Who Are These People?

In three weeks 1-2 Peter and Jude in the Everday Bible Study will be available. Here’s an excerpt. Questions are by Becky Castle Miller.

1 Peter 2:11-12

2:11 Dear friends, I urge you, as foreigners and exiles, to abstain from sinful desires, which wage war against your soul. 12 Live such good lives among the pagans that, though they accuse you of doing wrong, they may see your good deeds and glorify God on the day he visits us.

         Peter wrote 1 Peter to instruct and exhort believers how to live in the Roman empire as followers of Jesus. His pastoral hope was for them to be (1) faithful to Jesus and (2) effective in evangelism. These believers learned they were members of two worlds: the empire of Rome and the kingdom of God.

Peter’s thematic verses in chapter two express his approach to the Christian life in the Roman empire. So with those verses we begin. One travels a long distance between Peter’s “Dear friends” (or “Loved ones” in Second Testament) and his terms for the believers in Asia Minor: “foreigners and exiles.”  Though many have understood these terms as no more than metaphors for life-as-a-pilgrimage, these two terms describe their social condition. One speaks of the intimacy of family, friendship, and siblingship and the other the rugged realities of the social location of these believers. Both of these terms have been translated with the same English term “exiles.” I prefer the translation of 2:11 as “exiles and temporary residents” (Second Testament), which means I translate 1:1 with “elect temporary residents.” One term in 2:11, paroikos, refers to residents without the legal protection of citizenship or belonging, while the second term, parepidēmos, points at residents who remain in a location for a short period. For the sake of boldness, I suggest we think of them as migrant workers rather than the more comfortable simile of life on earth as a journey or pilgrimage to heaven (discussed fully in McKnight, 1 Peter, 47-51). “Think factory workers and undocumented farm or domestic workers; think sanitation workers, caretakers for the elderly; think (dare I say it?) sex workers – the people we see every day, or maybe we look past them, but as a society we depend on them nonetheless” (Davis, The Luminous Word, 308). You might be surprised by Ellen Davis’s words, but think again. The past of these believers was not squeaky clean; many were victims; many experienced generational poverty and marginalization. They found Jesus, they found community, and together they were chasing a life of holiness in the empire. Which was their challenge and the reason for Peter’s letter.

There is nothing in 2:11, or at 1:1 (in our next passage), suggesting these terms are anything but literal descriptions of a social location, nor is there anything suggesting they are mere metaphors. Dennis Edwards says it perfectly: “people on the margins have little power and influence in society. Yet they may still make a profound impact on the world when they are able to persevere and live according to the ways of the Lord Jesus” (Edwards, 1 Peter, 28).

How, then, did they get to these locations? We don’t know for sure, but what we do know is that an abundance of Jews lived in the diaspora outside Jerusalem, Judea, or Galilee. So, perhaps they chose to move because of family. Paul’s family lived in Tarsus in Cilicia, west of Cappadocia. Perhaps they moved from Galilee for work, which one early Christian source says happened. Perhaps, because they were Jewish or foreigners or Christians, they were pushed out of one location and moved to these locations. Perhaps some of them were at Pentecost and returned home. Perhaps because they were Christians, they fled persecution. (This letter has lots to say about suffering.) Perhaps they were alienated in their own locations because of their faith or heritage. What is most likely is that these believers, or at least some of them, had been persons of lower social standing prior to meeting Jesus and remained so, or were lowered in social status because of their faith. What we know is that these two terms direct our attention to Christians living at the level of subsistence (see more in Sidebar below). Joel Green puts it like this: “First Peter is addressed to folks who do not belong, who eke out their lives on the periphery of acceptable society, whose deepest loyalties and inclinations do not line up very well with what matters most in the world in which they live. This is not the sort of life that most people find attractive” (Green, 1 Peter, 18).

What does it mean, then, to follow the way of Jesus in their condition? That’s an important question to answer for reading 1 Peter.

