Tag: bible

Exposition

1 PETER 4:7-19 LIVING WITH ‘THE END’ IN VIEW

Posted on 23rd Nov 202218th Dec 2025 by writtenexposition

4:7-11 CHRISTIAN BEHAVIOUR AS THE END APPROACHES

4:12-19 SUFFERING FOR THE GLORY OF GOD

4:7-11 CHRISTIAN BEHAVIOUR AS THE END APPROACHES

[4:7] The conjunction ‘but’ connects this passage back to the judgement of God (v.5). That is part of the consummation of history which is here called ‘the End’. That time is ‘at hand’ (Mk 1:15; Rom 13:12). For similar expressions see:

1 Cor 7:29 ‘the time is short’.
Heb 10:25 ‘as ye see the day approaching’.
1 Jn 2:18 ‘it is the last time’.

In light of the nearness of ‘the End’ Christians ought to be watchful and well-behaved (Mt 24:45-25;13; Mk 13:33-37; Rom 13:11-14; Phil 4:4-6; Heb 10:23-31; Jas 5:7-11; Rev 22:12).

‘sober’ (sōphronéō) self-controlled They are to remain clear-headed and not get overly-excited or emotional (see 2 Thess 2:2). It is not necessary for them to give up their usual routine, they are to be disciplined (nḗphō) and alert so that they can pray.

[4:8] Above everything else they are to keep their love for one another at full strength (see 1:22; 2:17) for love will cover a multitude of sins. This is a quotation from Prov 10:12. They are not to harbour grudges but overlook the offences of others.

‘fervent’ intense (ektenḗs)

‘have’ hold fast, adhere, cling (échō)

[4:9] ‘be hospitable’ (philóxenos)

This probably refers to the hosting of travelling apostles or other Christians. Hospitality was to be exercised without grumbling, especially perhaps should the visitors decide to overstay.

[4:10-11] ‘As every man hath received the gift (chárisma), even so minister the same one to another, as good stewards of the manifold grace (cháris) of God.’

This is a general exhortation to Christians to use whatever gift they have received for the benefit of others. Every Christian is a steward (oikonómos). In those days a steward was the slave entrusted with managing his master’s household and property. The local church is viewed as a household in 1Tim 3:5, 15.

‘As every man hath received the gift, even so minister the same one to another, as good stewards of the manifold grace of God.’

(poikílos) means many in number and varied in kind. God’s grace is diversified, it is bestowed freely and takes many forms. The word ‘manifold’ occurs twice in 1 Peter:

1 Pet 1:6 ‘manifold temptations’

1 Pet 4:10 ’ manifold grace of God’

Peter mentions two categories of gift which perhaps together stand for all of the gifts. These are a) speaking and b) serving. His not concern is not just with the gifts but also how they are exercised.

Those who speak (preach and teach) should speak realizing that they are speaking the words of God ( 2 Cor 5:20; 1 Thess 2:13). ‘Oracles’ are divine utterances (Acts 7:38; Rom 3:2). Those who serve are not to depend upon their own resources but must rely on the strength that God supplies. Keating (2011, p.108) comments: ‘Our ability to exercise these gifts does not come from within us — God himself supplies the words to speak and the strength to serve.’

‘Giveth’ – supplies (chorēgéō) This verb originally referred to the provision of a choir for a public festival at the benefactor’s own expense. Eventually it carried the idea of lavish or unstinting giving.

All speaking and serving should have the glorification of God through Jesus Christ as the chief aim.

V.11 finishes with a short doxology to God, the relative pronoun does not refer to Jesus Christ but to God. ‘Glory’ links to ‘glorified’ in the previous clause. ‘Dominion’ (krátos) is power, might, sovereignty. The doxology, like many in the Bible, ends with an ‘Amen’ – may it be so! (Neh 8:6; Psa 41:13; Rom 1:25; Gal 1:5; Phil 4:20; 1 Pet 5 :11).

From its first mention in Num 5:22 and a passage in Deut 27:15–26 (where the word appears 12 times) it would seem that ‘Amen’ started life in the Old Testament as a sort of legal shortcut. Instead of formally repeating all the words of an oath, Israelites would merely say: ‘Amen.’ ie, ‘I agree with that.’

4:12-19 SUFFERING FOR THE GLORY OF GOD

This section returns to the theme of suffering which was introduced in 1:6 and which has been present throughout the letter so far (1:6-7; 2:18-25; 3:9-18; 4:1-4). There is no noticeable connection between this section and the previous verses but there are a few less obvious links.

The word (xenízō) meaning ‘think it strange’ or ‘be surprised’ is used in v. 4 and v.12.
The notion of glorifying God occurs in v. 11 and in v.16.
The idea of impending judgement is in v.5 and in vv.17-18.

4:12-16 The Christians will be partakers of Christ’s suffering. Peter reminds these ‘strangers’ and ‘aliens’ (1:1; 2:11) that even in their trials they are ‘beloved’ (agapētós). Using word play (see xenízō v.4) they are not to be ‘shocked’ (xenízō) as if it would be a ‘strange’ (xénos) thing for them to face a ‘fiery ordeal’ (púrōsis) lit. ’burning’. It is to try them: the word ‘is’ (gínomai); a present participle meaning ‘to begin to be.’ Their trial would be ongoing, not just a one-off event.

[13-16]

v.13 They will have future glory.

v. 14 God will have present glory.

‘But rejoice, inasmuch as ye are partakers of Christ’s sufferings; that, when his glory shall be revealed, ye may be glad also with exceeding joy.’

Their fiery trial amounts to ‘sharing’ (koinōnéṓ̄) in the sufferings of the Messiah. This should cause them to ‘rejoice’ (chairete) and also, when Christ’s glory is revealed, they will then ‘rejoice with exultation’ ( charete agalliomenoi).

Note the word ‘also.’ Their rejoicing in suffering now is but a foretaste of the rapturous joy they will experience when the glory of Christ will be fully revealed.

When Christians are insulted on account of Christ they are ‘blessed,’ not just in the future but in the present time. This section is reminiscent of the beatitudes in Mt 5:11-12. Peter has already mentioned the topic of suffering unjustly in 2:20 and 3:17.

The verb ‘to insult’ or ‘reproach’ (oneidízō), and its noun (oneidismós), is used elsewhere to describe how Jesus Christ was treated:

Mt 27:44 ‘cast…in his teeth.’

Rom 15:3 ‘that reproached thee.’

Heb 11:26 ‘the reproach of Christ

Heb 13:13 ‘bearing his reproach.’

The Christians who suffer unjustly because of Christ are already blessed for (i.e because) ‘the spirit of glory and of God resteth’ upon them. Achtemeier (2009, p.308) comments:

‘The clause is framed in uncharacteristically awkward prose …with repeated neuter articles preceding genitival phrases tied together with a coordinating “and,” thus making both phrases appear to modify “Spirit. “

J. N. D. Kelly (1969, p.186) explains:

‘In part the wording is inspired by LXX Is. xi. 2 (‘and the Spirit of God shall rest upon him’). But while the broad meaning of the sentence is reasonably clear, the Greek is bafflingly difficult to construe, and it is possible that the original text (copyists very soon began altering it) is lost. As the text stands, we have the neuter definite article with the genitive ‘of the glory’ (to tes doxes) followed by and, and then a second neuter definite article with Spirit of God (to tou theou pneuma). The article may be repeated so as to give emphasis: ‘the Spirit of the glory—yes, the Spirit of God’. In both cases, on this assumption, it is one and the same Spirit, the genitives denoting its possessor and source, which is first (because of the mention of glory in 13) described as ‘the glory’, and then for purposes of clarification as ‘God’. Admittedly the reduplicated article is cumbersome, but this is the best sense that can be made of the sentence. An alternative explanation is that two distinct subjects are required, and so we should take ‘the of the glory’ as a substantival phrase equivalent to ‘the presence of the glory’, i.e. the Shekinah; but the precedents quoted for this use of the bare article (Mt. xxi. 21; i Cor. x. 24; Jas. iv. 14; 2 Pet. ii. 22) are instances of a well recognized usage which is of dubious relevance here. The motive, too, for this curious periphrasis, alleged to be reverence, is odd in view of the writer’s readiness to speak of the divine glory elsewhere.’

‘On their part he (it) is evil spoken of, but on your part he (it) is glorified’ probably refers back to the ‘name of Christ’ in v.14a.

Verse 15 begins with a ‘But.’ Peter reminds his readers that the promised blessedness does not apply to those who are badly treated for criminal behaviour. He gives four categories which seem to be listed in descending order of gravity:

1) Murderer

2) Thief

3) Evildoer (kakopoiós) see 2:12,14; 3:17

4) Busybody (allotrioepískopos) mischief-maker, meddler, one who gets involved in the affairs of other people.

This is a hapax legomenon, a word that occurs just once in a body of literature. There are more than fifty such words in 1 Peter. A list of New Testament hapax legomena may be viewed or downloaded here.

There is no shame, however, in someone suffering as a ‘Christian’ (follower of Christ) but he should rather glorify God ‘on this behalf’ i.e. on being described as a Christian, on account of bearing the name ‘Christian.’ This is one of the earliest (see Acts 11:26; 26:28) occurrences of ‘Christian and the first to bring out the stigma ‘(ashamed’ v.16) attached to such a designation in the society of the time.

[17-19] ‘For’ explains the reason why Christians who suffer unjustly should give God glory in that situation. Peter is assuring the Christians that those who persecute them will not go unpunished. They must realize that God’s first concern is with believers, he will certainly turn his attention to the ungodly sinners later. In fact, the suffering which the believers endure now represents the beginning of God’s final judgement (note the absolute tó kríma ‘the judgement’) on all human beings see 1: 17; 2:23; 4:5.

The idea that judgement will start with God’s people is present in the Old Testament:

‘Wherefore it shall come to pass, that when the Lord hath performed his whole work upon mount Zion and on Jerusalem, I will punish the fruit of the stout heart of the king of Assyria, and the glory of his high looks.’ Isa 10:12

‘For, lo, I begin to bring evil on the city which is called by my name, and should ye be utterly unpunished? Ye shall not be unpunished: for I will call for a sword upon all the inhabitants of the earth, saith the LORD of hosts.’ Jer 25:29

‘Slay utterly old and young, both maids, and little children, and women: but come not near any man upon whom is the mark; and begin at my sanctuary. Then they began at the ancient men which were before the house.’ Ezek 9:6

Also:

‘Now I urge those who read this book not to be depressed by such calamities, but to recognize that these punishments were designed not to destroy but to discipline our people.

In fact, not to let the impious alone for long, but to punish them immediately, is a sign of great kindness.
For in the case of the other nations the Lord waits patiently to punish them until they have reached the full measure of their sins; but he does not deal in this way with us,
in order that he may not take vengeance on us afterward when our sins have reached their height.’ 2 Macc 6:12-15 RSV

‘So that we ourselves glory in you in the churches of God for your patience and faith in all your persecutions and tribulations that ye endure:

Which is a manifest token of the righteous judgment of God, that ye may be counted worthy of the kingdom of God, for which ye also suffer:

Seeing it is a righteous thing with God to recompense tribulation to them that trouble you;

And to you who are troubled rest with us, when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels,

In flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ.’ 2 Thess 5:4-8

Peter emphasizes the point that it is much better to suffer the refining judgement of God as a Christian now than the later damnation of the ungodly who reject God’s good news. He does this by use of two parallel questions each beginning with ‘And.’

v. 17b ‘and if it first begin at us, what shall the end be of them that obey not the gospel of God?,

v.18 ‘And if the righteous scarcely be saved, where shall the ungodly and the sinner appear?’

These two questions have much the same meaning, the latter is almost an exact citation of Proverbs 11:31 LXX.

The conclusion of v.19 is that in such circumstances Christians ought to realize that their suffering is not random but is in accord with the will of God. They must therefore commit their souls (i.e. themselves’) to God and continue in active well-doing. God is the faithful Creator, he has the power to create and therefore has the power to sustain them. He is someone who can be trusted. The word (ktístēs) for Creator occurs only here in the New Testament.

(1) THE PRESBYTER-BISHOP IN THE PASTORAL EPISTLES – INTRODUCTION

Exposition

1 PETER 5:1-4 – EXHORTATION TO ELDERS

Posted on 14th Nov 202218th Dec 2025 by writtenexposition

Chapter five naturally divides into the following sections:

5:1-4 Exhortation to elders

5:5-7 Exhortation to church members

5:8-11 A warning about the adversary

5:12-14 Farewell and final greetings

5:1-4 EXHORTATION TO ELDERS

‘The elders which are among you I exhort, who am also an elder, and a witness of the sufferings of Christ, and also a partaker of the glory that shall be revealed: Feed the flock of God which is among you, taking the oversight thereof, not by constraint, but willingly; not for filthy lucre, but of a ready mind; Neither as being lords over God’s heritage, but being examples to the flock. And when the chief Shepherd shall appear, ye shall receive a crown of glory that fadeth not away.‘

[1] Peter refers to the leaders of the Asian churches as ‘elders’ and says that he considers himself an elder as well.

Various terms are used for church leaders in the New Testament. For example:

Phil 1:1 ‘to the bishops and deacons.’

1 Tim 3:1-7 The qualifications of ‘the bishop’ (singular).

1 Tim 3: 8-13 The qualifications of ‘the deacons’ (plural).

1 Tim 5:1; 17-22 Instructions about ‘elders.’

Titus 1:5-9 ‘Elders’ in v1, ‘bishop’ in v7 – the terms seem to be used interchangeably as the same responsibilities are in view.

For further reading view my posts:

(2) THE PRESBYTER-BISHOP IN THE PASTORAL EPISTLES – QUALIFICATIONS

(3) THE PRESBYTER-BISHOP IN THE PASTORAL EPISTLES – CONCLUSION AND BIBLIOGRAPHY

The word ‘so’ or ‘therefore’ (oun – also occurs in 3:7; 5:13) is not included here in most Bible translations. It may refer back to ‘well doing’ in 4:19 or possibly to the idea of judgement beginning at the house of God in 4:17. The Old Testament background for this is Ezek 9:6.

Peter uses the first person (‘I exhort’) followed by an imperative (‘feed’). The first person was last used in 2:11 (‘I beseech’) where it was followed by an infinitive (‘[to] abstain’). He is strongly encouraging them to comply with his request.

