.e. the
condition of believers is very different from that of those who have
stumbled over Christ. When used within a sentence 8έ is normally
adversative in 1 Peter (cf. i 7, 8, 12, 20, ii lobis, 23 etc.), but at the
beginning of a sentence it usually indicates a new step in the
argument (i 25b, iii 8, iv 7, 17, ν 5, io) although it is adversative
at ii 7, iv 16a. We may then take it that a fresh step in the argument
comes with v. 9 and that at the same time ύμεΐς points a contrast
to what has preceded. The fresh matter introduced here sets out the
church in terms of attributes normally used of the O.T. people of
God, indicating that the new people of God is continuous with the
old people and suggesting in what respects this is true by the
attributes chosen.
V. 9 is a combination of Isa. xliii 20-1 and Exod. xix 6, ( = xxiii
22). ύμεΐς δέ may be taken from Exod. xix 6, but if so it no longer

x
) L I N D A R S pp. 177 ff., ELLIOTT, pp. 26 ff.
 I PETER II 4-IO — A RECONSIDERATION 277

remains a word on the lips of God but is transferred to Peter's ; if

Peter had intended this to be a quotation he could have used the
present of ειμί in place of the future in Exod. xix 6 and adapted
to his context the latter's μοι. Moreover it is difficult to see what
other suitable words could have been chosen instead of ύμεΐς δέ to
introduce the subsequent string of attributes. We conclude therefore
that they are not a quotation, γένος εκλεκτόν comes from Isa. xliii 20 ;
μου is omitted, the number is changed to the second and the phrase
is torn out of its context, βασίλειον . . . αγιον come from Exod. xix 6
where the words were set on God's lips, λαός εις περιποίησιν are
derived from Isa. xliii 2 1 ; they are changed from the accusative to
the nominative, μου is omitted and δν περιεποιησάμην becomes εις
περιποίησιν, perhaps under the influence of Mai. iii 17 or Hag. ii 9;
in the latter the context concerns the building of the temple, a not
inappropriate context to the present use of the phrase, δπως τάς
άρετάς έξαγγείλητε — again from Isa. xliii 21, with έξαγγέλλειν
replacing διηγεΐσθαι and a δπως clause the simple infinitive; note
again the omission of μου. The contrast of σκότος and φώς may also
reflect O.T. passages (e.g. Isa. ix ι ) but more probably repeats the
contrast between these two concepts common in inter-testamental
Judaism and in the early church. We note finally t h a t the use which
Peter makes of Scripture in v. 9 is completely in accord with his
methods when he is using its words to advance his argument, and,
indeed, he is here setting out an argument t h a t was not present
in ii 4, 5, viz., the continuity of the old and new peoples of God.
V. 10 is not a direct quotation from any one passage in Hosea; it
approaches most closely ii 25 but is also related to 16, 9; ii 21. It is
quoted more fully at Rom. ix 25. The use by Peter of selected words
from Hosea resembles again his use of Scripture when applying it to
advance his argument ; the fresh step at this point is the emphasis
upon the change of condition of those who are now the people of God.
By way of objection to our conclusion t h a t vv. 9-10 are fresh steps
in the argument it may be claimed: (1) The introductory phrase in
v. 6 governs all the O.T. quotations; there is however no clear
indication t h a t it should be stretched in this way. (2) Various words
from vv. 4-5 are repeated in v. 9; v. 9 therefore either confirms
vv. 4-5 or else they are a midrashic introduction to it. The words
repeated are εκλεκτόν, ίεράτευμα, αγιον; but if the church is being
set out as the new Israel the only surprising word to find here is
ίεράτευμα and since it has already been used there is really nothing
278 ERNEST BEST

surprising in finding that it suggested to Peter the use of Exod.

xix 6 for his purpose. (3) βασίλειον means 'royal building' and so
repeats the idea of οίκος in v. 5; it is not certain that this is ne­
cessarily the meaning of βασίλειον at this point, but, even if it is,
it certainly adds a new shade of meaning to οίκος which does not
suggest by itself that the building which Christians form is 'royal'*).
(4) δπως κτλ repeats the idea contained in άνενέγκαι κτλ 2 ) ; but the
former phrase is attached to all the attributes of v. 9 and does not
stand in any special relationship to ίεράτευμα as does άνενέγκαι κτλ
in v. 5. More positively it must be said that the principal conception
of vv. 9-10, the nature of the church as the continuation of the O.T.
people of God, is not contained in vv. 4-5 ; the argument does make
an advance at this point.
To summarise: in vv. 4-5 Peter sets out the nature of the church
using (as we shall see) an imagery which was common to the early
Christian tradition and which serves to contrast the church with
the O.T. people of God; he then confirms this with O.T. quotations
in vv. 6, 7 ; with that of v. 7 and the words of v. 8 he moves his
argument on to consider the position of those who reject Christ;
finally in vv. 9-10 he goes on to show the continuity between the new
and the old I s r a e l 3 ) .