Sidebar

[In what follows, I borrow heavily from David Downs, “Economics,” in Dictionary of Jesus and the Gospels, ed. Joel B. Green, Jeannine K. Brown, and Nicholas Perrin, 2nd ed. (Downers Grove, Ill.: IVP Academic, 2013), 219–22. For some differences with Downs, see Amanda C. Miller, Rumors of Resistance: Status Reversals and Hidden Transcripts in the Gospel of Luke, Emerging Scholars (Minneapolis: Fortress, 2014), 25–64, 75–86. For a more urban context analysis, Steven J. Friesen, “Poverty in Pauline Studies: Beyond the So-Called New Consensus,” JSNT 26 (2004): 323–61; Bruce W. Longenecker, Remember the Poor: Paul, Poverty, and the Greco-Roman World (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 2010). An older discussion is found in Anthony J. Saldarini, Pharisees, Scribes and Sadducees in Palestinian Society (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 2001), 35–49. For an alternative scheme, see Ekkehard W. Stegemann and Wolfgang Stegemann, The Jesus Movement: A Social History of Its First Century, trans. O.C. Dean Jr. (Minneapolis: Fortress, 1999), 72, 135, 185, 232.]

Social Location Matters

Estimates for what percentage of the population fit into which level are necessarily approximate, but one can get a lasting impression with the following.

         Level 1        0.04%          Imperial elites

         Level 2        1.00%          Regional, provincial elites

         Level 3        1.76%          Municipal elites

         Level 4        7%              Moderate surplus resources

         Level 5        22%            Stable, but near subsistence level

         Level 6        40%            Subsistence, often below minimum

         Level 7        28%            Below subsistence

Approximately ninety percent, perhaps slightly less, of the population of these provinces lived near, at, or below the subsistence level. Poverty reigned in agrarian economies. The agenda for most people was resources, an abundant harvest, a good year as an artisan. The clamor of crowds broke out of these subsistence conditions. Their clamor spoke the dialect of trauma. Life on the edge of subsistence traumatizes. Generationally.

         To put muscle and skin and hair on these levels, the various occupations, vocations, or professions look like this:

Level 1         Roman officials, occasional retainers, and freedpersons

         Level 2        Provincial officials, retainers, retired military

         Level 3        Wealthy who do not hold offices, some freedpersons, retainers,

                           Veterans, merchants

         Level 4        Some merchants, traders, freedpersons, artisans, veterans

Level 5        Most merchants, traders, wage earners, artisans, large shop owners, farm families

Level 6        Small farm families, laborers both skilled and unskilled, employed artisans, wage earners, most merchants and traders, small shop and tavern owners

Level 7        Some farm families, unattached widows, orphans, beggars, disabled, unskilled day laborers, prisoners

The believers addressed by Peter mostly resided in Level 5, 6, and 7. What matters, and this cannot be ignored, is the numbers. Levels 5-7 comprise 90% of the population. A disproportionate number in Levels 1-4 resided in the big cities, like Antioch or Ephesus. Most were on the margins.

End

How to live?

Peter’s approach to life for these marginalized people is as old as any moral teaching in history and as relevant as right now wherever you are: avoid bad behaviors, do good behaviors. So, they are (1) to avoid “fleshy desires” (more about this at 1:13–2:3) and (2) to live a publicly “beautiful” life (Second Testament). One of the biggest challenges of the earliest Christians was to learn how to live as followers of Jesus in a way that (1) did not destroy the Jesus movement by rebelling against the machine and that (2) remained faithful to the way of Jesus. If Revelation becomes the paradigm of dissident discipleship and resistance to the way of the empire (Babylon), 1 Peter offers another approach to fit his audience. They were to live publicly beautiful, or attractive, lives. He uses a very special word here. He says they are to practice “good deeds,” or “good works.” This captures one’s public life (cf. Matthew 5:16) and does not refer to what Paul means by “good works” when he is critical of them.

What is even more vital to Peter’s strategy is his theory of doing good. The Greek terms at work are built on agathos (good) and poi- (do). Please read each of these verses, and I italicize the important words that translate the above Greek term.