‘Elder’ (presbuteros) here refers to a church leader rather than just to an older man (Acts 14;23; 1 Cor 12:28; Phil 1:1; 1Thess 5:12). Peter adds weight to his exhortation by saying that he is a ‘fellow-elder'(sympresbuteros). This word occurs nowhere else in Greek literature and was probably coined by Peter. He can therefore relate to the responsibilities that elders carry. Since Peter did not claim to have a higher position than other elders we can be certain that he was not a pope.

He also claims that he is a witness (martus) to Christ’s sufferings. Does this mean that he was an actual eyewitness or just ‘one who testifies?’ For examples of the former meaning see Mk 14:63; Acts 7:58 and 2 Cor 13:1. For the latter meaning see Lk 24:48; Acts 1:8; 22:15. There may be suffering involved (Acts 22:20; Rev 2:13; 17:6).

Peter will be ‘a partaker in the glory which is going to be revealed’ (cp. 4:13). Presumably the force of ‘fellow’ elder carries on so that he is also a fellow-witness and a fellow-partaker in the glory. There may be a special glory for faithful elders.

[2] ‘feed the flock of God which is among you’ Using pastoral imagery Peter exhorts the elders to tend the flock of God in their charge. They were to feed, guard and guide the believers. There is a play on words here. The verb poimaínō (act as shepherd) and the noun poímnion (flock) are from the same root and in English would be something like ‘shepherd the sheep.’ The elders are to oversee (episkopéō) the flock of God (it belongs to God, not then). They are to function as overseers i.e. take upon themselves and carry out pastoral responsibility. Shepherding and oversight have already been linked in 2:25.

The idea of God’s people as a flock is present in both the Old Testament (Psa 23; Isa 40:11; Jer 23:1-4; Ezek 34:1-10) and in the New Testament (Jn 21:15-17; Acts 20:28). Some church leaders are designated ‘shepherds’ (KJV pastors) in Eph 4:11. This, however, describes the work they do, it is not a clerical title (‘Pastor’). How the elders must supervise (episkopéō) the flock is set out in a series of three antitheses or contrasts. The negative is given first, followed by the positive.

i. ‘not by constraint but willingly’

The elders are not to lead by constraint ( i.e. as a result of coercion or compulsion by others), but willingly (i.e. voluntarily and eagerly). To be a willing volunteer in spite of possible danger and government scrutiny, is ‘according to God’ (i.e. as God would have it).

ii. ‘not for filthy lucre, but of a ready mind’

The elders ought to take up the role because they eagerly wish to serve others and are not to be motivated by desire for financial gain. They must wish to give rather than get.

iii. ‘neither as being lords over God’s heritage, but being ensamples to the flock’

[3] The elders are not to lord it over (katakurieúō) those (klḗros) whom God has allotted to them but are to set them an example by how they live their own lives. Those who have been assigned to the elders are ‘the flock’ of 5:2. Jesus himself gave a similar instruction to the apostles in Mt 20:25-27; Mk 19:42-45; Lk 22:25-27.

[4] Peter here describes the Lord Jesus as the ‘chief shepherd’ (archipoímēn), one who oversees other shepherds when a flock is so large that more than one shepherd is required. Peter promises the elders that if they faithfully carry out their pastoral duties as undershepherds then they will receive an unfading reward when the chief shepherd is revealed. The reward is a crown of glory; this image of a crown as a reward would have been familiar to Peter’s first readers, The crown awarded to faithful elders will be everlasting.

Note:

Jn 10:11 ‘the good shepherd’

Heb 13:20 ‘ the great shepherd’

1 Pet 5:4 ‘the chief shepherd’

KING HEROD AGRIPPA II (Part 1)

Roman names

KING HEROD AGRIPPA II (BIBLIOGRAPHY)

Posted on 14th Nov 202218th Dec 2025 by writtenexposition

BOOKS

Aymer, M., Kittredge, C. and Sánchez, D., 2016. The Gospels and Acts, Minneapolis: Fortress Press

Barrett, C.K., 2002, Acts of the Apostles: A Shorter Commentary. Bloomsbury Publishing.

‌Baur, F. C., 1876. Paul The Apostle Of Jesus Christ, His Life and Work, His Epistles and His Doctrine: A Contribution to A Critical History Of Primitive Christianity, Vol. 1., London: Williams and Norgate

Balch, D. and Osiek, C., 2003. Early Christian Families in Context: an Interdisciplinary Dialogue. Cambridge: UK: Eerdmans.

Bruce, F. F., 1990. The Acts of the Apostles: The Greek Text With Introduction and Commentary, Grand Rapids, Wm. B Eerdmans Publishing Co.

Conzelmann, H. and Epp, E. J., 1987, Acts of the Apostles. Hermeneia: A Critical & Histor.

‌Dunn, J. D. G., 1992. The Acts of the Apostles, Grand Rapids, Wm. B Eerdmans Publishing Co.

Earle, R, 1988, The Acts of the Apostles, Nicholasville, KY: Schmul Publishing Company

Gooding, D. W. 1990, True to the Faith: The Acts of the Apostles – Defining and Defending the Gospel, Belfast: Myrtlefield House

Green, M., 2004, Thirty Years That Changed the World: The Book of Acts for Today, Grand Rapids, Wm. B Eerdmans Publishing Co.

Haenchen, E., 1971, The Acts of the Apostles: A Commentary, Philadelphia: The Westminster Press

Horton, S. M, 1981, Acts, Springfield, Mo: Logion Press.

Jacobson, D. M., 2019, Agrippa II: The Last of the Herods, London: Routledge

Jennings, W. J., 2017, Acts: A Theological Commentary on the Bible, Louisville, KY: Westminster John Knox Press

Johnston, L. T., 1992, The Acts of the Apostles, Collegeville, Minn: The Liturgical Press

Jones, A. H. M., 1967, The Herods of Judaea, London, Clarendon Press

Keener, C.S., 2015, Acts, Vol. 4, 24 :1-28 : 31 : An Exegetical Commentary. Grand Rapids, Mich.: Baker Academic.

Lightfoot, J. B. and Witherington, B., 2014, The Acts of the Apostles : a New Commentary. Downers Grove, Illinois: Ivp Academic/Intervarsity Press.

Lyttelton, G, 1747, Observations on the Conversion and Apostleship of St. Paul. In a Letter tο Gilbert West, Esq., London : Printed for R. Dodsley, and sold by M. Cooper

‌MacArthur, J., 1986, Paul on Trial, Chicago: Moody Press

Marshall, I. H., 2008, Acts : an Introduction and Commentary. Nottingham: Inter-Varsity Press / Ivp Academic.

‌Montgomery, R. M, 2002, Great Events in Early Church History: Development and Spread of the Christian Faith as Recorded in the Book of Acts, Fort Worth, TX: Star Bible Publications

Neagoe, A., 2002, The Trial of the Gospel. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press

Pervo, R. I., 2009, Acts: A Commentary, Minneapolis, Minn: Fortress Press.

Sanford, W., 1972, Church Alive. Regal Books.

Seesengood, R. P., 2010, Paul: A Brief History, Chicester: Wiley-Blackwell

Schürer, E., Millar, F., Vermès, G., Black, M., Goodman, M. and Vermes, P., 2014, The History of the Jewish People in the Age of Jesus Christ (175 B.C. – A.D. 135). 1st ed. New York: Bloomsbury T & T Clark

Sherwin-White, A. N., 2004, Roman Society and Roman Law in the New Testament:The Sarum Lectures 1960-1961, Eugene, OR: Wipf & Stock Publishers

Stendahl, K., 1976, Paul Among Jews and Gentiles & Other Essays, Philadelphia, Fortress Press

Talbert, C. H., 2005. Reading Acts: A Literary and Theological Commentary on the Acts of the Apostles, Macon, GA: Smith & Helwys Publishing, Inc.

Tannehill, R., 1986, The Narrative Unity of Luke-Acts: A Literary Interpretation – Vol. 2 The Acts of the Apostles, Minneapolis, Minn: Fortress Press

Taushev, A., 2017. The Acts of the Apostles, New York: Holy Trinity Seminary Press

Udoh, E. F., 2020. To Caesar What Is Caesar’s: Tribute, Taxes, and Imperial Administration in Early Roman Palestine, Providence, Rhode Island: Brown Judaic Studies

Wilkins, M., Evans, C., Bock, D., Köstenberger, A. and Howard, J., 2013, The Holman Apologetics Commentary on the Bible: The Gospels and Acts, Nashville: B & H Publishing Group

JOURNAL ARTICLES

Allison Jr., D. C., 2016, ‘Acts 9:1–9, 22:6–11, 26:12–18: Paul and Ezekiel’, Journal of Biblical Literature, Vol. 135, No. 4, pp. 807-826

Bunine, A., 2004, Paul, Jacques, Félix, Festus et Les Autres: Pour Une Révision de la Chronologie des Derniers Procurateurs de Palestine, Revue Biblique, Vol. 111, No.3, pp. 387-408

Bunine, A., 2004, Paul, Jacques, Félix, Festus et Les Autres: Pour Une Révision de la Chronologie des Derniers Procurateurs de Palestine (suite et fin), Revue Biblique, Vol. 111, No.4, pp. 531-562

Dupont, J., 1961, Aequitas Romana: Notes sur Actes, 25,16, Recherches de Science Religieuse, Vol 49, No.3, pp. 354-385 available: https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/bpt6k9816413w/f36.item.r=aequitas%20romana

Faunce, W. H. P., 1896, ‘Paul before Agrippa’. The Biblical World, Vol. 7, No. 2, pp. 6-93

Foerster, G., 1975, The Early History of Caesarea, Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research. Supplementary Studies, (19), pp. 9-22

Fredriksen, P, 1986, ‘Paul and Augustine: Conversion Narratives, Orthodox Traditions, and the Retrospective Self’, Journal of Theological Studies, NS, Vol. 37, No. 1, pp. 2-34

Harry, J. E., 1908, Agrippa’s Response to Paul (Acts 26. 28), The Classical Review, Vol. 22, No. 8, pp. 238-241

Hedrick, C. W., 1981, ‘Paul’s Conversion/Call: A Comparative Analysis of the Three Reports in Acts’, Journal of Biblical Literature, Vol.100, No.3, pp. 415-432

Hurtado, L. W, 1993. ‘Convert, Apostate or Apostle to the Nations: the “Conversion” of Paul in Recent Scholarship’, Studies in Religion/Sciences Religieuses, Vol. 22, No. 3, pp. 273-284

Jacobson, D. M., 2017, ‘On the Chalkous of the Later Seleucids and of Agrippa II’, Israel Numismatic Research, Vol. 12, pp. 65-70

Jacobson, D. M., 2019, ‘The End of Agrippa II’s Rule, as Revealed by Coins’, Israel Numismatic Research, Vol. 14, pp. 131-139

Kilgallen, J. J., 1988, Paul before Agrippa (Acts 26, 2-23): Some Considerations. Biblica, Vol. 69, No. 2, pp. 170-195

Kokkinos, N., 2003, ‘Justus, Josephus, Agrippa II and his Coins’, Scripta Classica Israelica, Vol. XXII, pp. 163-180.

Kushnir-Stein, A., 2002, ‘The Coinage of Agrippa II’, Scripta Classica Israelica, Vol. XXI, pp. 123-131

Lewis, W. M., 1899, ‘St. Paul’s Defense before King Agrippa, in Relation to the Epistle to the Hebrews,’ The Biblical World, Vol. 13, No. 4, pp. 244-248

Prokulski, W., 1957, ‘The Conversion of St. Paul’, CBQ, Vol. 19, No 4, pp. 453-473

Speidel, M., 1982, ‘The Roman Army in Judaea under The Procurators: The Italian and The Augustan Cohort in The Acts of The Apostles,’ Ancient Society, 13/14, pp. 233-240

Spencer, A. B, 2016, ‘A style study of the Apostle Paul’s communication with Festus and Agrippa: The use of literary Koine Greek in Acts 25:14–22; 26:1–29,’ In die Skriflig/In Luce Verbi. Vol. 50, No. 4

KING HEROD AGRIPPA II (Part 2)

KING HEROD AGRIPPA II (Part 3)

Roman names

KING HEROD AGRIPPA II (Part 3)

Posted on 14th Nov 202218th Dec 2025 by writtenexposition

Reading: Acts 26:1-32

PAUL’S DEFENCE BEFORE KING HEROD AGRIPPA II

Luke’s account of Paul’s ‘apologia’ (defence) in Acts 26 consists of a speech by Paul and an interruption by Festus, followed by a closing dialogue between Paul and Agrippa.

26:1-23 Paul’s defence speech.

26:24-26 Festus’ interruption.

26:27-29 Closing dialogue.

26:1-12 Paul addresses the first charge.

After Agrippa invited him to speak Paul stretched out his hand in ancient oratorical style and ‘answered for himself’ (26:1). The same verb – ‘I shall answer for myself’ – occurs in verse 2. This verb is apologéomai, meaning: to defend or plead for oneself. Although the noun is not used in Acts chapter 26 the usual description of this speech as a ‘defence’ before Agrippa is justified because of Paul’s use of the verb ‘to defend’.

Paul began by courteously addressing Agrippa and saying that he considered himself blessed to be making his defence before him because the king was a recognized expert on Jewish affairs. Paul refers to ‘all the things’ of which he ‘is being accused’ by the Jews. These accusations are the two sets of charges that have been previously identified:

A) That he was anti-Jewish, teaching against the law and the people and profaning the Temple (21:28-29; 25:8).

B) Political agitation and disturbance of the Roman peace (24:5; 25:8).

Paul maintained, and continued to maintain before Agrippa (26:8), that in reality the first set of charges boiled down to the question of belief in resurrection. He explained that he was well-known in Jerusalem where he had lived from his youth. He was famous as a Pharisee, following the rules of the strictest sect in Judaism. The Jews who had been accusing him knew very well that there was no chance of him desecrating the temple or preaching against Judaism. That, according to Paul, was not the real issue. He was being judged for ‘the hope of the promise made of God unto our fathers.’

Agrippa would have been aware that ‘the promise’ was the Messianic hope. Paul later clarified (26:8) that this hope included the resurrection of Jesus as proof that he really was the promised Messiah (26:23). It had been promised to the patriarchs (26:6) and been predicted by the prophets and in the torah (26:23). The strange thing was that the Jews, who had this ‘hope’, did not accept Paul’s message that ‘the hope’ had been fulfilled.

Although Jews, of all people, ought to have recognized this fulfilment Paul himself had made the same mistake. He was a Pharisee, and therefore theoretically a believer in resurrection, but had not accepted the fact that Jesus had risen from the dead. Paul had been so strongly opposed to the idea that he actively undertook an obsessive personal campaign of persecution against Christian believers. Chapter 26:9-11 details his involvement.