The Background to the Passage

As in any N.T. writing the background is complex ; however it has
been demonstrated fairly clearly that Peter makes very great use
of primitive Christian tradition in his paraenetic sections 4 ). We
*) E L L I O T T argues t h a t n e i t h e r βασίλειον n o r οίκος, while referring t o one a n ­
o t h e r , m e a n s " t e m p l e " ; cf. p p . 149 f., 153, 156 ff., 163. See also p p . 289 infra.
2
) So E L L I O T T , p p . 184, 194.
3
) I n a long p a p e r ' T h e L i t e r a r y G e n r e M i d r a s h ' (CBQ X X V I I I (1966)
IO
5 - 3 8 > 4 I 7~57) A. G. W R I G H T h a s a t t e m p t e d t o distinguish t h e use of t h e
O.T. in m i d r a s h from its o t h e r uses. " W e see t h a t in biblical c i t a t i o n s t w o
d i r e c t i o n s of m o v e m e n t a r e possible : e i t h e r a biblical t e x t c o n t r i b u t e s t o t h e
n e w c o m p o s i t i o n a n d is for t h e sake of t h e new c o m p o s i t i o n or t h e n e w
c o m p o s i t i o n c o n t r i b u t e s t o a n u n d e r s t a n d i n g of t h e t e x t cited a n d is for t h e
s a k e of t h e biblical c i t a t i o n . O n l y t h e l a t t e r is m i d r a s h since only t h e r e does
t h e c o m p o s i t i o n a c t u a l i z e S c r i p t u r e . I n t h e former case (which is m e r e
l i t e r a r y d e p e n d e n c e ) t h e a u t h o r m a y h a v e p u t a t t e n t i o n on a t e x t a n d m a d e
i t r e l e v a n t in his own m i n d b u t h e does n o t w r i t e a m i d r a s h . H e m e r e l y uses
t h e r e s u l t s of a p r e v i o u s m i d r a s h ( w r i t t e n or m e n t a l ) as h e proceeds t o w r i t e
a c o m p o s i t i o n of a n o t h e r g e n r e . " P e t e r h a s followed t h e former process a n d
h a s n o t w r i t t e n m i d r a s h in ii 4-10.
4
) Cf. a b o v e all P . C A R R I N G T O N , The Primitive Christian Calendar, Cam­
bridge, 1940; S E L W Y N , p p . 363 ff.
 I PETER II 4 - I O — A RECONSIDERATION 279

shall examine our section to see if this tradition also forms the
background, and, if so, what then can be learned about the terms
and conceptions used therein which are generally recognised as
being the more difficult to interpret, viz., ίεράτευμα, πνευματικός,
βασίλειον. Of course this is only part of Peter's background. We have
already seen how important the LXX was to him and how in his
argument he tends to make great use of its words and ideas. This is
in keeping with his use of the early Christian paraenesis. He is not
an original thinker but draws on what is common to himself and
the early church. Other sections of the contemporary background
are of course known to him, especially the apocalyptic : in iii 19 he
depends on tradition about Enoch; this may not imply a direct
acquaintanceship with I Enoch since the information might have
been mediated to him through the Christian church.
If we take the ideas of ii 4-10 one by one we quickly see how Peter
is indebted to the primitive tradition.
Jesus as the stone : there is no direct reference to Jesus elsewhere as
the stone simpliciter', but he does appear as the corner-stone and
stone of stumbling. I t is not a great step to advance to Jesus as the
stone within the concept of building given these other ideas as
known. Peter cannot be said to make much of the stone concept
by itself except in so far as it is a foil to Christians as stones x ) .
Believers as stones : granted the conception t h a t a community forms
a building, and we shall see below t h a t this was commonly accepted
in early Christianity, then it is only a short step to view the mem­
bers of the community as the stones which compose it. Already in
Eph. ii 19-20, a writing which Peter possibly knew, Christ, apostles
and prophets are individualised as stones in the building. Inde­
2
pendently of 1 Peter Ignatius ) took the step of regarding Christians
as stones (ad Eph. ix 1). The idea may well have been in the tra­
dition prior both to Peter and Ignatius. Lam. iv 1, 2 may have
encouraged the growth of the conception 3 ) .
The corner-stone: cf. Rom. ix 33; Mark xii 10-11 and parallels; Acts
4
iv n , E p h . ii 20-22 ) .
*) There appears no reason to accept the suggestion of Bo REICKE (The
Epistles of James, Peter and Jude, The Anchor Bible 37, New York 1964) that
Christ as the stone is the stone altar on whom the sacrifices of Christians are laid.
2
) The New Testament in the Apostolic Fathers, Oxford, 1905, pp. 63 ff.
3
) Cf. J . M. F O R D , " T h e J e w e l of D i s c e r n m e n t " B.Z. 11 (1967) 109-116;
she d e m o n s t r a t e s h o w widely t h e m e t a p h o r of m e n as stones of a b u i l d i n g w a s
to be found at that time.
4
) On the growth of the tradition on Jesus as the corner-stone and stumb­
ling-stone and as rejected, cf. LIND ARS pp. 169 ff.
28ο ERNEST BEST

Jesus as rejected Mark xii i o - n and parallels, Mark vm 31 and

parallels, Luke xvn 25
Jesus as elect Luke ix 35 where έκλελεγμένος is probably the true
reading, Luke XXI1135, cf the variant readings at John 134 It
appears to have been an accepted Messianic title and as such was
interchangeable between the Messiah and his followers, the elect 1 )
So already at 1 1 believers have been termed 'the elect' and at
11 9 we have 'the elect race' On Christians as elect see Mark
xm 20, 22 and parallels, Matt xxn 14, Rom VI1133, Col 11112,
2 T i m 11 10 e t c
building is commonly applied to the church both in the sense of
moral edification (1 Cor xiv 4, 17 etc ) and in the sense, directly
parallel to 1 Pet 11 5, of the comparison of the church to a literal
building Mark xiv 58 and parallels, xv 29 and parallels, Rom
xv 20, 1 Cor 1119, Eph 1121
The church as house Heb 1116, 1 Pet IV17, 1 Tim 11115, Mark
xi 17 2 ) "House' is however constantly used for the temple both
in the Ο Τ and m the N T So it is important to draw m also those
passages which refer to the church as the new temple 1 Cor 111 16,
2 Cor vi 16, Eph 1118-22, Mark xiv 58, xv 29 3 ) The house,
which is the church, is the Temple of God ELLIOT 4 ) argues that
οίκος does not necessarily signify 'temple' However when specific
reference is made in the LXX to the building (οίκοδομεΐν) of the
temple the noun used in association with οίκοδομεΐν is almost always
οίκος (see especially 3 Kgdms v-vn, 1 Chron vi, xvn, xxn, 2 Chron
11-vi, 1 Esdras 1,11, v, vi, Hagg , Zach ) I t occurs about ten times as
frequently as the next most common word (νάος) To a mmd as
saturated as Peter's was with the language of the LXX the two
words οίκος and οίκοδομεΐν together would inevitably imply thetemple.
The sacrifices of the Christian Heb xm 15-16, Rom xn 1, xv 16,
Phil 1117, iv 18, 2 Tim i v 6 , Rev vm 3 f We have the use of
λειτουργεΐν for the collection sent to the poor m Jerusalem Rom
5
xv 27, 2 Cor ix 12 ) This conception goes back to the Ο Τ , e g