… governors, who are sent by him to punish those who do wrong and to commend those who do right (2:14).

For it is God’s will that by doing good you should silence the ignorant talk of foolish people (2:15).

But how is it to your credit if you receive a beating for doing wrong and endure it? But if you suffer for doing good and you endure it, this is commendable before God (2:20).

Like Sarah … You are her daughters if you do what is right and do not give way to fear (3:6).

For it is better, if it is God’s will, to suffer for doing good than for doing evil (3:17).

So then, those who suffer according to God’s will should commit themselves to their faithful Creator and continue to do good (4:19).

We could run out of space quickly here, so I want to reduce this to the basics: the terms Peter uses describe public acts of benefaction for the common good. His concern is not so much that they are to be good citizens of the empire or even of the local community. Being nice people is not enough. The deeper concern is to be people of good character who do what is good for others. That first verse cited from 2:14 makes an astounding point: what is being done by the believers has the potential to gain the approval and public honor by political authorities. What would these benefactions look like? I quote from an expert on this theme, Bruce Winter:

Benefactions included supplying grain in times of necessity by diverting the grain-carrying ships to the city, forcing down the price by selling it in the market below the asking rate, erecting public buildings or adorning old buildings with marble revetments such as in Corinth, refurbishing the theatre, widening roads, helping in the construction of public utilities, going on embassies to gain privileges for the city, and helping in the city in times of civil upheaval (Winter, Seek the Welfare of the City, 37).

As we read through this letter, we need to keep in mind two elements that shine forth from this thematic passage in chapter two: first, that these believers are at the lower end of the social ladder and, second, they are to engage as they can in public benefactions. How can they do so as the poor? By participating in the benefactions as laborers or in any way they can establish a good reputation for the church that brings glory to God (2:12 end).

Who are they?

         As mentioned in the Introduction, the churches of Asia Minor were experiencing suffering for their faith. Whenever a group experiences social pressure like this, the group develops strategies for cohesion and survival. In a theory developed long ago but still of much value, Bernard Siegel detailed four strategies:

(1) a cadre of leadership is formed;

(2) they marry within the group, something called endogamy;

(3) the group forms cultural identity symbols;

and (4) the youth are educated or discipled into the group’s way of life (Siegel, “Defensive Structuring”).

Today’s passage embodies this theory because the community of believers was experiencing stress and opposition (2:12: “accuse of doing wrong” unjustly). The training of youth and formation of leadership emerge in one single verse. At 5:5 Peter urges the younger men to live consistently with the ways of the wiser, older men, and in this way he affirms leadership (5:1-4) and education. Chapter three’s concerns with husbands and wives, not the least the believing partners, illustrates endogamy. Their most important cultural symbol may be the names Peter mentions in today’s reading: they are “exiles and temporary residents.” They know where they actually belong (kingdom of God) and that this world is not the eternal city Rome claimed for itself.

         This theoretical reflection yields deep insights for the letter: Peter is addressing a group of Christ followers who are marginalized but identified with some of the most glowing terms in the whole Bible (2:9-10). Even more, they are following Jesus, the Messiah and Lord and Savior and Living Stone and Great Shepherd. As followers they are also siblings. All this yields a community that is a family and a community that recognizes them regardless of their location on the social ladder (2:13–3:12). This letter will bounce how to live off who they are over and over.

Questions for Reflection and Application

1. How does Peter expect the believers to live in two worlds at once (the Roman Empire and the Kingdom of God)?

2. What does “do good” mean to Peter?

3. How does it change your perspective to think of the audience of this letter as migrant workers rather than spiritual pilgrims?

4. In what ways can these poor believers participate in benefaction, an activity often associated with the wealthy upper class?

5. What does it mean to you to live a “publicly beautiful” life today?

Bernard Siegel, “Defensive Structuring and Environmental Stress,” American Journal of Sociology 76 (1970): 11-32.

Bruce Winter, Seek the Welfare of the City: Christians as Benefactors and Citizens (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1994).