Thus, in this first part of his speech (26:4-12), Paul addressed the charge that he was anti-Jewish by outlining his past life as a strict Jew and by asserting that the resurrection (of Jesus) is compatible with Jewish messianic teaching. By using such expressions as ‘mine own nation’ (v. 4), ‘our religion’ (v. 5), ‘our fathers’ (v.6), and ‘our twelve tribes’ Paul emphasized that he still considered himself to be a Jew.

26:13-23 Paul addresses the second charge.

Paul’s response to the second charge (that he was a political revolutionary) was to ‘tell the story of his conversion’, explain his mission and give a potted history of his evangelistic activity up to that point in time (‘unto this day’ v. 22). Verses 13-23 may be divided into three sections:

A Christophany (13-15)

A Commission (15-18)

A Change (19-23)

A CHRISTOPHANY – OUTSIDE DAMASCUS (vv. 13-15)

Just as Luke records three accounts of the conversion of Cornelius (Acts 10:1-44; 11:5-17; 15:7-11) in the Acts of the Apostles so he also includes three accounts (9: 9-19; 22: 4-16; 26:12-18) of what we commonly refer to as ‘Paul’s ‘conversion’. This is the third of the three. Paul himself did not use the term ‘conversion.’ What Paul relates was by no means a typical experience and strictly speaking not even a conversion (since he did not begin to worship a different God or leave his ancestral faith). Strangely, however, Paul later wrote that it was a ‘pattern’ (1 Tim 1:16) for ensuing conversions. He referred to the Damascus Road experience five times in his epistles (1 Cor 9:1; 15:8; 2 Cor 4:6; Gal 1:11-17; Phil 3:6-8).

Here Paul relates a vivid story which includes exciting details of:

The Journey: Paul travelling to Damascus with authority from the Jewish religious leaders to persecute Christians (26:12).

The Light: A light at noon that was brighter than the sun (26:13).

The Voice: A voice asking why he kept persecuting him (Jesus). The voice addressed him by name in Aramaic: ‘Saoúl, Saoúl’. This is the third of three names for the apostle in the Greek text of the book of Acts. The other names are Saúlos (which is a transliteration of his Hebrew name Sha’ūl) and the Hellenistic name Paúlos. (N.B. Contrary to what one might think the name change from Saul to Paul was not due to his conversion but occurs at Acts 13:9 when Paul was in Cyprus before the Roman proconsul Sergius Paulus. The name change signified the change in priority from Jews to Gentiles.)

The risen Jesus in heaven quoting a well-known ancient Greek proverb: ‘It is hard to kick against the goads’ (Euripides. Bacc. 794-95; Aeschylus, Agam 1624; Julian, Or. 8.246B; Pindar, Pythian Odes 2.94)

A COMMISSION – TO EVANGELIZE JEWS AND GENTILES (vv. 15-18)

Addressing the issue of stirring up political unrest, Paul told Agrippa that Jesus had confronted him in a vision outside Damascus in order to appoint (procheirízomai) him ‘a minister’ (hupērétēs) and a witness (márturos).’

These terms would have been familiar to Festus and Agrippa as there would have been several of each in any courtroom. Note that an ‘assistant’ (minister) worked with documents (i.e. handling and delivering them e.g. Luke 4:20). John Mark is called this in Acts 13:5.

Paul claimed that since the Christophany his sole motivation in life had been obedience to Christ’s instructions which had been accompanied by a promise of deliverance from hostile Jews and Gentiles. Paul had been given a special commission to go to the Gentiles in order:

to open their eyes
to turn them from darkness to light
to turn them from the power of Satan to God
that they might receive forgiveness of sins
that they might obtain a place among them who are made holy (set apart to do God’s will) through faith in Jesus.

A CHANGE – IN PAUL’S LIFE (vv. 19-23)

Paul’s told Agrippa that his life had dramatically changed as a result of the vision of a heavenly being and gave a short account of his activities as a preacher and of the message he preached. That he was preoccupied with preaching the gospel across a wide geographical area answered the second charge levied against him; that he was a political agitator and disturber of the peace (25:8). He was motivated by the heavenly vision, not by political fervour.

Just like that of the earlier Christians in 1:8 there are four geographic divisions in Paul’s programme of outreach. His differs slightly in that his ministry began in Damascus where he was just after his conversion. He preached there (9:19-20) and in Jerusalem (9:28-29) but Acts does not record a preaching tour of Judaea, although such could possibly fit into 15:3-4. The summary of Paul’s missionary career in Galatians 1 gives no details of a period of ministry in Judaea but rather states (Gal 1:22) that Paul was personally unknown to the churches in Judaea. In an interesting article Lewis (1899, pp. 244-248) suggests that Paul’s ministry was not in person but through writing the Letter to the Hebrews during his time of imprisonment in Caesarea and arranging for it to be circulated throughout Judaea. Lewis identifies similarities in the thought and language of Acts 26 and the Letter to the Hebrews. Paul’s missionary activity began with Jews and then extended to the Gentile pagans.

Paul’s message was that his hearers were to repent, turn to God and do works ‘meet for repentance’. The idea is that their repentance could be viewed as sincere if it resulted in changed lives.

26:21 It was ‘for these causes’ that Jews sought to kill Paul. This might be a reference to what Paul had outlined in vv.16-20 but is more likely a reference to the charges that had been brought against him. In any case, with help from God, he had continued with his mission right up to that present time and was convinced that what he preached to everyone (both small and great) was nothing less, or more, than the message of the Old Testament (the prophets and Moses). He then summarizes this message in v. 23:

That the Messiah was to suffer
That the Messiah would be the first to rise from the dead
That the Messiah would show light to Israel and the Gentiles

Note that the unusual order ‘the prophets and Moses’ is the order of the Letter to the Hebrews (Heb 1:1; 3:2), as is ‘small and great’ (Heb 8:11).

FESTUS’ INTERRUPTION (vv. 24-26)

Although Paul’s speech had come to a close the outburst by Festus is usually treated as an interruption. This is because Paul had addressed his remarks to King Agrippa (26:4-23) but it was the Roman procurator Festus who spoke up loudly, telling Paul that great learning had driven him mad. Obviously Festus had been listening carefully but did not understand about resurrection. There had already been a hint of this in Acts 25:19. Festus reckoned that lit ‘many writings’ (possibly a reference to the Old Testament) had driven Paul insane.

Paul courteously addressed Festus as ‘most noble’ and assured him of his sanity and that the words he spoke were truthful and sound. Referring to Agrippa who had a good understanding of the Jewish religion (26:3) Paul said that the King knew that the death and resurrection of Jesus and associated events were public knowledge (‘not done in a corner’) and thus true and verifiable.

CLOSING DIALOGUE (vv. 27-29)

Turning from indirect to direct speech Paul called upon Agrippa as an expert witness and as one who knew that the prophets had prophesied the death and resurrection of the Messiah to confirm his belief in those prophecies.

‘King Agrippa, believest thou the prophets? I know that thou believest.’

Unfortunately Agrippa sidestepped the question with a frivolous and humorous comment: ‘Soon you will convince me to play (theatrical term) the Christian’. Since it was clear that Agrippa had not come to faith in Christ Paul had the last word and said that he wished that all those present were like himself, apart from the chains. Barrett (2002, p. 393) comments: ‘Paul’s desire to make Christians applies to the least and to the greatest, to the king himself. Paul wishes for all his hearers the election, the call and the commission he himself has.’

At that point King Agrippa, Festus, Bernice and their legal advisers rose and left. Luke reports that as they talked together about the day’s proceedings Agrippa spoke positively of Paul and explained to Festus that had Paul not already appealed to Caesar he could have been released. The New Testament has nothing further to say about Festus or Agrippa.

KING HEROD AGRIPPA II (Part 1)

KING HEROD AGRIPPA II (Part 2)

KING HEROD AGRIPPA II (Bibliography)

General

‘EBENEZER’

Posted on 21st Dec 202118th Dec 2025 by writtenexposition

Closing message on our last Sunday with our church before moving to live elsewhere.

1 Samuel 7:12 ‘EBENEZER’

‘Then Samuel took a stone, and set it between Mizpeh and Shen, and called the name of it Ebenezer, saying, Hitherto hath the Lord helped us.’ 1 Samuel 7:12

There is a certain form of words occurring throughout our Bible which makes a very interesting study. I’ll mention the following example references:

Deuteronomy chapters 31-34 – the speaker is Moses.

Joshua chapters 23-24 – the speaker is Joshua.

1 Samuel chapter 12 – the speaker is Samuel.

1 Kings chapter 2 and also 1 Chronicles chapters 28 -29 – the speaker is David,

Luke chapter 22 and also John chapters 13-17 – the speaker is the Lord Jesus Christ.

Acts chapter 20 – the speaker is the apostle Paul.

You may have already realized that in these chapters we have what scholars term ‘THE FAREWELL ADDRESS.’

You will be relieved to know, although this is our last Sunday here, that I am not about to deliver a long farewell speech.

Instead I would like to leave this verse from 1 Samuel with you, not only because it is my favourite Bible verse but also because we have experienced, and can testify to, its truth. Today we look back over the 32 years since we walked in the door of the old building one Sunday morning in September 1989, with two small children in tow and not knowing anyone in this part of the world.

Ebenezer is an unusual name. Personally, I don’t know anyone called Ebenezer. Unless familiar with the Bible most people would probably recall it as the name of the miser Scrooge in Charles Dicken’s story, ‘A Christmas Carol’ – but Ebenezer Scrooge bears no relation to the Ebenezer of the Bible because:

The biblical Ebenezer was not a person, it was a place.

The biblical Ebenezer was not a scrooge, it was a stone.

The biblical Ebenezer was not a miser, it was a marker.

In 1 Samuel chapters 4-7 you can read for yourselves the historical background to Samuel’s erection of this stone monument. Sufficient to say that for a long period of time the ancient Israelites forgot God and had consequently suffered defeat at the hands of their neighbours, the Philistines. These enemies captured the Ark of the Lord, which was gone for twenty years (7:2). After a national turning to the Lord, however, and intercession on the part of Samuel, the Philistines were defeated. Samuel then set up the memorial stone as a reminder to the people of the faithfulness of God to those who trust in him alone.

As we review more than three decades spent here:

EBENEZER REMINDS US OF THE PAST

Looking back we recognise God’s help and protection in our lives. There have been many good times and some difficult times; there has been employment and also unemployment; there has been health and there has been sickness. However, we can honestly say: ‘Ebenezer …. Hitherto hath the Lord helped us.’ Had we set up a memorial stone for every occasion on which the Lord helped us there would be a long trail of gratitude behind us, stretching back over thirty-two years. As well as reminding us of the past…

EBENEZER DIRECTS US TO THE PRESENT

‘Hitherto’ means ‘up to now’ and that, of course, includes the present time. We can therefore be confident that the Lord who has helped us in the past is now helping us in the present. The One who HAS helped us is STILL helping us. As we undergo the stress of uprooting our lives and moving to one of the other countries in the UK ‘Ebenezer’ reminds us to be thankful for what the Lord is doing now.

Ebenezer reminds us of the past.

Ebenezer directs us to the present, but also:

EBENEZER POINTS US TO THE FUTURE

When we get to a certain point in time and can still say ‘hitherto’ that means that we haven’t reached the end yet. The Lord has more to do, for us and with us, and he will help us until our lives on earth come to a close. I suppose that as we contemplate the future we can change the ‘hitherto hath the Lord helped us’ to ‘henceforth the Lord will help us’.

Let me publicly pay tribute to all the members of this church (to the many who have already gone to be with the Lord, and to you all who remain) and thank you for your fellowship, your friendship, your kindness to us and your confidence in us as we have fulfilled our various roles and responsibilities in this assembly.

We brought up our children here and are thankful that, at a young age, both of them placed their trust in Jesus Christ for eternal salvation. Thank you for providing a loving and caring atmosphere in which we could raise our family and for being a positive Christian influence upon young lives.

We ask you to pray for us as we assume a nomadic lifestyle for a few months, that the Lord will guide us as to where we ought to settle down and live in retirement and that we might be of help in whatever assembly of Christians we meet with.

I trust that you all (individually and as an assembly of believers) will continue to experience the Lord’s help and blessing and be able to say, as we can: ‘Ebenezer …. hitherto hath the Lord helped us.’

Exposition

1 John 2:18-23

Posted on 7th Nov 202118th Dec 2025 by writtenexposition

THE DECEPTIONS OF THE LAST HOUR

Another reason John gives for writing this letter was that of end-time deceptions. He wanted his readers to be aware of false teachers who would be marked by the characteristics of antichrist.

[18] Having mentioned in v.17 that the world ‘passeth away’ John begins to think about the End.

‘last hour’ (éschatos hṓra) Some tend to overthink this expression and assign it to the long time period between Christ’s Ascension and Second Coming (others might say something similar, like: ‘between Pentecost and the Rapture’). How would the first readers/hearers of this letter have understood these words? They, like John, would have assumed that the eschatological climax of the ages was imminent.

What caused John to think that the End was near? He himself answers that question: ‘now there are many antichrists; whereby we know that it is the ‘last time.’

The word ‘antichrist’ (antíchristos) meaning ‘against Christ’ occurs only in the epistles of John (1 John 2:18, 22; 4:3; 2 John 1:7). The appearance of false teachers and false Christs had been predicted by Jesus himself in Mt 24:4-5, 24-25.

[19] ‘They went out from us’ Note: ‘They’ and ‘us’. The false teachers had defected from the fellowship of the apostles. As regards doctrine, there had been a rift between them and the apostles. ‘Us’ is most likely an apostolic first person plural pronoun (see also 1:1; 4:6). It is likely that as the false teachers travelled around they claimed an association with the apostles. John emphasizes that no such link existed. For John, the fact that these people had left the true faith showed what they were really like.

[20] ‘but ye’ The ‘you’ of vv. 21-22 contrasts with the ‘they’ of v. 19. John’s readers were faithful because they had ‘received an unction (chrísma) from the Holy One’. This may be an allusion to the anointing of the Levitical priests (Ex 40:15). If so, the main idea is that when a priest was anointed it was with the presumption that his ministry for God would continue for the remainder of his life. The ‘unction’ that John’s readers had received is mentioned again twice in v. 27, where it is clear that the reference is to a person.

‘The Holy One’ This is Jesus Christ (see Mk 1:24; Lk 4:34; Jn 6:69; Acts 3:14; Rev 3:7).