*) Cf ScHRENK TWNT I V 189 f

2
) Cf B E S T The Temptation and the Passion The Markan Soteriology
(Society for N e w T e s t a m e n t S t u d i e s M o n o g r a p h S e n e s 2) C a m b r i d g e
1965 ρ 84
3
) On t h e t w o M a r k a n t e x t s cf B E S T op cit ρ 99
4
) Pp 156 ff
5
) On t h e use of Ο Τ liturgical t e r m s t o describe t h e a c t i v i t y of C h r i s t i a n s
cf B E S T S p i r i t u a l Sacrifice , Interpretation X I V (i960) 273 99
 I PETER II 4-IO — A RECONSIDERATION 281

I s a . i n - 1 5 ; H0S.VÌ6; Mie. vi6-8; Ps. i v 6 ; I13, 14, 23, li 19, cxli 2.

Acceptable to God: this concept is found with varying Greek words to
express it in Rom. x v i 6 ; Phil. i v i 8 ; Heb. xii 28, xiii 15-16;
1 Tim. ii 3.
Through Jesus Christ: John i 17; Acts χ 36; Rom. ii 16, ν 9; 1 Cor.
xv 57 ; 2 Cor. ν i 8 ; etc.
The general context of 1 Pet. ii 4, 5, an appeal for purity, is
similar to t h a t where the new temple imagery is used elsewhere
in the N.T., 1 Cor. iii 16-17; 2 Cor. vi 16 f.; ι Tim. iii 15; Heb.
iii 6 ff. Commentators have often been puzzled by the sudden
change of metaphor between 1 Pet. ii 1-3 (growth) and ii 4 f.
(building). But these two conceptions are found together in the
tradition at 1 Cor. iii 1-17 (cf. especially iii 9 where the transition
is made; it recalls 1 QS viii 4 ff.) and Eph. ii 21 (where the temple
is said to grow).
Most of the conceptions of vv. 6-8 have already been covered;
of some it hardly requires to be shown t h a t they belong to the
primitive Christian tradition e.g. the centrality of faith in Christ.
That Christ is of value (τιμή) to Christians is not elsewhere ex­
pressed precisely in this way; the word here is drawn from the
quotation of Isa. xxviii 16 (εντιμον).
Christ as the stone of stumbling and rock of offence: Mark vi 3; Mt.
xiii 57, xi 6, xxvi 31, 33; Luke vii 23; Rom. ix 32-33; 1 Cor. i 23;
Gal ν 11.
The idea of predestination is also common in the N.T. though the
word used to express it here is probably drawn from Isa. xxviii 16
(τίθημι). The word is used in a somewhat similar way in 1 Tim. ii 7;
2 Tim. i n ; the idea is already present in κατά πρόγνωσιν (i 2);
it is more fully expressed in Rom. viii 29-30, ix-xi; Eph. i 4, 5, 11.
V. 9 introduces the concept of the Church as the new Israel : in the
Gospels there is the choice of twelve apostles ; elsewhere the Christians
are called 'the saints' ; more formal expression to the idea is given
in Gal. vi 16; Rom. xi 16-25; Eph. ii 11 ff. (and this in the context
of the new temple); J o h n xv 1-8; Rev. ii 9; iii 9; etc. The words
γένος and έθνος are not normally used for the O.T. people of God
(λαός is) ; however their qualifying adjectives and the fact t h a t they
are drawn from the O.T. render them suitable to Peter for the
purpose of expressing the church as the new Israel, εις περιποίησιν
qualifies λαός in like manner; it is however an O.T. conception which
had already entered the primitive Christian tradition, even if not
282 ERNEST BEST

always expressed precisely in these terms : 2 Thess. ii 14 (2 Thess.

ii 13-17 as a whole is very close to 1 Peter in its ideas) ; Acts xx 28;
Tit. ii 14; Heb. x 39; 1 Thess. ν g.
τάς άρετάς έξαγγείλητε : the proclamation of God's deeds is very
common to early Christianity, though expressed in different words ;
here again Peter dresses a common idea in O.T. phraseology,
σκότος, φως: for this contrast of the pre-Christian and Christian
life cf. Acts XXVÌ18; Eph. ν 8; Matt, iv 16, vi 22 f. ( = Luke
xi 35 f.) ; Luke i 79; 2 Cor. iv 6, vi 14; 1 Thess. ν 4, 5; Col. i 12-13;
1 J o h n i 6-7.
The conception in v. 10 of those not a people now becoming a
people is also found in Rom. ix 25, xi 17 ff. ; λαός is the regular word
for the people of God.
It can be thus seen that throughout vv. 4-10 we move in a circle of
ideas which is the common possession of early Christian tradition.
This suggests that the primary background for the understanding
of the remaining concepts will be primitive Christianity. Before we
turn to these it should be pointed out that some of the central
ideas are also found in Qumran; since it is likely t h a t the ideas of
Qumran came to Peter already absorbed into the primitive Christian
tradition we shall not trace out in detail their appearance in Qumran
but note their relevance at the particular points in which we are
interested.
(a) ίεράτευμα
This is used twice by Peter. In ii 9 it is part of a sequence of
phrases which express the church as the new Israel; emphasis lies
not so much upon the idea expressed by each phrase in isolation
as in the cumulative effect of the quotation of the complex of
phrases from the O.T. ; its use at ii 9 has moreover probably been
suggested by its prior use at ii 5 ; since Peter is here constructing his
argument more freely, it is likely that the special meaning he at­
taches to the word will appear more clearly, and so we begin with ii 5.
At ii 5 the immediate context is the conception of the new temple ;
οίκοδομεΐν, οίκος, θυσία, as we have already seen, are used regularly
in primitive Christianity to express this conception. It may well
also be present in προς δν προσερχόμενοι*) ; προσέρχεσθαι is a word
τ
) Peter's choice of this phrase may arise out of a similar phrase in ψ
xxxiii 6; he certainly quotes from the Psalm at ii 3, iii 10-12; If he has used
it in our present text then this is another point at which he adopts an O.T.
phrase to express his thought.
 I PETER II 4 - I O — A RECONSIDERATION 283