As a result of the unction they ‘know (understand) all things.’ (For use of the word ‘know’ (eídō) in 1 John see also: 2:11, 21 (2x), 29; 3:2, 5, 14, 15; 5:13, 15 (2x), 18, 19, 20)

[21] John tactfully tells them that he has written to them precisely because they know the truth (Jer 31:34; Jn 6:45), that because of the unction they already have a good grasp of truth i.e. about Jesus Christ. They will not be caught out by the lies that false teachers were spreading about the Person of Christ.

[22-23] The false teachers were liars because they denied that Jesus was the Messiah, i.e the One sent by God to be the Saviour (Jn 4: 29, 42; 20:31). Having defined the lie John then labels those who propagate that lie as antichrists. To deny the Son is tantamount to denying the Father who sent him (4:10) and who bore witness to him (5:9-10).

Exposition

1 PETER 4 :1-6 THE GOSPEL PREACHED TO THE DEAD

Posted on 22nd Oct 202118th Dec 2025 by writtenexposition

Division of the chapter:

4:1-6 Suffering as Christ suffered

4:7-19 Suffering as a Christian

Forasmuch then as Christ hath suffered for us in the flesh, arm yourselves likewise with the same mind: for he that hath suffered in the flesh hath ceased from sin; That he no longer should live the rest of his time in the flesh to the lusts of men, but to the will of God. For the time past of our life may suffice us to have wrought the will of the Gentiles, when we walked in lasciviousness, lusts, excess of wine, revellings, banquetings, and abominable idolatries: Wherein they think it strange that ye run not with them to the same excess of riot, speaking evil of you: Who shall give account to him that is ready to judge the quick and the dead. For for this cause was the gospel preached also to them that are dead, that they might be judged according to men in the flesh, but live according to God in the spirit. 4:1-6

4:1-6 Suffering as Christ suffered

4:1-5 Their death with Christ:

v.1 liberates them from the power of sin.
v.2 enables them to do God’s will.
vv.3-5 gives them a new perspective on sin.

4:6 The Christian martyrs:

were judged (and slain) by men
are alive unto God.

[1] ‘Since then Christ has suffered in the flesh’ looks back to 3:18 – ‘being put to death in the flesh’.

‘suffered’ – suffering can be taken as including death (Acts 17:3; Heb 13:12).

‘In the flesh’ – during this life on earth.

‘arm yourselves’ (hoplízō) This is a military term meaning to equip or furnish with arms. The Christian life is sometimes thought of as a war (Rom 6:13; 13:12; 2 Cor 6:7; 10:4; Eph 6:11-17; 1 Th 5:8).

‘with the same mind’ In light of Christ’s suffering Christians are to think as Christ thought about suffering. His mind was fixed and focused on the will of God (v. 2).

(énnoia) attitude of mind, thought, guiding conviction – that ‘death in the flesh’ results in ‘life in the spirit’ (3:18). They are to arm themselves with a willingness to suffer.

‘likewise’ and ‘the same’ – the experience of Christians is equated with that (death, resurrection, triumph) of Christ.

‘for’ (hóti) – if taken as explicative it introduces the explanation of ‘same mind’, if taken as causal (translate ‘because’) it is introducing the reason for the exhortation in verse 1a.

It is most likely causal, which also avoids any perception that ‘ceased from sin’ implies that Christ has been a sinner. Peter has already stated that Christ was sinless (2:22).

‘he that hath suffered in the flesh hath ceased from sin.’ The idea is possibly that in water baptism a believer identifies himself with Christ’s suffering and death.

paúsō stop, come to an end. To be finished with something does not necessarily imply participation in it.

If the singular ‘he’ is taken as referring to Christ as the one who has ‘suffered in the flesh and ceased from sin’ in what sense, therefore, has Christ ‘finished with sin’? One could say that he is finished with it in that he no longer has to reckon with the opposing powers and perhaps also in that it is no longer something that he has to bear for mankind. His bearing sin for mankind was finished at the cross and in his resurrection he was victorious over death and the evil powers. His death has removed him from sin’s sphere of influence.

Since this verse links back to 3:18, in which suffering and death seem to be equivalent, Peter could use the term ‘suffer’ here to speak of both the death of Christ and the suffering of Christians and draw an analogy between the two.

[2] By their willingness to suffer for righteousness’ sake the Christians demonstrate that they have made made a clean break with sin and have committed themselves to a new way of life.

‘The rest of…time in the flesh’ This refers not simply to the remainder of their earthly lives but also to the fact that the End is near (see v.7).

[3] ‘The time past of our life may suffice us’ Referring to their previous lifestyle Peter uses irony to tell them that they have wasted ‘more than enough’ time living in immorality. They were living ‘according to the wish of the Gentiles’. Peter uses ‘Gentiles’ here to refer to the local pagans – who are not Christians, rather than to people who are not Jews. Note the contrast between ‘the will of God’ (v.2) and the ‘will of the Gentiles’ (v.3).

Peter divides the Christian life into two parts. The first is ‘the time that has passed’ which is characterized by sinful practices (v.3 ff). The second part is the time that remains (v.2).

‘When we walked in’ is followed by a short list of vices (cp. Gal 5:19-21):

lasciviousness – asélgeia, sensuousness, no moral restraint.

lusts – epithumía, passions, cravings, sinful desires

excess of wine – oinophlugía, intoxications

revellings kṓmos, revelries, immoral parties

banquetings pótos, drinking bouts, drunken parties

abominable idolatries – athémitoi eidōlolatreíai, lawless idolatries, acts of idol worship

[4] ‘wherein’ refers to the content of v. 3. Contrast with the ‘wherein’ of 1:6. Non-Christians think it strange that the Christians no longer involve themselves in such social activities. The pagan neighbours ‘speak evil’ of the Christians because they do not rush with them (stampede) to the same ‘excess of riot’ (indulgence that is unrestrained).

The word for ‘speak evil’ is blasphēméō which, as well as meaning ‘ to blaspheme’ (Mt 9:3; Rom 2:24) can mean ‘to speak slanderously’ (Rom 3:8, 1 Cor 10:30; Tit 3:2).

[5] Those who vilify the Christians will be accountable to ‘him that is ready to judge the quick and the ‘dead’. The use of ‘ready’ implies that the judgement will be soon.

Who is the judge? Thus far in 1 Peter God the Father is viewed as the judge (1:17, 2:23). Generally, however, the New Testament teaches that God has committed this task to Christ (Mt 25:31-46; Lk 24:46; Acts 10:42, 17:31; Rom 14:10; 1 Cor 4:5; 2 Tim 4:1).

[6] Having mentioned the thought of judgement and its imminence Peter now makes a rather obscure statement: ‘For for this cause was the gospel preached also to them that are dead, that they might be judged according to men in the flesh, but live according to God in the spirit.’

‘For’ links back to the mention of judgement and ‘this cause’ (this is why) refers forward to the day of judgement. The author is stating why the gospel was preached to dead people. Although there is no article here (it is not ‘the dead’) and thus the reference is to dead people in general Peter may be thinking of Christians who had already died (cp. 1 Thess 4:13-18) before the Day of Judgement. The early church expected a swift return by Christ. The Second Coming would involve judgement by Christ of the living and of those who were already dead (Acts 10:42; Rom 14:9-12; 2 Tim 4:1).

‘the gospel was preached’. Grammatically euaggelízō (to proclaim or tell) has no subject so we could read ‘it was preached’ or ‘he was preached’.

If taken as the impersonal ‘it was preached’ then Christ could have been the one who preached. In addition, the aorist tense refers to a definite occasion in the past when the preaching occurred.

It is unlikely, however, that this verse refers to the same preaching event as that of 3:19 as there the preaching was to spirits (pneúma) whereas here the preaching was to dead human beings (nekrós). ‘Dead’ refers to their present state but the ‘preaching’ occurred when they were alive. The gospel was preached to those who are dead.

Peter gives two reasons why the gospel was preached to these early believers:

a) that they might be judged according to men in the flesh.

b) that they might live according to God in the spirit.

The idea seems to be that these early Christians glorified God through martyrdom (see vv. 12-14). They were judged according to men (as men judge i.e. by appearances and unfairly) but once dead they leave the condemnation of men behind and enjoy eternal life. Jobes (2005, pp. 312-312) points out:

‘In the immediate context, Peter’s point is that death does not exempt a person from God’s coming judgment. Accountability after death was not widely taught in the pagan world. With such an assumption a pagan critic could reasonably question what good the gospel is, since it seems so restrictive of behavior in this life, and then the believer dies like everyone else. Peter, however, teaches that because people will be judged even after physical death, contra pagan expectation, the gospel message of forgiveness and judgment that has been preached to those who are now dead—whether they became believers or not—is still efficacious. Death does not invalidate either the promises or the warnings of the gospel of Jesus Christ. Peter’s claim not only would warn the unbeliever but would also encourage Christians concerning believers who may have passed on. Peter reassures his readers that the efficacy of the gospel continues after physical death to be the basis for God’s judgment, and therefore a decision to live for Christ in this life is truly the right decision, even despite appearances to the contrary as judged by the world’s reasoning.’

Exposition

1 John 2:15-17

Posted on 22nd Oct 202118th Dec 2025 by writtenexposition

We have previously noticed that in the section 2:12-27 the author tells his first readers precisely why he has written this letter to them. The first reason, given in 2:12-14, is their spiritual state. Now, in 2:15-17, we have John’s second reason for writing: because of the enticements of the world.

THE ENTICEMENTS OF THE WORLD

No matter how good their spiritual state might be John was aware that the danger of worldliness was ever present. He therefore warns them to beware of it.

[15] A COMMAND

Rather than just offer one or two helpful suggestions John issues a firm command: ‘love not the world neither the things that are in the world’. This is the first of ten imperatives in 1 John. See the ten listed at:

Although the ‘world’ (kósmos) can refer to people (e.g. John 3:16) here it seems to refer to the world system. Kósmos carries the idea of order or arrangement.

Lambert Dolphin makes the following useful comments on ‘the world:

‘The “world-system” involves a concern for external appearances more than inner content and quality. As used in the New Testament, the world does not refer to nature, but to the world-system, to society and human culture. The world system is outwardly religious, scientific, cultured and elegant. Inwardly it seethes with national and commercial rivalries.’

Much is said about the world in 1 John. See 2:2, 16-17; 3:1, 13; 4:3-5, 9, 14, 17; 5:4, 19.

[15] A CONCLUSION

‘If any man love the world, the love of the Father is not in him.’

If a professing Christian is wholly taken up with love for the world John would conclude that such a person is not a genuine believer at all, for this behaviour is incompatible with love for God.

[16] A CHARACTERIZATION

Everything that is in the world system does not come from the Father. This system of values, goals and ethics excludes God and is opposed to God (5:19).

John identifies three elements othat characterize worldliness:

a) ‘The lust of the flesh’. Lusts (desires or cravings) of the flesh refers to human bodily appetites.

b) ‘The lust of the eyes’. This would refer to the human tendency to want what we see. We are naturally covetous and acquisitive.

c) ‘The pride of life’. This is a reminder of human showiness and the wish to impress others with one’s own importance.

The world encourages and caters to these perspectives. N.B. Some see the sin of Eve (Gen 3:6) as illustrating these three elements of worldiness: ‘the tree was good for food’, ‘it was pleasant to the eyes’, ‘a tree to be desired to make one wise’.

[17] A CONFIRMATION

John observes that worldiness is a craving for things that will soon pass away and confirms that whoever does the will of God will ‘live’ (ménō, abide, remain) forever. The idea of ‘abiding’ is that of living in fellowship with God. Such a life is viewed as never really coming to an end.

Exposition

THE TEN IMPERATIVES IN 1 JOHN

Posted on 17th Oct 202118th Dec 2025 by writtenexposition

1. Love not the world, neither the things that are in the world. 2:15

2. Let that therefore abide in you, which ye have heard from the beginning. 2:24

3. Abide in him. 2:27

4. Abide in him. 2:28

5. Behold, what manner of love the Father hath bestowed upon us, 3:1

6. Let no man deceive you. 3:7

7. Marvel not, my brethren, if the world hate you. 3:13

8. Believe not every spirit. 4:1

9. Try the spirits. 4:1

10. Keep yourselves from idols. 5:21

Exposition

1 JOHN 2:12-14

Posted on 17th Oct 202118th Dec 2025 by writtenexposition

Reading through 1 John you will notice that the author often sets out his ideas in groups of three.

In chapter 1 he gives three tests of life and already in chapter 2 he has presented three tests for love.

Three tests in chapter 1: all begin with ‘if we say.’

1:6 If we say that we have fellowship with him, and walk in darkness, we lie, and do not the truth:

1: 8 If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.

1:10 If we say that we have not sinned, we make him a liar, and his word is not in us.

Three tests in chapter two: all begin with ‘he that saith.’

2:4 He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him…

2:6 He that saith he abideth in him ought himself also so to walk, even as he walked.

2:9 He that saith he is in the light, and hateth his brother, is in darkness even until now.

In the section 2:12-27 the author tells his first readers precisely why he has written this letter to them. The first reason is given in 2:12-14.

2:12-14 John writes because of their spiritual state.

Because of previous warnings in the letter one might think that the state of his addressees was suspect but these verses clarify that their spiritual condition was good. John was hoping that this would continue.

In 2:12-14 we have more triplets, two series of three, all beginning with the assertion ‘I am writing to you….. because.’

Series 1

2:12 I write unto you, little children, because your sins are forgiven you for his name’s sake.

2:13 I write unto you, fathers, because ye have known him that is from the beginning.

2:13 I write unto you, young men, because ye have overcome the wicked one.

Series 2

2:13 I write unto you, little children, because ye have known the Father.

2:14 I have written unto you, fathers, because ye have known him that is from the beginning.

2:14 I have written unto you, young men, because ye are strong, and the word of God abideth in you, and ye have overcome the wicked one.

CHILDREN

FATHERS

YOUNG MEN

Opinion is divided as to what is meant by ‘children’, ‘fathers’, and ‘young men’. Is the author addressing:

three physical age groups , i.e. ‘children’, ‘fathers’, and ‘young men’?
three levels of spiritual maturity, i.e. new Christians, mature Christians, and those with some Christian experience?
all the Christians as children, and then directing his comments to ‘fathers’ and ‘young men’, whether according to physical age groups (older people and younger people) or spiritual maturity (more mature, maturing)?

Whatever the case may be it seems odd that the group labelled ‘fathers’ is placed in the middle of each sequence.

The word for children (teknía) is a figurative term of affection. It occurs in Jn 13:33, Gal 4:19 and seven times in 1 John (2:1, 12, 28; 3:7, 18; 4:4; 5:21). It is said of them that their sins have been forgiven ‘ on for his name’s sake’ i.e. on account of Jesus Christ. John is thus reminding them of the wonderful fact that they had experienced the forgiveness of sins. This is something that has happened in the past but is still true in the present.

It is said of the ‘fathers’ that they have ‘known him that is from the beginning. This refers to the person of Jesus Christ and would seem to refer back to 1:1-2. The ‘beginning’ is the incarnation of the ‘Word of life’.

The ‘young men’ (neanískos occurs only here and in the following verse in the Johannine writings) have overcome (nikáō – see also 4:4; 5:4 twice, 5) evil / the evil one (ponērós – 2:13, 14; 3:12; 5:18, 19).

Having addressed his first readers as ‘children’, ‘fathers’ and ‘young men’ in 2:12-13a John does so for the second time in 2:13-14. What he says to these parties is similar to what he has said in the first series.

The ‘children’ have ‘known the Father’.

Again the ‘fathers’ have known the one who is ‘from the beginning’. Here the ‘I am writing’ changes from the present tense to the Aorist, John now presenting his writing of the epistles as a complete rather than as an ongoing action.

Again it is said that the young men have overcome ‘the wicked one’ but John now adds two further reasons for writing to them:

because they are strong
because the word of God abides (remains, lives) in them.

SUMMATION

Viewed as ‘children’ the believers had experienced forgiveness of sins and had come to know the Father.

Viewed as ‘fathers’ the believers had fellowship with the eternal One who had become incarnate.

Viewed as ‘young men’ the believers had fought and overcome the evil one. This had made them strong in their faith.

KING HEROD AGRIPPA II (Part 3)

Roman names

KING HEROD AGRIPPA II (Part 2)

Posted on 27th Aug 202118th Dec 2025 by writtenexposition

READING: ACTS chapters 21-25

THE PREQUEL TO PAUL’S DEFENCE BEFORE KING AGRIPPA

THE ( LEGAL) BACKGROUND

After completing his third missionary journey Paul made his way to Phoenicia, landing at Tyre. He spent seven days with the Christians there before sailing down the coast to Ptolomais, a port near Caesarea Maritima. He spent a day with the Christians before travelling to Caesarea, where he stayed at Philip’s house. There a prophet, Agabus, foretold Paul’s troubles at Jerusalem. Although the Christians tried to persuade Paul not to venture to Jerusalem he would not be deterred (Acts 21:1-16). The opportunity to to preach to the large crowd of Jews from near and far who would gather there for the Festival of Pentecost was too good to be missed.

The Jerusalem Christians suggested that Paul ought to display conformity to his identity as a Jew by going through the rite of purification. This he did, probably in accordance with his principle set out in 1 Cor 9:22, paying for himself and four other men (21:18-26). While there Paul was noticed by Jews from Asia Minor (probably hardliners from Ephesus) who had earlier seen Trophimus from Ephesus in Jerusalem with him and assumed that Paul had brought him into the temple. They incited the crowd to physically attack Paul. The uproar was such that the Roman military intervened to quell the riot.

The Jews complained that Paul had taken a Greek into a section of the temple that was out of bounds to non-Jews but then stated the real problem as him teaching against the Jewish people, the torah and the temple (20: 28-29). The Roman authorities gave Paul leave to address the quietened crowd which listened attentively to his story of conversion up until he said that he had been sent to take the gospel to the Gentiles (22:21-23). Again there was another loud commotion as the Jews called for Paul’s death. The Roman commander, who may not have understood Paul’s speech to the crowd if spoken in Hebrew or Aramaic, wished to flog Paul in order to get the truth out of him but discovered that he could not do so as that would have violated Paul’s rights as a Roman citizen. He therefore commanded that Paul appear before the Sanhedrin so that the charges against him might be clarified (22:30).

Paul, knowing that the Sanhedrin was composed of Pharisees and Sadducees, shouted that he was a Pharisee and was being tried for the hope of the resurrection. He thus divided the council on this theological point (the Sadducees did not believe in resurrection) and the meeting was halted with no resolution to the problem of the charges, which Paul claimed had changed from teaching against the people, the law and the temple to the question of resurrection. The Roman commander, Claudius Lysias, therefore decided to send Paul for formal investigation by the Procurator, Antonius Felix. Details of a Jewish plot to kill Paul were revealed to the Roman authorities by Paul’s nephew with the result that Paul was quickly transferred to Caesarea, the seat of Roman government in Judaea.

Five days later the trial before Felix commenced. The High Priest Ananias and some other members of the Sanhedrin attended and were represented by a lawyer named Tertullus who claimed that Paul, as well as opposing matters associated with the Jewish religion, was a revolutionary who incited political opposition to Rome. Paul, while defending himself, stated in 24:17: ‘Now after many years I came to bring alms to my nation, and offerings.’ Felix, who was well-known to be a corrupt official, did not find Paul guilty of the charges but, having heard Paul mention a large sum of money, neither did he release him. Paul remained imprisoned for two years at Caesarea, during which Felix interviewed him several times, hoping to receive a bribe.

When Felix was recalled to Rome in disgrace he left Paul still in prison for his successor to deal with. Felix’s replacement was Porcius Festus, who arrived in 58 or 59 CE. The Jewish authorities lost no time in approaching the new governor, asking that Paul be transferred to Jerusalem for trial, hoping to hijack Paul on the journey and put him to death. Festus refused their request but offered them the opportunity to resume their case against Paul at Caesarea. This hearing took place eleven days later.

Luke does not specify the charges brought against Paul but says that they were ‘many’ and ‘serious’ (25:7) and that the Jews could not prove them. Wishing to ingratiate himself with the Jews Festus asked Paul to go to Jerusalem and be tried there, with Festus himself as the judge. Realising that he would not get justice in either Caesarea or Jerusalem, and that the proposed transfer posed a threat to his personal security, Paul exercised his right as a Roman citizen to appeal to the emperor. (25:11). This last recourse ensured that he would remain under Roman protection.

Not long after Festus took up the reins of procuratorial power King Herod Agrippa II and his sister Bernice paid a state visit to welcome the new governor. This social call from local royalty, which would have involved lavish entertaining, lasted ‘many days’, according to Acts 25:14, During the course of the visit Festus told Agrippa about Saul’s case. Agrippa said that he would like to hear Paul himself so Festus arranged for this to take place on the following day.

THE SCENE

The hearing took place in an auditorium at Caesarea Maritima. Caesarea was previously a Phoenician settlement that had been rebuilt by Herod the Great between 22 and 9 BCE and named in honour of his patron, the Roman emperor Caesar Augustus (27 BCE-14 CE). The city was one of Herod’s spectacular building projects and, constructed of gleaming white limestone, must have been an impressive sight. It was also a major feat of engineering.

Using huge stones and hydraulic concrete Herod created an artificial harbour by building a large breakwater. Along with a palace, temples, theatre and amphitheatre the city featured a modern underground drainage system and an aquaduct to transport water to the city from from the springs at Mount Carmel eight miles away.

When the Romans annexed Judaea in 6 CE Herod’s palace at Caesarea became the governors’ residence and the city the administrative headquarters of the Roman regime in the province. Paul would have been well acquainted with Caesarea and would have visited it many times (e.g. Acts 9:30; 18:22; 21:7-8; 23:31-27:3).

The following day Agrippa and Bernice arrived at the auditorium ‘with great pomp’ (phantasía 25:23). As well as Festus the hearing was attended by senior military commanders (chilíarchos) and by the leading citizens of Caesarea. Most of these would have been Gentiles.

One can imagine the spectacle as Agrippa and Bernice left their chariot and, waving to the crowd, entered the auditorium. There they were respectfully greeted by the military officers in shining uniforms and by the well-dressed dignitaries and their wives. Luke draws a contrast between Agrippa and Paul.

25:23 Agrippa came, Paul was brought.

25:23; 26:29 Agrippa entered with great pomp, Paul was in chains.

25:23 Agrippa was accompanied by Bernice, Paul stood alone.

Before the hearing began Festus addressed a few introductory remarks to the assembled company. He introduced Paul and summarized the case history, as he viewed it, up to the time of Paul’s appeal. In the course of his remarks he asserted Paul’s innocence of any crime (25:25, see also 25:18; 26:31). Although mentioning the appeal to Augustus he did not emphasize Paul’s Roman citizenship but instead dwelt on Jewish hostility towards him. Before handing the proceedings over to Agrippa Festus explained that the objective of the hearing was to enable him to compile a report advising the imperial court of the charges against Paul.

What followed was, in effect, a show trial. It may partly have been to enable Festus to send a report but was mostly for the entertainment of his guests. The views of Festus and Agrippa on Paul’s guilt or innocence were irrelevant. Paul had appealed to Caesar, Nero would decide.

KING HEROD AGRIPPA II (Part 1)

KING HEROD AGRIPPA II (Bibliography)

Roman names

KING HEROD AGRIPPA II (Part 1)

Posted on 18th Aug 202118th Dec 2025 by writtenexposition

Greek: Ἀγρίππας (Agríppas)

Latin: Agrippa

English: Agrippa

Full name: Marcus Julius Agrippa

Known in history as: King Herod Agrippa II

Reading: Acts 25:13 – 26:32

‘King Agrippa, believest thou the prophets? I know that thou believest. Then Agrippa said unto Paul, Almost thou persuadest me to be a Christian.’ Acts 26:27-28

INTRODUCTION

The Acts of the Apostles is a second volume by Luke the Evangelist (Acts 1:1; Lk 1:3) who ended his gospel with an account of the Ascension of Jesus. It is at that same point he commences the book of Acts. In this second work he documents the rise of early Christianity; from its small beginning as a new sect within Judaism to status as an international religion. A key verse in the Acts of the Apostles is 1:8:

‘But ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth.’

Acts falls into two main sections: chapters 1-12 and chapters 13-28. The first section concentrates on local missionary work in Palestine and in the surrounding areas of Judaea and Samaria. It is Jewish in flavour, Peter is the prominent apostle and the activity is based in Jerusalem.

Chapters 13-28 concentrate on overseas mission. The emphasis is therefore gentile rather than Jewish, the apostle Paul is prominent and the operational base is Antioch. This section includes details of three missionary journeys by the apostle Paul plus a record of his journey to Rome for trial. It ends with his physical imprisonment there and yet his amazing freedom to preach and teach ‘those things which concern the Lord Jesus Christ’ (28:31) right in the hub of the Roman empire.

In this second half of the Book of Acts, as Christianity moves away from Judaism towards the Gentiles, Luke highlights the hostile attitude of the Jews towards the apostle Paul by including details of four incidents which deal with Paul’s status in the eyes of the ruling authorities. In these four cases the Romans are portrayed as having treated him with comparative fairness.

23:12-35 Claudius Lysias

24:1-27 Antonius Felix

25: 1-12 Porcius Festus

25:13 – 26:32 Porcius Festus and King Agrippa II

Our study will focus mainly on Acts 25:13 – 26:32 which details the state visit of King Herod Agrippa II to the Roman governor Festus and the hearing before Agrippa at which the apostle Paul gave his defence. This section may be divided as follows:

25:13-22 Festus briefs King Agrippa privately on the charges against Paul.

25:23-27 Festus briefs the assembled company publicly on the charges against Paul.

26: 1-29 King Herod Agrippa II hears Paul’s defence.

26: 30-32 Luke reports a private conversation during which Agrippa and others conclude that Paul is innocent.

THE MAIN CHARACTERS AT PAUL’S DEFENCE BEFORE AGRIPPA

THE APOSTLE PAUL

Paul, also known as Saul, was a first century Jew who was born in Tarsus in modern Turkey. He was a Pharisee who trained under Gamaliel, one of the most famous rabbis of the day (Acts 22:3). He described himself as having been a persecutor of the early Christians until he had a conversion experience on the road to Damascus. Thereafter, believing that Jesus was the Messiah, he spent the rest of his life in missionary activity, assisted by various co-workers, in various parts of the Roman empire; especially in areas around the coast of the Aegean Sea. Although it was his custom to commence his work in each area by teaching in the local Jewish synagogue Paul believed that salvation through faith in the resurrected Messiah Jesus was available also to Gentiles, without them first having to convert to Judaism or observe Jewish customs, rituals or food regulations. He gathered groups of his converts to Christianity into assemblies which functioned under local leadership (elders and deacons) and after moving on to new areas he conducted ongoing written correspondence with these churches. Some of his letters, all undated, have survived and are included in the New Testament canon. In his Defence before Agrippa Paul summarized his early career and reported on his missionary work (conducted in fulfillment of his commission by the risen Jesus) up to that point in time (c. 60 CE).

PORCIUS FESTUS

Festus was a Roman procurator of Judaea whose period of office is thought to have begun in 59 or 60 CE. He took over at a turbulent time in the history of Judaea as the Jews had been cruelly treated by previous procurators and revolution was brewing. He comes across in Acts as a man of action. After just three days in office he left his residence at Caesarea Maritima and went up to Jerusalem to survey the situation there. After returning to Caesarea about ten days later he lost no time in having Paul brought before him (‘the next day’ 25:6). Referring to this in v.17 he said ‘without any delay on the morrow I sat on the judgement seat’. By comparison with other governors he was an upright man who did not accept bribes, nevertheless, like Felix, he did experience pressure from the influential Jewish leaders (Acts 24:27; 25:9). He died in 61 or 62 CE, less than two years after his meeting with the apostle Paul.

BERNICE

Bernice (or Julia Berenice) was a great-granddaughter of Herod the Great and one of five children of King Herod Agrippa I of Judaea by his wife Cypros. Bernice was born in 28 CE, and was a year younger than her brother, the future King Herod Agrippa II.

When she was aged 12 or 13 her father gave her in marriage to Marcus Julius Alexander who was about 16 years her senior and son of a prominent Jew, Alexander the Alabarch of Alexandria, who had bailed her father out of some financial troubles. She became a widow when her husband died some three years later.

Her father, just before his death in 44 CE, then married her off to his own brother, her uncle Herod, King of Chalcis. She had just turned 16 and her uncle was 38 years her senior. The marriage lasted six years until he died c. 49/50 CE. At 22 years of age Queen Bernice was left a widow for the second time, with two young sons, Berenicianus and Hyrcanus, whom she had borne to her uncle.