drawn from the O.T. cult denoting the approach of the priest to
1
G o d ) . Believers come to Christ whom they worship in the new
temple. The corner-stone is connected to the new temple in Eph.
ii 20 ; it is a fairly rare concept but where it appears outside the
primitive Christian tradition it is related to the temple. Test. Sol.
22:7-23:4; 4 Kgdms. xxv 17 (Symmachus) ; in iQS 8.4 ff. it again
reappears in the temple context, only in this case not of the literal
temple but of the new temple which is the community. It is also
connected to the temple in Rabbinic writings 2 ) . Isa. viii 14 is not
quoted in full by Peter; he cannot have been u n a w a r e 3 ) t h a t
the verse begins by arguing t h a t the one who is a stone of offence
and a rock of stumbling to unbelievers is a sanctuary or temple
(άγιασμα) to the faithful ; this recalls the initial words of the passage
'to whom coming' — Christ is himself the new temple, ψ cxvii, from
which Peter quotes in v. 7, is also closely connected to the temple
cultus (cf. vv. 19 f.; 26 f.). The whole imagery of vv. 4-8 is conse­
quently t h a t of the new Temple. This was not only a part of the
primitive Christian tradition but it was earlier a part of the tradition
of Qumran where we find the community represented as a temple
whose members offer holy sacrifices 4 ) .
At this point we must meet the objection of ELLIOTT t h a t it is
incorrect to compare the teaching of 1 Pet. ii 4-10 with t h a t of the
remainder of the N.T. in relation to priesthood and sacrifice in the
church because 1 Peter draws on Ex. xix 6 whereas elsewhere the
conception is expressed as a derivation from the conception of
levitical priesthood and sacrifice 5 ) . Ex. xix 6 applies to all Israel,
and wherever it is quoted this is recognised. Levitical priesthood
was however originally limited to a part of Israel ; when the death
of Christ was recognised as rendering unnecessary the levitical
cultus, its terms were spiritualised and applied to the Christian
church. Following on his rejection of a parallel to 1 Peter in the
rest of the N.T. ELLIOT argues t h a t 'spiritual sacrifices' are not
necessarily to be interpreted according to the type of sacrifice
which we see set out elsewhere in the N.T. ; in particular they are to
be considered as activity on the part of Christians directed to those

1
) Cf. B E S T , " S p i r i t u a l Sacrifice", p p . 218 f.
2
) R. J . M C K E L V E Y " C h r i s t t h e c o r n e r s t o n e " NTS, 8 (1961/2) 352-9.
3
) H e q u o t e s from t h e p r e c e d i n g verses (Isa. viii 12-13) a t iii 14-15.
4
) See p p . 284 f. infra.
5
) ELLIOTT, pp. 173, 210.
284 ERNEST BEST

outside the church and not as an inward looking cultus or worship ;

the priesthood envisaged is one turned towards the world and not an
internal characteristic of the church *).
As against this we have already demonstrated the close connection
between the Petrine complex of ideas in ii 4-10 and those of the
primitive Christian tradition, and we have indicated that this is
wholly in line with the general dependence of Peter throughout his
epistle on that tradition. Peter's mind as revealed by his letter is
not creative; it is therefore unlikely that he by himself derived
from Ex. xix 6 the conception of a priesthood of the church ; it is
much more probable that he already knew the tradition of the
primitive church (it is difficult to see how he could not have known
it) and then applied Ex. xix 6 to it; he may not even have been the
first to apply Ex. xix 6 but have received this also in the tradition.
We would now turn more specifically to the relationship of Ex. xix 6
and 1 Pet. ii 4-10 to levitical conceptions.
We look first at Qumran where we find an ambivalent attitude
to the levitical priesthood. On the one hand members were accepted
into the community in accordance with the rules governing the
admissibility of men to exercise levitical function 2) ; they offer non-
material sacrifices which may atone 3 ), as did the sacrifices of the
levitical priesthood; the non-material sacrifices of the O.T. are not
regarded as achieving such atonement. The Qumran community
forms the spiritual temple, a temple being necessarily associated
with priesthood 4 ). On the other hand there are priests within the
community whose leading position is recognised 5 ). Qumran is the
cradle from which the N.T. conception of the temple and the
priesthood of the church is derived; the almost contradictory
position within it would be resolved once the particular position
of a group of priests within the community was no longer seen to be
necessary. It would then only have been a matter of time until
someone saw the relevance of Ex. xix 6 to this situation. Indeed the
text may have been used in the community. The formula is quoted
twice in the book oí Jubilees (Jub. 16:18; 33:20). Judging by the
number of fragments found at Qumran and the acceptance of its