She and her boys then moved to live with her brother Agrippa who was subsequently granted their uncle’s kingdom of Chalcis. She remained with him for more than a decade, effectively acting as his consort and co-ruler. Her visit along with Agrippa to greet Festus at Caesarea Maritima and her presence at the interrogation of the apostle Paul is confirmation that she carried out royal and ceremonial duties with her brother.

Their intimate relationship became the subject of much scandalous gossip at the time and it is thought that her third marriage in 63 CE to Ptolemon II of Cilicia Trachaea may have been contracted in an attempt to quell the rumour that she and Agrippa had entered into an incestuous relationship. The marriage lasted less than a year, after which she returned to live with her brother. Luke makes no mention of a sexual relationship in the book of Acts, nevertheless he does make it clear that she was definitely involved along with Agrippa in all the proceedings. This he achieves by repetition of the words ‘and Bernice:’

‘And after certain days king Agrippa and Bernice came unto Caesarea to salute Festus.’ Acts 25:13

‘And on the morrow, when Agrippa was come, and Bernice, with great pomp.’ Acts 25:23a

‘And when he had thus spoken, the king rose up, and the governor, and Bernice, and they that sat with them.’ Acts 26:30

In the years leading up to 66 CE she, along with her brother, unsuccessfully implored the Jews to remain obedient to Roman rule and was forced to leave Jerusalem with him.

About the year 67 CE she met the future Roman emperor Titus, who with his father Vespasian and their army was resting up up at Caesarea Philippi (the capital of Herod Agrippa’s kingdom) after a military campaign in Galilee, and became his lover. He was about ten years younger than Bernice.

Some years after the Fall of Jerusalem (c. 75 CE) she moved to Rome where Titus was heir apparent to the imperial throne. Their affair restarted and she lived openly with Titus at the palace, behaving as if she were already the Empress of Rome. Unfortunately the Romans did not like the idea of a foreign queen and both the aristocracy and the general populace turned against her.

Such was was the hostility of public opinion that when Titus became Emperor in 79 CE he did not make her his queen but, probably against his will, dismissed her. He died in 81 CE just before his 42nd birthday. By then Bernice had probably left Rome. Nothing is known of how, when or where she died.

KING HEROD AGRIPPA II

Herod Agrippa II, born 27 CE, was the last ruling member of the Herodian family in the Eastern Mediterranean. The year of his death is uncertain (estimates range from 86 -100 CE) but is likely to have been 93 CE. He is mentioned in the book of Acts chapters 25 and 26 in connection with Festus, the Roman procurator of Judaea (59-62 CE), and the apostle Paul. Although he was a member of the Herodian dynasty Luke seems quite favourable towards him. Luke does not refer to him by the dreaded name ‘Herod’ but only by his name Agrippa. Having been brought up and educated at the imperial court in Rome on account of his father being a Roman client king, Agrippa generally used his Latin name ‘Marcus Julius Agrippa’. He therefore thought of himself as a Roman, though nominally he was a Jew. He took a deep interest in Jewish affairs (in which Paul acknowledged him to be an expert (Acts 26:3), and on occasion spoke up for Jewish interests at Rome. He remained, however, thoroughly hellenized and totally loyal to the Romans throughout his lifetime.

The Herodian family was infamous for its lax morals, brutality and intrigue. New Testament references to the dynasty make unpleasant reading:

Agrippa II’s great-grandfather was Herod the Great (72-4 BCE) who killed all the babies in Bethlehem (Mt 2:16).

His great-uncle Herod Antipas (c. 20 BCE- later than 39 CE in exile) had John the Baptist beheaded (Mk 6:14-29; Lk 9:7-9). Along with his soldiers Herod Antipas mocked Jesus, who had been sent to him by Pontius Pilate (Lk 23:11).

His father King Herod Agrippa I (11 BCE – 44 CE) executed James the brother of John and also imprisoned Peter (Acts 12:1-3).

Marcus Julius Agrippa II had one brother and three sisters. His younger brother Drusus died young, before reaching his teens. His three sisters were Bernice (or Berenice), Mariamne and Drusilla (whose second husband was the Procurator Antonius Felix). Mariamne and Drusilla were ten and six when their father died.

King Herod Agrippa I died in 44 CE. Three years earlier Judaea, a Roman province since 6 CE, had been handed over to his control and he had been given the title ‘King’. At the time of his death his son Marcus Julius Agrippa junior was 17 and still being tutored at Rome. The emperor Claudius (41-54 CE) and his advisors considered him too young for the responsibilities of kingship so Judaea was annexed once more by the Romans and administered for a second period (44-66 CE) by procurators. Having been brought up at the Roman court Agrippa did, however, have very good connections with the imperial family.

In 49 CE the Emperor Claudius granted him the territory of Chalcis in Lebanon on the death of his uncle (and brother-in-law!) Herod of Chalcis. This gave him the royal title ‘King’ and with Chalcis came Curatorship of the Temple in Jerusalem which gave the right to appoint and dismiss the High Priest. Agrippa made full use of this power and had an ongoing rocky relationship with the Jewish priesthood; for example, during the seven years from 59 CE he appointed and dismissed five High Priests.

In 53 CE, Claudius exchanged Agrippa’s small kingdom of Chalcis for a much larger area, the former tetrarchy of Philip plus several eastern territories.

In 54/55 CE the Emperor Nero (54-68 CE) further expanded Agrippa’s kingdom by giving him control of Tiberias, Tarichaea, Bethsaida and Julias in Galilee plus some territory in Southern Peraea.

During the 60’s CE Jewish outrage at abuses by the procurators increased. As tension grew Agrippa tried his best to persuade the Jews not to revolt but to submit to Roman domination. This was unsuccessful and the Jews expelled him and his sister Bernice from Jerusalem in 66 CE. King Herod Agrippa II supported Vespasian and Titus in their war against the Jews (66-70) and played a small role in that war. He was involved in the sack of Jerusalem and the destruction of the Temple, much of which had been built by his great-grandfather. As reward for his support he was made a senior senator in Rome c. 75 CE and his territory was expanded. Until his death he remained active in his kingdom while also furthering his political career in Rome. He was fabulously wealthy; Jacobson (2019, pp129-130) writes;

‘While we have no quantitative information about Agrippa’s personal wealth, its size can be approximately estimated from the data given by Josephus for his predecessors who had title to much of the same territory. Josephus states that Herod Antipas enjoyed an annual revenue of 200 talents from Peraea and Galilee, while the areas to the east of Galilee, namely Batanaea, Trachonitis, Auranitis and ‘a certain portion of what was called the domain of Zenodorus’ yielded Philip the Tetrarch the sum of 100 talents (AJ 17.319; BJ 2.95). Although Agrippa II only possessed the eastern portion of Galilee, he certainly made up for the lack of western Galilee with Arca and Abilene. So, it seems reasonable to estimate the annual revenue from his territories as exceeding 300 talents (of silver) and may have been nearer 1,000 talents. With one Attic talent equivalent to 6,000 drachmas, his revenue from those sources would have approached six million drachmas. One drachma represents the average day wage of a labourer in the Graeco-Roman economy. Besides this revenue, Agrippa would have derived supplementary income from the vast estates that he owned outright. As an example, together with his sister, Berenice, the king possessed estates near Mount Tabor administrated by his steward (epitropos), Ptolemy, and elsewhere by Thaumastus, who their father Agrippa I received as a slave from Caligula.’

In spite of all his wealth and political power King Herod Agrippa II ended his life as a renegade who turned his back on his people and on his religion.

One can only wonder how history might have been different had Agrippa shifted his allegiance from the Roman empire to the kingdom of the risen Messiah Jesus. If only he had genuinely believed the Old Testament prophets (Acts 26:27) and had moved from being ‘almost’ a Christian (26:28) to being ‘altogether’ a Christian (26:29)!

KING HEROD AGRIPPA II (Part 2):

KING HEROD AGRIPPA II (Part 3)

KING HEROD AGRIPPA II (Bibliography)

General

GOD’S LOVE

Posted on 7th Aug 202118th Dec 2025 by writtenexposition

Here are links to a few short posts on God’s love that I wrote some time ago for the website ‘Understanding the Gospel.’

A Different Kind of Love

The Good News of God’s Love

The Proof of God’s Love

Exposition

THE AARONIC BLESSING

Posted on 31st Jul 202118th Dec 2025 by writtenexposition

‘The LORD bless thee, and keep thee: The LORD make his face shine upon thee, and be gracious unto thee: The LORD lift up his countenance upon thee, and give thee peace.’ Numbers 6:24-26

INTRODUCTION

Recently I attended a wedding service during which the officiating minister delivered the Aaronic Blessing. I was intrigued by this pronouncement, in a 21st century CE Christian setting, of a liturgical blessing from the ancient Israelite cult. I therefore decided to look more closely at the scriptural occurrence of this benediction and seek to determine the original circumstances and meaning behind its use?

HISTORICAL BACKGROUND

The Aaronic Blessing appears in the book of Numbers which is the fourth of the first five books of the Old Testament (Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy). These books are often referred to collectively as the Pentateuch, or as the Torah (law or instruction). The Aaronic blessing comes at the end of a large chunk of religious legislation extending from Leviticus 1:1 – Numbers 6: 27.

This cycle of instructions is mainly concerned with the holiness of YHWH (the Lord) and with the holiness of the Israelites as his chosen people. YHWH had revealed himself to the Israelites as their national god, had brought them out of slavery in Egypt (the Exodus) and had made a covenant with them at Sinai by which they obligated themselves to worship him exclusively. He had also delivered to Moses blueprints for the construction and erection of a portable shrine (known as the Tabernacle) dedicated to YHWH worship and had given detailed instructions for an associated cult (set of religious practices). The latter involved the institution of a priesthood and a sacrificial system. All of this had been successfully implemented as instructed by the time the book of Numbers opens.

At that point the Israelites are preparing to leave Sinai and travel through the wilderness to the Promised Land. Just as the community is about to set out on the journey Moses delivers instructions, specifically to the Aaronite priests, about a blessing. It draws attention to the good things that lie in store for YHWH’s covenant people; those who live their lives in accordance with his revealed word.

THE CONCEPT OF BLESSING

‘Bless’ and ‘blessing’ are common words in the Old Testament and in the culture of the time the concept carried various shades of meaning.

1. Blessing functioned as part of an everyday greeting similar to our modern ‘Hello!’ (see Ruth 2:4; Psa 129:8).

2. Blessing was regarded as having almost magical power to bestow future fertility, prosperity and security (see Gen 27:30-38).

3. Blessing often had God as the object and in these instances it conveyed gratitude and thanksgiving on the part of human beings (see Gen 24:27; Ex 18:10; Ruth 4:14; 1 Sam 25:32-33; 2 Sam 18:28; 1 Kgs 1:48; 5:7; 8:15, 56; 1 Chron 16:36; 2 Chron 2:12; 6:4 and various psalms e.g. Psa 28:6; 31:21). The emphasis is on God as the recipient of praise for blessings already received rather than as the giver of future blessings.

4. ‘Blessed’ was used to describe the situation of one who had already received good things, e.g. Psa 1:1

5. Blessing was used as part of religious worship as petition for the favour of the deity and perhaps also, in the case of the Aaronic Blessing, as a prayer for protection through death (e.g. the Ketef Hinnom amulets – see below).

Hagee (2012, p.27) comments:

‘When God blesses man it is to bestow good health, abundant success, and prosperity, both materially and spiritually. When man blesses God, it is presented in the forms of thanksgiving, reverence, obedience, praise and worship. When a man blesses his fellow believer, he recites the Priestly Blessing of Numbers 6:22-27…’

It is useful to note the important difference in emphasis between blessings already received and those wished for the future. One produces a beatitude, the other a benediction. The Aaronic Blessing is a benediction.

AN ANCIENT BENEDICTION

In 1979 two tiny silver scrolls were found during the excavation of a tomb at Ketef Hinnom near Jerusalem. Since they contain an abbreviation of this priestly blessing in miniature script it is generally thought that these were worn as amulets by the person buried there (possibly a priest). Dating from about the end of the seventh century BCE, these tiny silver sheets are now the oldest written portions of the Hebrew Bible in known existence, predating the Dead Sea Scrolls by three or four centuries.

THE STRUCTURE OF THE PASSAGE

Following immediately upon the block of legislation dealing with Israel’s holiness, particularly that in Num 5-6 about holiness in the camp, comes this benediction which expresses a wish for the ideal situation; a state of harmony, security and prosperity for the Israelites, brought about by holiness.

6:22-23. The introduction to the blessing.

6:24-26 The wording of the blessing.

6: 27 The conclusion to the blessing.

THE INTRODUCTION TO THE AARONIC BLESSING

‘And the LORD spoke unto Moses, saying, Speak unto Aaron and unto his sons, saying, On this wise ye shall bless the children of Israel, saying unto them‘ Num 6:22-23

This introductory section emphasizes that the Lord himself initiated this blessing. YHWH (the Lord) is the author, Moses is the messenger and Aaron and his descendants are the mediators of the blessing. The revelation by YHWH to Moses specifies the blessing as part of a religious ritual that is to be invoked only by priests. These are weighty words that not just anyone can speak casually.

Deuteronomy makes it clear that blessing was one of the main functions of the Levitical priestly office (see also 1 Chron 23:23):

‘At that time the LORD separated the tribe of Levi, to bear the ark of the covenant of the LORD, to stand before the LORD to minister unto him, and to bless in his name, unto this day.’ Deut 10:8

‘And the priests the sons of Levi shall come near; for them the LORD thy God hath chosen to minister unto him, and to bless in the name of the LORD; and by their word shall every controversy and every stroke be tried:’ Deut 21:5

In Numbers 6, however, the message is even more specific: only the Aaronite priests can invoke this priestly blessing. The mediation of the blessing was a specific duty which was exclusive to a single group of priests authorised by YHWH.

We are not told when this blessing was first pronounced by Aaron but it may have been some time earlier when the priests began to exercise their ministry just after the inauguration of the Tabernacle and the priesthood. According to Lev 9:22:

‘And Aaron lifted up his hand toward the people, and blessed them, and came down from offering of the sin offering, and the burnt offering, and peace offerings.’

What Aaron said on that occasion is not divulged nor is there mention of the lifting of the hand in Num 6, but perhaps the wording of that first blessing matched what is recorded here in Numbers 6:24-26.

The particle ‘thus’ (translated ‘on this wise’ in the KJV) specifies that the blessing must be given exactly in the form and wording prescribed by YHWH.

THE WORDING OF THE AARONIC BLESSING

‘The LORD bless thee, and keep thee:
The LORD make his face shine upon thee, and be gracious unto thee:
The LORD lift up his countenance upon thee, and give thee peace.’