1
) Ibid., p p . 184 f.
2
) GÄRTNER, p p . 5 ff.
3
) Ibid., p p . 44 ff.
4
) Ibid., p p . 16 ff.
5
) Ibid., pp. 5, 9 f.
 I PETER II 4 - I O — A RECONSIDERATION 285

ideas in the writings of the community, Jubilees was exceptionally

well known and appreciated there. The idea of the priesthood in
Ex. xix 6 and the levitical conception as applied to the community
as whole would therefore have co-existed at Qumran.
But supposing for the moment that the members of the Qumran
community did not associate Ex. xix 6 and levitical ideas but framed
their conception of the new temple under the dominance of the
latter alone, then we need to note the many close contacts between
ι Peter Ü4-10 and the idea of the new temple at Qumran; it is
not going too far to say that 1 Peter lies nearer to the idea as found
in Qumran than does any other part of the N.T. x ). It is only at
Qumran that we find the new temple directly associated with Isa.
xxviii 16 (1 QS 8:4 ff.), non-material sacrifice (1 QS 8:4ft.;
9:3ft.; 4 QFlor 1: 6 f.), the members as stones (4QpIsa d , frag i;
cf. 1 QH 6:25 ff.) 2) ; it may be also that at Qumran the priesthood
of the community was related directly to the new temple ( C D .
3:19-4:3) 3 ) . ELLIOTT argues that the themes of election and holi-
ness run through 1 Peter ii 4-10 4) ; these are continuing and vital
interests of the Qumran community. The main conceptions of
1 Peter ii 4-10 are all found in Qumran and set out there on a
levitical basis; the only item missing is the direct quotation of
Exod. xix 6 ; there seems thus no reason why Peter should not quite
happily have married the latter text to neo-levitical ideas or have
found it already in the tradition he used. And we must finally note
that the easiest explanation of his use of the terms οίκος, θυσία,
προσέρχεσθαι which occur in our passage is to view them as drawn
from a levitical context.
That the two concepts could co-exist harmoniously is indicated
by : (a) the quotation of Exod. xix 6 in, of all places, Test. Levi
11:4-6. It is found in the Greek Fragment printed by CHARLES 5 ) .

x
) Ibid., p p . 72-88. G Ä R T N E R n o t e s t h a t t h e c o n t e x t of 1 P e t . ii 4-10 is t h a t
of m o r a l p u r i t y which is also t h a t of t h e image w h e n used in Q u m r a n ; t h e r e
is also in b o t h t h e c o m b i n a t i o n of t h e conceptions of election a n d holiness.
2
) ' ' T h e r e s e m b l a n c e b e t w e e n Q u m r a n a n d I P e t . ii is so s t r i k i n g a t t h i s
p o i n t t h a t we are compelled t o a s s u m e t h e existence of some c o m m o n t r a -
d i t i o n . " ( G Ä R T N E R , p . 78).
3
) Ibid., p p . 82 ff.
4
) T h i s is b r o u g h t o u t in t h e t i t l e of his m o n o g r a p h , " T h e E l e c t a n d t h e
Holy".
5
) R. H . C H A R L E S , Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs. The Greek Versions
Oxford, 1908.
286 ERNEST BEST

ELLIOTT X ) regards it as a pre-Christian gloss and thus implies the

association of the two ideas prior to Peter. Even if it is a Christian
gloss it shows how easily the two could be brought t o g e t h e r 2 ) ,
(b) Rev. i 6, ν i o have their conception of the priesthood of the
members of the church based on Exod. xix 6 ; b u t Revelation is
also a book which is full of levitical conceptions; cf. ν 8, vi g,
viii 3-5, xvi6f., xiv 4-5, iii 12, xi 1 3 ) . (c) Philo (de Sobr. 66; de
Abrah. 56) quotes Exod. xix 6, but in complete independence of
this and therefore presumably as a development of levitical con­
ceptions he also speaks of true men of God as priests (de Gigant. 61 ;
de Ebriet. 126-8) and of Israel as a priest to mankind (de Abrah. 98;
de Spec. Leg. II, 162-4; °f· de Vita Mosis I I , 224 f.; de Spec. Leg.
π 145 f.)·
We thus conclude t h a t there is no reason why Peter should not
have associated the non-levitical conception of priesthood in Exod.
xix 6 with the levitical ideas which were already prevalent in the
primitive church, and t h a t in fact, failing any evidence to the
contrary, ίεράτευμα in ii 5, 9 must be interpreted in line with the
conception prevailing in the primitive church of the church as
priestly or of believers as priests.
The precise meaning of ίεράτευμα is difficult to determine.
ELLIOTT 4 ) has carefully examined the meaning of words ending
in -ευμα and shown t h a t such words indicate ,,communities of
persons functioning in a particular capacity'' (το βούλευμα, senators;
το τεχνίτευμα, artisans; το πρέσβευμα, ambassadors) or " a community
of people in more general terms" (το πολίτευμα, a political mass;
το στράτευμα, a fighting mass). This leaves unresolved the rela­
tionship of the individual to the group: whereas it may be argued
that a senator is only able to exercise his senatorial function within
the senate and this implies a necessary corporateness, the same is
not true of the artisan or the ambassador. There is nothing in the
word ίεράτευμα itself to tell us how we should understand it. I n the
primitive tradition of Rev. i 6, ν io, xx 6, Exod. xix 6 becomes the
simple plural "priests"; where the tradition expresses priesthood
in levitical terms we sometimes find this used in the singular of
x
) P p . 85 ff
2
) I n Τ Levi 3 6 w e h a v e t h e e x t e n s i o n of levitical c o n c e p t s angels offer
s p i r i t u a l sacrifice
3
) Cf P . C A R R I N G T O N , The Meaning of the Revelation, L o n d o n , 1931,
p p 381-94, B E S T , " S p i r i t u a l Sacrifice" 292-4
4
) Op cit, p p 66 f
 I PETER II 4-ΙΟ — A RECONSIDERATION 287

individuals (Rom. xv 16; Phil, ii 17) or in the plural without any

implications of corporateness (Rom. x i i i ; Heb. xiii 15-16). I n
1 Pet. ii 5 ίεράτευμα is set alongside οϊκος, a term which in its present
context and with its present meaning of "temple', in which the
individual members are parts of the whole, is collective in its
significance. At 1 Pet. ii 9 ίεράτευμα is set in parallel with a sequence
x
(γένος, έθνος, λάος) ) of terms which cannot be individualised; they
are necessarily collective and their members cannot be described
individually in words derived from the collective nouns. However
ίεράτευμα is a term, unlike them, which also involves a function and
there exists a cognate word, ιερεύς, describing the one who performs
the function. The only conclusion which it would be safe to draw
from this evidence would appear to imply t h a t just as a Christian
cannot exist in isolation but is always such as the member of a
church, so Christians exercise priestly functions but always as
members of a group who all exercise the same function. We cannot
go further t h a n this because Peter's conception of the church, in so
far as we can ascertain it, lacks the profoundity t h a t we find in Paul
and John ; had we fuller knowledge of his conception of the church
we would be able to discuss more adequately the relation of the
individual to the whole.
The nature of the sacrifices which Christians offer is not spelt out
by Peter. ELLIOTT 2 ) argues t h a t δπως τάς άρετάς έξαγγείλητε is
parallel to άνενέγκαι. πνευματικας θυσίας and therefore may be used
to elucidate it. This is not so. The former phrase is attached to all
the terms of v. 9; it is drawn from Isa. xliii 20-1 from which γένος
and λαός come and there is no reason to suppose t h a t Peter would
attach it specifically to ίεράτευμα, or even make any association
between the two in his mind. Further we have argued t h a t v. 5 is
not an anticipatory midrash on v. 9 but t h a t in v. 9 Peter enters
a new stage of his argument. There is thus nothing within the
passage to explain the nature of the sacrifices. We are therefore
again dependent on the primitive tradition for elucidation. In this
these sacrifices may be stated in a perfectly general way (Rom.
xii 1) or related to the worship of the community (Heb. xiii 15;
Rev. viii 3-4) or to its deeds of love and goodness (Heb. xiii 16;
Rom. xv 27). We find a similar range of description in the Qumran
x
) βασίλειον may be a parallel concept, but we have yet to determine
whether it is a noun or an adjective.
2
) Pp. 184, 194.
288 ERNEST BEST

community the works of the law (4 QFlor 1 6 f , 1 QS 8 4 ff.),

worship (1 QS 9 3 ff.)· However unlike Qumran we find no teaching
m the primitive tradition that the sacrifices of Christians atone
for the sms of men. The spiritual sacrifices of Peter may then be
either internal, related t o the life of the community, or external,
related to the extension of the Church through the dedicated lives
of Christians. Of the many duties which Peter lays on those to whom
he writes there is no reason t o distinguish some from others and
say that these are the spiritual sacrifices, whereby it is implied
others are not.

(b) βασίλειον
Including Exod xix 6 Peter has drawn his O.T. quotations from
the L X X , in the latter τ) βασίλειον could be construed either as a
noun or an adjective, stylistic and grammatical considerations
favour the former solution The quotations which depend on the
LXX show that it was so understood (2 Mace. 2 17, Philo, de Sobr
66, de Abrah. 56). A tradition, apparently independent of the LXX,
found m the Targums takes the original phrase D^HD roVöö,
consisting of two nouns of which one depends on the other in t h e
MT, as co-ordinate and results in phrases like 'kings and priests',
this is the tradition followed by J u b 16 18, Rev. 1 6, ν 10 2 )
Peter nearly always places his adjectives after the noun they
qualify, this is true in the noun-adjective phrases he quotes from
the O.T m 11 9, there are not four parallel phrases in 11 9 each
consisting of a noun and an adjective, for the fourth has an ad­
jectival phrase εις περιποίηση which Peter did not find in Isa.
xliii 20 f. b u t took independently either from the Ο T. or from the
primitive tradition, he could have taken λαός περιούσιος from
Exod. xix 5 if he had desired four parallel noun-adjective phrases 3 ) .
Unless there is positive evidence to the contrary we must agree
with ELLIOTT 4 ) that βασίλειον should be regarded as a noun, on the
grounds both of internal evidence and the non-Christian tradition
of interpretation of Exod xix 6. If it is taken as an adjective then
x
) ELLIOTT has traced out most carefully the development of the tradition
in respect of Exod xix 6, cf pp 50-128
2
) Jub xxxni 20 stands apart from both lines of development because it
takes βασίλειον as an adjective but dependent on λαός and not on ίεράτευμα
this itself has been changed to an adjective
3
) Cf ELLIOTT ρ 151
4
) Op cit, pp 51 ff
 I PETER II 4-IO — A RECONSIDERATION 289

it will mean "royal" i.e. a priesthood serving a king (God), not a

priesthood consisting of kings ; the priests will not necessarily have
royal dignity.
If it is a noun what meanings may we attribute to it ?
(1) Royal residence, palace. This is a perfectly good classical
meaning of the word, though normally occuring in the plural ; it is
also found in the LXX (Esther i 9, ii 13 etc.). I t is the meaning
Philo gave to the word on the two occasions he quoted Exod. xix 6 ;
in de Sobr. 66 he glosses a description of it as οίκος, by his statement
about God's indwelling, and by his application to it of ιερός and
άσυλος; this latter as a substantive can mean 'sanctuary" or as an
adjective 'inviolate' with reference to the right of sanctuary in
temples. So understood as ''residence of God", i.e. temple, the word
fits the context of 1 Pet. ii 4, 5 most appropriately x ) . However it is
unlikely that Peter knew Philo, there does not appear to be any
other reference to βασίλειον in the sense of 'temple' 2 ) and the
structure of 1 Pet. ii 4-10 suggests that Peter is now past t h a t part
of his argument which dealt with the new temple. Moreover in the
context of ii 9 'palace' does not fit sweetly with four other terms all
of which directly describe a group of people. If there was any
evidence that the word meant 'royal household', i.e. the people
belonging to the palace, this objection could be overcome; there
does not appear to be any instance of the word with this meaning.
If it is to be taken in a non-literal sense then we should expect t h a t
Peter in accordance with his usual custom 3 ) would indicate this
with a qualifying word; he could have added ώς as in i 24. However
we cannot completely exclude this meaning for Philo's use of it
shows that it might come naturally to a Jew to regard God's palace
as his dwelling-place or temple.
(2) Tiara, diadem. This is a Hellenistic usage of the word. We only
consider this meaning because in the neighbourhood of Isa. lxi 6,
where the Israelites are termed priests of God, they are also termed
his crown and diadem (IXÜ3). But βασίλειον itself is not used in
IXÜ3. As in (1) such a meaning would not fit in with the other
epithets describing the church in v. 9 and to be understood would
require a qualification to show that it was not meant in the material
sense.