This formal request to God for the granting of prosperity, fertility and success to the Israelites consists of three lines each having two clauses and containing two verbs.

bless keep

shine be gracious

lift give

The verbs call for six related actions on the part of YHWH in order that this favourable situation for his people might be achieved.

YHWH appears as the first word in each line and is therefore explicitly the subject of the first clause in each line. He is also implicitly the subject of the second clause in each line. The placement of YHWH at the beginning of each line is for emphasis, as grammatically the threefold repetition is unnecessary. This stresses that although the benediction is spoken by the priests it is the Lord who issues the blessing. This rules out the possibility that blessing can come from another source e.g. the priests or false deities.

Some equate the threefold mention of ‘the Lord’ with the Holy Trinity (Father, Psa 110:1; Jesus, Rom 10:9; Holy Spirit, 2 Cor 3:17) and link the Aaronic Blessing with the Apostolic Benediction ‘The grace of the Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the communion of the Holy Ghost, be with you all. Amen.’ in 2 Cor 13:14.

Scholars see great literary accomplishment in the Hebrew. Each of the three lines is longer than the one before thus, it is thought, illustrating the increasing flow of God’s blessings. In the original the lines have 3, 5 and 7 words which is a regular sequence of odd numbers. The number of consonants in the lines is 15, 20 and 25 which is a sequence by five. The number of syllables is 12, 14 and 16.

The pronouns throughout the blessing are singular. The KJV clearly shows that they are second person singular by the use of ‘thee’, e.g. ‘The Lord bless thee and keep thee’. Although singular, and therefore referring to each individual Israelite, this is a collective singular similar to that in the Ten Commandments (Ex 20:2-17: Deut 5:6-21), e.g ‘Thou shalt, thou shalt not’, so the import is wide.

Although one could hardly describe the relationship between YHWH and his Old Testament worshippers as intimate yet the use of second person singular pronouns emphasizes that it was personal. By blessing individuals YHWH blessed the people as a whole, by blessing the people as a whole (collective sense) he blessed individuals.

There is some discussion as to whether the blessing contains six petitions or three. The general opinion seems to be that there are three. That assumes that the verbs are in pairs. The first clause of each line is a call for YHWH to act towards the Israelites, the second clause has to do with his activity on their behalf in response to that call.

The last part of each line can be taken as expanding or explaining the request in the first part (i.e. it is epexegetical).

Some suggest that the Lord blesses by keeping (protecting), the Lord makes his face to shine by being gracious and that he lifts up his countenance thereby giving peace.

The last part of each line may be regarded as giving the consequent action of God to the request in the first part, i.e. it is the result.

The verbs in the Aaronic Blessing

BLESS

bāraḵ: to bless, kneel, salute, greet. Its derived meaning is to bless someone or something.

Blessing in the Old Testament had little to do with spirituality but more to do with material benefits. The first biblical mention of blessing in Gen 1:28 shows that it has to do with productivity (offspring), prosperity, empowerment and personal physical security. Deuteronomy 28:1-14 (which is also in the second person singular) gives a list of blessings that an obedient worshipper of YHWH might expect to receive:

28:3 Blessed shalt thou be in the city, and blessed shalt thou be in the field.

28:4 Blessed shall be the fruit of thy body, and the fruit of thy ground, and the fruit of thy cattle, the increase of thy kine, and the flocks of thy sheep.

28:5 Blessed shall be thy basket and thy store.

28:6 Blessed shalt thou be when thou comest in, and blessed shalt thou be when thou goest out.

28:7 The LORD shall cause thine enemies that rise up against thee to be smitten before thy face: they shall come out against thee one way, and flee before thee seven ways.

28:8 The LORD shall command the blessing upon thee in thy storehouses, and in all that thou settest thine hand unto; and he shall bless thee in the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee.

28:11 And the LORD shall make thee plenteous in goods, in the fruit of thy body, and in the fruit of thy cattle, and in the fruit of thy ground, in the land which the LORD swore unto thy fathers to give thee.

28:12 The LORD shall open unto thee his good treasure, the heaven to give the rain unto thy land in his season, and to bless all the work of thine hand: and thou shalt lend unto many nations, and thou shalt not borrow.

28:13 And the LORD shall make thee the head, and not the tail; and thou shalt be above only, and thou shalt not be beneath;…

KEEP

šāmar: to watch, to keep, to preserve, to guard, to be careful, to watch over.

This word is used of men guarding, protecting or tending (e.g Gen 2:15; Isa 21:11-12) and of YHWH keeping covenant (e.g. 1Kgs 8:23-25). This request in the Aaronic Benediction is for protection by YHWH against any force, human or spiritual, that would disrupt or destroy the blessing once received by his people.

Psalm 121, in which šāmar occurs several times, is a meditation on YHWH’s vigilance (‘neither slumber nor sleep’) and his preservation of his people. He is a divine security guard.

I will lift up mine eyes unto the hills, from whence cometh my help. My help cometh from the LORD, which made heaven and earth. He will not suffer thy foot to be moved: he that keepeth thee will not slumber. Behold, he that keepeth Israel shall neither slumber nor sleep. The LORD is thy keeper: the LORD is thy shade upon thy right hand. The sun shall not smite thee by day, nor the moon by night. The LORD shall preserve thee from all evil: he shall preserve thy soul. The LORD shall preserve thy going out and thy coming in from this time forth, and even forevermore.

SHINE

’ôr: to give light, to shine, to become light, make bright

Examples: Jonathan’s eyes brightened 1 Sam 14:27, 29; and Ezra 9:8 ‘that God may brighten our eyes’.

‘May YHWH make his face to shine in your direction’

This anthropomorphism which attributes human features to God indicates that God makes his presence known but the imagery of his face shining means much more. God is not only near but also friendly and his attitude is benevolent. He will give a positive and favourable reception. See also Psa 31:16; Psa 80:3, 7, 19.

Note: The opposite imagery of the shining face is that of hiding the face (e.g. Deut 31:18) which speaks of rejection.

Psalm 67, which is based on the Aaronic Blessing, is a meditation on ‘bless’ (vv. 1, 6, 7) but also includes the expression ’cause his face to shine upon us’ in v.1.

BE GRACIOUS

ḥānan: to be gracious toward, to favour, to have mercy on.

The idea here is that of God showing favour to his people. This is usually thought of as the action of a superior towards an inferior. There is not the distinction between grace and mercy that we have in the New Testament. The Septuagint (Greek Old Testament) translates ‘be gracious’ as ‘show mercy’. The prayer is that God might deal with his people in mercy, grace and deliverance from afflictions. Perhaps forgiveness of sins would be included as one of God’s gracious actions; judgement tempered with mercy.

At Sinai YHWH had revealed himself as ‘merciful and gracious’ but also held out the possibility of judgement:

And the LORD passed by before him, and proclaimed, The LORD, The LORD God, merciful and gracious, longsuffering, and abundant in goodness and truth, Keeping mercy for thousands, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin, and that will by no means clear the guilty; visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children, and upon the children’s children, unto the third and to the fourth generation.

Unlike the above quotation from Exod 34:6-7 there is no mention of judgement in in the Aaronic blessing.

LIFT

nāśā’: to lift, to carry, to take away.

The ‘lifting up of the countenance toward’ literally ‘turn his face towards’ suggests that God is looking at and therefore paying attention to his people, smiling upon them with pleasure and affection.

GIVE

śiym: to put, to set, or to place, to appoint, to bring, to call, to put, to change, to charge, to commit, to consider, to convey, to determine.

The petition ends with a request for the Lord to grant šālôm (peace). ‘Peace’ does not just mean the absence of war but also carries the thought of unity, harmony, well-being, health, prosperity,wholeness, security and salvation.

THE CONCLUSION OF THE AARONIC BLESSING

And they shall put my name upon the children of Israel; and I will bless them. Num 6:27

Following the words of the Aaronic Blessing comes verse 27 which continues the instructions for blessing given by YHWH to Moses in vv. 22-23. The Septuagint places verse 27 at the end of verse 23. The verse concludes the section on the Aaronic Blessing and gives an insight into how it was viewd by the Lord.

‘and they shall put my name upon the children of Israel;‘ Does this refer to a further separate ritual that is not described here or back to the invocation of the Aaronic Blessing? Given that details of a different ritual are not supplied it seems most likely that YHWH regarded the invocation of the blessing by the Aaronite priests as a figurative act of putting his name upon the people.

As a ritual act the recitation of the Aaronic Blessing expressed the divine name (being and character) of the covenant-making and covenant-keeping God and reminded the Israelites that they belonged him.

The divine name reminded them of who he is – his character.

The divine name reminded them of what he had done – his works.

The divine name reminded them of what he had promised- his covenant.

As worshippers of an awe-inspiring, holy God they had to be holy as well. The pronouncement of the benediction did not provide an easy magic shortcut to blessing. They had to worship the Lord, obey him and walk in his ways, then blessing would follow. Whenever the blessing was asked for such people it would definitely be granted.

The blessing had to be requested by the Aaronite priests but it was not caused by them. The Lord alone could bless.

SUMMATION

As Christians today we can enjoy the principle enshrined in the Aaronic Blessing: that the Lord who has saved us and brought us into a relationship with himself can sustain us on our journey of life with blessings which are unmerited but graciously bestowed. It is our responsibility, as those who belong to him, to live holy lives.

‘But seek ye first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness; and all these things shall be added unto you.’ Mat 6:33

BIBLIOGRAPHY

BOOKS

Bailey, L. R., 2005. Leviticus-Numbers, Macon, GA: Smyth & Helwys

Bush, G., 1858. Notes, Critical and Practical, on the Book of Numbers: Designed as a General Help to Biblical Reading and Instruction, New York: Ivison & Whinney

Duguid, I. M. and Hughes, K. R., 2006. Numbers: God’s Presence in the Wilderness. Wheaton, IL: Crossway Books.

Hagee J., 2012. The Power of the Prophetic Blessing, Brentwood, TH: Worthy Publishing

Martin, G. and Anders, M., 2002. Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers. Nashville, Tenn: Broadman & Holman.

North, G., 1996. Sanctions and Dominion: An Economic Commentary on Numbers, Tyler, TX: Inst for Christian Economics

Pitkänen, P., 2018. A Commentary on Numbers: Narrative Ritual and Colonialism. New York: Routledge

Swete, H. B., 1909, The Old Testament in Greek According to the Septuagint, Cambridge University Press

Rushdoony, J. R., 2006. Numbers, Vallecito, CA: Chalcedon/Ross House Books

van Kooten, G. H., 2007. The Revelation of the Name YHWH to Moses: Perspectives from Judaism, the Pagan Graeco-Roman World, and Early Christianity, Leiden: Brill.

JOURNAL ARTICLES

Cocco, F., 2007, La sonrisa de Dios. Los verbos de la bendición de Num 6,24-26, available at

https://www.academia.edu/9648468/La_sonrisa_de_Dios_Los_verbos_de_la_bendici%C3%B3n_de_Num_6_24_26

Cohen, C., 1993, The Biblical Priestly Blessing (Num. 6:24-26) in the Light of Akkadian Parallels, Tel Aviv, Vol. 20, No. 2, pp. 228-238

Fishbane, M., 1983, Form and Reformulation of the Biblical Priestly Blessing, Journal of the American Oriental Society, Vol. 103, No. 1, pp. 115–121.

Isaak, M. A., 1995, Literary Structure and Theology of the Patriarchal Narratives: The Three-fold Blessing, Direction Magazine, Vol. 24. No. 2 pp. 65-74

Martens, E., 2009, Intertext Messaging: Echoes of the Aaronic Blessing (Numbers 6:24-26), Direction Magazine, Vol. 38, No. 2, pp. 163-178

Miller, P. D., 1975. The Blessing of God, Interpretation: A Journal of Bible and Theology, Vol. 29, No.3, pp.240-251

Ozolins, K., 2021. Artifact in Focus: The Ketef Hinnom Amulets, Ink Magazine, Issue 9, pp. 12-14

Yardeni, A., 1991. ‘Remarks on the Priestly Blessing on Two Ancient Amulets from Jerusalem.’ Vetus Testamentum, Vol. 41, No. 2, pp. 176–185

Exposition

1 PETER 3:18-22 THE SPIRITS IN PRISON

Posted on 3rd Jun 202118th Dec 2025 by writtenexposition

For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit: By which also he went and preached unto the spirits in prison; Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water. The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God, by the resurrection of Jesus Christ: Who is gone into heaven, and is on the right hand of God; angels and authorities and powers being made subject unto him. 1 Pet 3:18-22

Having already discussed the topic of undeserved suffering with reference to Christ’s crucifixion in 1 Pet 2:21-25 the author now deals with it in terms of Christ’s resurrection and ascension. Note that the passage begins and ends with the resurrection of Christ. The flow of thought in these verses is as follows:

Christ suffered once for sins
he was put to death
he was made alive
he preached to imprisoned spirits
they had been imprisoned because they had been disobedient
they had been disobedient during Noah’s time
when only eight people had survived the flood
this reminds us of baptism
it ‘saves’ us because of Christ’s resurrection
when he ascended into heaven to sit at God’s right hand

[18] ‘For’ ‘because’ (hóti) – this is a link with the thought of vv.13-17. It does not link back to v.17 alone. If so Peter would be telling them that they are suffering innocently but are to be happy because Christ also suffered innocently as the pattern of innocent suffering. That interpretation is not possible because Christ’s suffering was unique, it was ‘for sins once for all.’ The link is to the entire thrust of vv.13-17 that they are blessed because they are suffering innocently. Peter is telling these Christians in Asia Minor that just as Christ seemed defeated by his suffering but emerged triumphant so they too will be triumphant. He is thus preparing them for fiery trial ahead and encouraging them to stand fast throughout.

‘For’ may also introduce a quotation from an early Christian hymn (cp. 2:21), the relevant extract here being v.18 and v.22.

‘also’ You are suffering but remember that Christ suffered too.

‘once’ (hápax) once for all. For similar see Rom 6:10; Heb 7:27; Heb 9:12, 26, 28; 10:10). Christ’s sacrificial death was of infinite value.

The argument here is not that of Hebrews (chapters 7-10) that Christ’s once for all sacrifice does away with the need for more sacrifices. The point here is the one brought out in 4:1-3; that just as Christ dealt with sin once and then began a new phase of life so these Christians should be finished with sin and not return to pagan practices.