*) Philo may also use it in this sense in De Praem. et Poem. 123.

2
) Cf. ELLIOTT, pp. 153.
3
) Cf. p p . 292 f. infra.
Novum Test. XI 19
290 ERNEST BEST

(3) Kingdom. This again is a Hellenistic usage. I t is possibly found

with this sense in the L X X (3 Kdgms. ν ι, xiv 8 ; 4 Kgdms. xv 19 —
all in A). I t occurs more frequently with the active meaning, 'rule,
reign', and in the three cases cited it probably has this meaning.
If taken in the passive sense of those who are ruled by the king then
it is appropriate to the context of ii 9. Normally it should mean the
territory rather than the subjects who are under the rule of the
king, b u t the extension appears natural. This may be the meaning
attached to the word in 2 Mace, ii 17. To the people is restored το
βασίλειον και το ίεράτευμα και τον άγιασμόν i.e. they again become
God's kingdom, the priesthood and the hallowing 1 ). This is not
very satisfactory. I t would be easier if βασίλειον could be taken to
mean the restoration of the rule of the people over their own land 2 ) ,
which was now restored to them with the victory of the Maccabees.
If, however, the meaning given is 'kingdom', in the sense of the
kingdom of God, we have in 1 Peter a more explicit identification
of the people of God with the kingdom than anywhere else in the
N.T. We might then have expected that Peter would add here some
qualifying adjective to βασίλειον in accordance with his normal
custom 3 ) to show that it is not to be taken in a literal sense.
(4) Because none of the above explanations is satisfactory it is
worth going back and re-examining a suggestion p u t forward by
H O R T in relation to Exod. xix 6 but which he rejects for 1 Pet.
ii 9 4 ) . He proposed giving to βασίλειον the meaning 'body of kings'.
This is certainly in accord with the Targumic tradition which
renders Exod. xix 6 as 'kings (and) priests' 5 ) . It also goes easily
with the interpretation of ίεράτευμα as 'body of priests'. The
termination -ειον signifies 'Kollektivität,Werkzeug, Ort' 6 ). We
have, άρχειον = townhall, college of magistrates; κοινειον =

x
) CERFAUX interprets the third term as denoting the purification of the
temple "Regale Sacerdotmm", m Recueil Lucien Cerfaux, Vol II, Gembloux
1954, P· 2 9° Whether this is so or not we can note here (1) the quotation of
Exod xix 6 m a 'temple' context, and (11) its association thereby with
levitical conceptions It is however probably wrong to take ίεράτευμα here
as indicating the restoration of the levitical priesthood to Israel (cf ELLIOTT,
PP 94*0-
2
) Cf GARTNER, ρ 8o
3
) Cf p p 292 f infra
4
) Op cit, ρ 125 KNOPF (cf BENNETT, STIBBS) adopts this solution for
1 P e t 11 9
5
) Cf G r e e k f r a g m e n t t o Τ Levi ( s e e p 285 η 5), αρχή βασιλέων ίεράτευμα.
6
) Ε ScHWYZER, Griechische Grammatik, Vol I, (München, 1939), ρ 470
 I PETER II 4-IO — A RECONSIDERATION 29I

common hall, club, association ; βακχεΐον = congregation of Bacchic

worshippers; φυλακεΐον = watch tower, watch (i.e. body of soldiers) ;
πρεσβυτηρεΐον = council of elders. Thus, though there is no inde­
pendent evidence t h a t it ever was taken in this way, it could well
have been so understood. This becomes a real possibility when we
consider the way in which Exod. xix 6 is taken in the Revelation
of John. At i 6 we have βασιλείαν, ιερείς; at ν ι ο βασιλείαν καί
ιερείς 1 ) , καί βασιλεύουσιν 2 ) επί της γης. The author has here followed
the tradition of the Targums but has quite obviously considered
t h a t those who form the βασιλεία are those who reign. At xx 6 he
again mentions that they reign without the intermediate step of the
argument which terms them βασίλειον. He would thus appear to be
spelling out this term as 'kings' 3 ) . Revelation and 1 Peter are
written to the same area and their readers may be expected to be
acquainted with the same layer of the primitive tradition. This
probability is increased if we hold, with ELLIOTT 4 ) , t h a t at i 6 and
ν 10 we have quotations from an early hymn. We have already seen
in our discussion of 2 Mace, ii 17 at (3) t h a t the meaning 'kingship'
is more suitable t h a n 'kingdom'. From the kingship of the nation
to the conception of its members as 'kings' is not a great step. I t is
already present in the O.T. (cf. Isa. l x i i ß ; Dan. vii 18, 22, 27),
finding its origin perhaps in the dominion given to Adam (Gen.
i 28) ; this re-appears in the inter-testamental period in relation
to Adam both in his own nature and as representative man 5 ). It
became a part of the primitive Christian tradition (Eph. ii 6; 2 Tim.
ii 12; 1 Cor. iv 8, vi 1 ff.; Rom. ν 17; James ii 5). Finally βασίλειον
understood as 'body of kings' fits the context most appropriately
since it gives a group meaning to the term in common with the four
other attributes.