‘suffered for sins, the just for the unjust’ Note the two different words translated ‘for:’

1) ‘for sins’ (perí) concerning or with regard to (see also Rom 8:3; 1 Jn 2:2; 1 Jn 4:10). Christ’s suffering was related to sins, but not his own sins for he was righteous.

2) ‘for the unjust’ (hupér) on behalf of. Christ’s death was vicarious, a substitutionary atonement.

Peter stresses the innocence of Christ’s character and therefore that his suffering was undeserved. Peter refers to Christ by the title ‘the Just One’ in Acts 3:14.

The purpose and intention of Christ’s suffering was that he might lead us to God i.e. to provide access to God or to bring us into God’s presence, in the sense of presenting us at a royal court.

Christ was able to provide this access to God by ‘being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit.’ Watson & Callan (2012, p.88) explain:

“Christ,” the subject of the sentence, is modified by two passive participles: “put to death” (thanatōtheis), with the human authorities in Jerusalem as implied agents, and “made alive” (zōopoiētheis), with God understood as the agent (cf. 1 Pet. 1:3, 21), for the latter verb typically refers to the resurrection (John 5:21; Rom. 4:17; 8:11; 1 Cor. 15:22; Eph. 2:5; Col. 2:13.

These parallel participles, each connected to a noun, are contrasts.

mén……dé on the one hand……on the other hand. This same expression denoting contrast appears elsewhere in 1 Peter, for example, 1:20; 2:4; 4:14.

What is meant by ‘in the flesh’ and ‘by the spirit?’ According to Vinson, Wilson & Mills (2010, p.174) there are three options :

in the flesh – as a human being , in the spirit – as a spiritual being. 1 Pet 4:6 makes it clear that the spirit is God’s spirit.
in the flesh – in the human realm, human sphere of existence, in the spirit – in the realm of the spirit, spiritual sphere of existence, i.e. Jesus was put to death in the human realm and made alive in God’s realm.
by the flesh – Jesus was killed by human beings, by the spirit – Jesus was raised by the action of God’s spirit i.e. by God’s power.

[19] ‘in/by which’ This refers back to ‘spirit’ (v.18b) and the three possible meanings are:

‘in which realm’ i.e in the Spirit’s realm, in his mode of existence as a spirit.
‘by which’ i.e. by the Spirit’s enabling.
in which’ i.e . this refers to the event (the resurrection – when the Spirit made him alive).

‘also’ This does not refer to the ‘spirits in prison’ as that would infer that Christ had made a previous proclamation to others. It indicates that another point about Christ’s activity has occurred to the writer. The previous point is that Christ died to bring us to God, this next point is that he made a proclamation to the spirits in prison.

‘spirits in prison’ This expression does not occur elsewhere in the New Testament. Peter’s readers obviously understood the reference to these imprisoned spirits as it is not presented as a new revelation nor does Peter give an explanation. Unfortunately, since we do not understand the reference we can therefore only speculate upon the answers to the following questions:

Who are the imprisoned spirits?
Where are they located?
What is meant by ‘went?’ In which direction did Christ travel?
What was the nature and content of his preaching?
When did the preaching occur?

‘spirits’ (pneúma) This word refers to supernatural beings (Mt 12:45; Lk 10:20; Heb 1:14). In the New Testament dead human beings are called nekroi, dead ones, or psychoi, souls. Peter had Genesis 6:1-4 in mind, where we read about the ‘sons of God’ (rebellious angels, Jude 6) who were attracted by and raped human women (1 En 15:3-7).

‘prison’ (phulakḗ) This is the usual word for prison, a place where criminals are held. It is used with regard to spirits in Rev 20:7 and probably also in Mt 5:25 – referring to ‘Gehenna of fire’ in Mt 5:22. Jude 6 ‘chains’ also suggests imprisonment of spirits. In Isa 24:21-22 we read about the imprisonment of ‘the host of the high ones on high’. Since it is spirit beings, not human souls, that are said to be imprisoned, the location is not the abode of the dead (Sheol or Hades, never viewed as a prison in the Bible) but seemingly an undisclosed location in the upper regions where disobedient spirit beings are held.

‘went'(poreúomai) In what direction did Christ travel? This word itself gives no clue. Since, however, it occurs again in v.22 where it obviously refers to Christ’s ascension (as in Acts 1:10), logically the direction is ‘upward.’ The preaching occurred after Christ’s resurrection (v.18b having been made alive in the spirit) so it makes sense that the reference here is to the Ascension.

‘preached’ (kērússō) – to announce or proclaim. This was not a proclamation of the gospel as Peter uses another word for that (euaggelízō) in 1 Pet 4:6 but most likely an announcement of judgement. It would have brought comfort to the Christians experiencing trials to know that the judgement of the wicked, even powerful spirits, was assured.

[20] ‘sometime’ (poté) at one time or another, formerly

These imprisoned spirits are said to have been disobedient.’ They are now in prison but the main focus is on their past disobedience rather than their present condition. They failed to heed the warning that they were given ‘in the days of Noah’. Mention of this time in history enables Peter to introduce the topic of the Flood (Gen 6-8). This story is referred to elsewhere in the New Testament in Mt 24:37-39; Lk 17:26-27; Heb 11:7; 2 Pet 2:5; 3:6.

‘the patience of God waited’ This does not just mean that a long-suffering God waited with patience while the ark was was under construction. The sense of ekdéchomai is eager expectation. God’s patience is personified as eagerly awaiting the time when it could be demonstrated in the saving of a few people, in this case eight.

‘in which’ lit. into which. Kelly (1969, p.158) points out: ‘eis conveys the double sense of going into the ark and so being saved in it.’

‘a few’ ‘eight souls (persons). Noah, his wife, his three sons and their wives.

‘were saved by water’ Just as the water effected Noah’s deliverance from the evil world of his day so baptism symbolized the deliverance of the Asian Christians from the evil society in which they lived.

‘BAPTISM NOW SAVES’

[21] What is meant by this dramatic statement in v.21?

‘now’ This refers to the present age in contrast to the time before Christ came.

‘figure’ (antítupon) – a type, pattern or model

‘flesh’ (sarkós) – the flesh of a living creature i.e. body.

‘filth’ (rhúpos) a coarser word than ‘dirt.’

‘answer’ (eperṓtēma) declaration, pledge, profession, agreement, contract, question, inquiry. This word occurs only here in the New Testament but is used in the LXX of Dan 4:17 to mean ‘decision.’

Others would argue that here eperṓtēma means ‘request’ (see Mt 16:1 KJV ‘desired him’). The following interpretations are possible:

• a request to God from a good conscience
• a request to God for a good conscience
• a declaration to God from (or ‘of’ ) a good conscience
• a pledge to God to maintain a good conscience

‘conscience’ (suneídēsis) consciousness of, awareness of an important situation, circumstance or attitude (comes from the words meaning co-knowlege or knowledge shared with another). The Christian receives a good/clear conscience as a result of cleansing at conversion. The idea is not that of absence of guilt but of submission and obedience to God’s will (2:19; 3:16).

Addressing his first readers, Peter tells them that ‘a few, that is, eight people were saved through water, which even in reference to them is a pattern. Baptism now saves, not as a removal of filth from the body but as a declaration of an appropriate awareness toward God through the resurrection of Jesus Christ.’

Baptism corresponds to the water and thus to Noah’s experience of salvation. As Noah passed through the water from evil and death to life, so Christians pass through water as a symbol of their transition from evil and death to new life at conversion.

Peter negates any idea that there is something miraculous about the baptismal water and goes on to explain how baptism saves. He defines it in terms of a declaration.

‘baptism saves’ Brooks (1974, p. 293) comments: ‘It spares from the unfavorable circumstance of judgment. It does so because it is the declaration of the individual’s appropriate conscious awareness in reference to God. He can have this appropriate awareness because of the resurrection of Christ. Baptism saves in that it is the moment when the individual testifies to the fact that he shares something in common with God. He makes known that he has the right attitude and relationship toward God. He willingly responds with his declaration to anyone who interrogates him. He has become a “co-knower” with God and other Christians that in the resurrection of Christ there is salvation. The baptized is saved because he recognizes the authenticity and divine origin of the message that in Christ God has offered man the ultimate revelation of His grace.’

The declaration of a good conscience is made possible ‘by the resurrection of Jesus Christ.’ See 1:3.

[22] Peter returns to what he has been saying about Christ in v.18 (and about Christ’s journey in v.19) and reminds his readers that Christ has been raised by the Father, that he has gone into heaven and is at the right hand of God, with all angels, authorities, and powers subject to him. He thus reassures them that just as Christ has emerged triumphant from suffering, so too will they. There is no need to be afraid (v.14).

‘right hand of God’ The place of authority. This was a fulfillment of Psa 110:1. For Christ at God’s right hand see Mt 22:41-46; 26:64; Mk 12:35-37; 14:62; 16:19; Luke 20:41-44; 22:69; Acts 7:55–56; Rom. 8:34; Col. 3:1; Heb. 1:13; 8:1; 10:12; 12:2

‘has gone into heaven’ Refers to an event i.e. the Ascension.

‘has gone’ This is the same participle as in v.19.

For the Ascension see: Mk 16:19; Lk 24:51; Acts 1:6-11.

For the subjection of supernatural beings see 1 Cor 15:24; Eph 1:20-21; Phil 2:9-10; Col 2:15. Angels are listed along with authorities and powers in Rom 8:38 and in this verse (v.22). This makes it even more likely that the imprisoned spirits of v.19 are disobedient angels.

Exposition

1 PETER 3:13-17 – COMMENTARY

Posted on 25th May 202118th Dec 2025 by writtenexposition

3:13-17 Suffering for righteousness’ sake

‘And who is he that will harm you, if ye be followers of that which is good? But and if ye suffer for righteousness’ sake, happy are ye: and be not afraid of their terror, neither be troubled; But sanctify the Lord God in your hearts: and be ready always to give an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you with meekness and fear: Having a good conscience; that, whereas they speak evil of you, as of evildoers, they may be ashamed that falsely accuse your good conversation in Christ. For it is better, if the will of God be so, that ye suffer for well doing, than for evil doing.‘ 1 Pet 3:13-17

We have now arrived at the main section of 1 Peter which, depending upon how one divides the epistle, ends at either 4:19 or 5:10. It deals with the subject of undeserved suffering; specifically, suffering as a Christian. The suffering endured by his readers has already been referred to in 1:6-7; 2:12,15, 19-20 and 3:9 but now Peter addresses it as his main topic.

Kelly (1969, p. 139) identifies three main interwoven strands of thought that Peter develops throughout the section:

‘the idea that the innocent man can face suffering with confidence.’
‘the basis of this confidence is Christ’s victory and the privilege of sharing His passion.’
‘the imminence of the End, when righteous suffering will receive its reward.’

[13] Generally, undeserved suffering is exceptional. Following on naturally from what he has said in vv.9-12 Peter asks a rhetorical question: ‘Who then (i.e. under the circumstances that I have just outlined) is going to harm you if you are devoted to what is good?’

‘followers of that which is good’ lit. ‘zealous of good ‘ – enthusiastic for.

The implied answer is ‘no-one’.

‘harm’ This does not mean literal physical harm but eternal, lasting harm.

[14] Peter tells them that in the event that they should have to suffer physical abuse for the sake of righteousness they ought to count it a blessing and a privilege. The thought is similar to that of Mt 5:10-11. Peter goes into more detail on this point in 4:14. ‘Righteousness’ is upright behaviour. In this verse the situation is hypothetical but in 4:12 the suffering is about to take place, therefore the situation for the original readers must have been deteriorating. In an environment hostile to, and suspicious of, Christianity the risk is always present.

‘be not afraid of their terror, neither be troubled’ Peter quotes from Isa 8:12 -13 by way of encouragement. Keating (2011, p.93) explains the point:

‘Just as the Lord was a stronghold for beleaguered Jerusalem in the time of the prophet Isaiah, so he is the comfort and strength for the small, vulnerable Christian communities of Asia Minor— and for us today. To shrink in fear before those who abuse us verbally and physically is a natural human response. We need supernatural faith and hope to resist falling into fear.’

[15] Undeserved suffering presents an opportunity to witness. Christians are not to be terrified by those around them. Their response should not be to deny Christ but to ‘sanctify’ (acknowledge as holy) the Lord God in their hearts. The words ‘in your hearts’ are not in Isaiah, these are added by Peter.

‘give an answer’ A second response is to be ‘ready for a defence (apologian)’. See Acts 22:1; 25:16 ‘answer for himself’; 26:2; Phil 1:7,17; 2 Cor 7:11 ‘clearing;’ 2 Tim 4:16 ‘answer’.

‘reason’ (lógos) account.

This may be a reference to formal interrogation by government or to making a legal defence against a charge, but ‘defence’ and ‘account’ do not always have a technical legal sense. Apologian is used in a non-technical way in 1 Cor 9:3 and 2 Cor 7:11.

‘Always’ and ‘everyone’ are general words so, while they may be called upon to answer to government authorities, Peter’s readers are expected to give an explanation or justification of their faith in answer to general informal questions from non-Christians.

‘hope’ – looking for something good with the expectation of obtaining it.

‘within you’ – either in the Christian community in Asia Minor as a group or within each of their individual hearts.

Their defence of their beliefs is to be conducted with an attitude of gentleness (towards their critics) and fear (towards God).

[16] ‘having a good conscience’ It is necessary to maintain a clear conscience for their witness to be effective. The idea is of knowing that one is not guilty and has nothing to hide. For similar see 3:21 and also Acts 23:1; 1 Tim 1:5,19; 3:9; 2 Tim 1:3; Heb 13:18.

Peter hopes that the exemplary behaviour of Christians will shame those who slander them. Their good manner of life is rooted ‘in Christ”.

‘conversation’ (anastrophḗ) mode of conduct, way of life.

‘that they may be ashamed who falsely accuse you’ (epēreázō) misuse, insult, treat despitefully – this word only occurs here and in Mt 5:44; Lk 6:28.

[17] The paragraph closes with a general statement: ‘it is better to suffer when doing right, if it be God’s will, than when doing wrong.’ lit, ‘if the will of God were so to will.’ Peter has already given this advice to slaves in 2:20.

SUMMARY POINTS

3:14 BE CONFIDENT ‘Be not afraid of their terror, neither be troubled’

3:15 BE COMMITTED ‘But sanctify the Lord God in your hearts ‘

3:15 BE CONVERSATIONAL ‘Be ready always to give an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you.’

3:15 BE CONSIDERATE ‘With meekness and fear.’

3:16 BE CLEAN ‘Having a good conscience.’

1 PETER – 1:3-12 – COMMENTS