1
) This resembles the texts of Symmachus and Theodotion. CHARLES
sees a special link between Revelation and Theodotion, or a text related to
Theodotion (CHARLES, Revelation, Vol. I, pp. lxxx f.).
2
3
) Reading the present tense as lectio difficilior.
) That βασιλεία should mean 'body of kings' is hardly possible; later
scribes altered it to βασίλειον, either to bring it into line with the LXX of
Exod. xix 6 or because they recognised that in the Christian tradition
βασίλειον did have this meaning. The author of the Revelation (or of the
hymn behind this passage) must himself have been aware that βασιλεία could
not mean 'body of kings' ; since he so elucidates he must have known that
Exod.xix 6 was to be understood in this sense.
4
5
) Pp. 107 ff.
) Cf. R. SCROGGS, The Last Adam, Oxford, 1966, pp. 25, 46.
292 ERNEST BEST

(c) πνευματικός
Before we consider the precise significance of this word for Peter it
is necessary to draw attention to a general feature of his style.
Whenever he introduces a term which could be understood in a
secular, literal or physical manner but which he wishes to indicate
should not be so understood he normally adds an adjective or
adjectives or a qualifying phrase which will remove all doubt
about the meaning he intends for the word. Consider the quali­
fications given to κληρονομίαν (14), χρυσίου (17), όσφύας (i i ß ) ,
άμνοΰ (i 19), άναγεγεννημένοι (123), γάλα (ii 2), λίθον, λίθοι (ii 4, 5)>
ποιμένα καί έπίσκοπον (ii 25), άνθρωπος (iii 4), νήψατε (iv 7), οικονόμοι
(iv 10), πυρώσει (iv 12), ποίμνιον (ν 2), στέφανον (ν 4), δόξαν (ν ί ο ) .
This explains his introduction of ώς with χόρτος (i 24 ; cf. its use at
ii 2 and ii 11). In the first place the qualifying adjective or phrase
alerts us to the fact t h a t the noun is being used in a sense other than
the literal. But when we examine the qualifying word or phrase
itself we often find that it is chosen because it tells us something
about the new use to which the noun is being put ; this is particu­
larly true when the qualification is a simple adjective (or adjec­
tives) ; cf. i 4, 7, 19, ii 2, 4, 5, ν 4, 10 in the list above.
Thus the use of πνευματικός in ii 5 indicates to us that οίκος and
θυσίας are not being used in their normal senses of physical house
and material sacrifices but in a transferred or metaphorical sense 1 ) >
though that does not mean an un-real sense. The inheritance (i 4),
the lamb (i 19), the milk (ii 2), the stone (ii 4, 5), the crown (v 4)
are all real, though not literal nor physical. At the same time
πνευματικός indicates in some way the new meaning which is to be
attached to οίκος and θυσίας. This adjective 2 ) is fairly widely used
in the Pauline corpus where it is applied not only to Christians but
also to various non-personal concepts, e.g., χάρισμα (Rom. i n ;
cf. I Cor x i i i , xiv ι ) , βρώμα, πόμα, πέτρα, (i Cor. x 3, 4), ωδαΐς
(Eph. ν 19; cf. Col. iii 16). Of these the last is the most interesting
for we find it related here to worship ; we find πνεύμα itself used in
reference to worship in John iv 24; 1 Cor. xiv 15-16; Eph. vi 18;
Phil, iii 3 3 ) . Peter thus moves within the primitive tradition when
x
) This confirms that οίκος means 'house', i.e., building, rather than
'household', i.e. people.
2
) Cf. E. SCHWEIZER, TWNT, V. pp. 435 f.
3
) θεοΰ is the better reading in Phil, iii 3, but even if τω θεω is read, πνεύματι
can still be understood of the divine rather than the human spirit.
 I PETER II 4 - I O — A RECONSIDERATION 2Ç3

he attaches the adjective to θυσίας. This is also true of οίκος. For

on two occasions when the new temple imagery is used the Spirit
of God is expressly associated with it (1 Cor. iii 16; Eph. Ü22).
When used of οίκος, the adjective πνευματικός will then suggest t h a t
the house is one indwelt by the Spirit of God, and because the Spirit
of God indwells those who comprise the spiritual house they will
offer a worship which is spiritual, i.e. of the Spirit of God. I n neither
case is it surprising to find Peter using the word.

CONCLUSIONS
We have attempted to show (1) that Peter uses his O.T. quotations
for one or other of two purposes: either to confirm an argument
already stated or to advance the argument he is making; that the
quotations in ii 4-10 are adequately explained in terms of these
reasons and t h a t therefore ii 4-5 are not preparatory midrashic
material for them : (2) t h a t the passage is explicable in terms of early
Christian tradition and t h a t this is the easiest way in which to
take it. In particular this is so for the difficult concepts (a) ίεράτευμα,
where we found the levitical conception of priesthood merged with
t h a t of Exod. xix 6; (b) βασίλειον, where the suggestion t h a t this
means 'a body of kings' should receive more serious attention ; and
(c) πνευματικός which relates the sacrificial life and worship of
Christians to the Spirit of God.
 ^ s
Copyright and Use:

As an ATLAS user, you may print, download, or send articles for individual use
according to fair use as defined by U.S. and international copyright law and as
otherwise authorized under your respective ATLAS subscriber agreement.

No content may be copied or emailed to multiple sites or publicly posted without the
copyright holder(s)' express written permission. Any use, decompiling,
reproduction, or distribution of this journal in excess of fair use provisions may be a
violation of copyright law.

This journal is made available to you through the ATLAS collection with permission
from the copyright holder(s). The copyright holder for an entire issue of a journal
typically is the journal owner, who also may own the copyright in each article. However,
for certain articles, the author of the article may maintain the copyright in the article.
Please contact the copyright holder(s) to request permission to use an article or specific
work for any use not covered by the fair use provisions of the copyright laws or covered
by your respective ATLAS subscriber agreement. For information regarding the
copyright holder(s), please refer to the copyright information in the journal, if available,
or contact ATLA to request contact information for the copyright holder(s).

About ATLAS:

The ATLA Serials (ATLAS®) collection contains electronic versions of previously

published religion and theology journals reproduced with permission. The ATLAS
collection is owned and managed by the American Theological Library Association
(ATLA) and received initial funding from Lilly Endowment Inc.

The design and final form of this electronic document is the property of the American
Theological Library Association.