Closing Greetings (1 Peter 5:12-14)
This sermon was preached on 2/2/2012
Peter brings his letter to a close by a short series of brief greetings in which he mentions at least three individuals who are with him. We may imagine that such verses are not important and perhaps we rush over them. Yet they are full of instruction.
Silvanus
Silvanus may be the Silas who accompanied Paul on his second missionary journey. Yet we cannot be sure about that detail. What is important about Silvanus is that Peter reveals he was a ‘faithful brother’. Perhaps he called Silvanus by this name because he carried the letter to them and if he was unknown to the readers he would need Peter’s commendation.
What is a faithful brother? Clearly the description indicates a close relationship, members of the family of God. At one time, both Peter and Silvanus were outside God’s family. We know about Peter came into it, when he met the Saviour after Andrew had spent some time with him (John 1:35-42). But we have no idea how Silvanus was converted. By enlarging the relationship with the idea of faithfulness, Peter is stressing that loyalty as well as love is part of a healthy Christian relationship. Silvanus could be depended upon, says Peter.
Silvanus acted as Peter’s writer, perhaps because Peter himself could not write. We must remember that the apostles in general were not educated persons and there was not the same emphasis on universal writing as there is today. Peter dictated the letter and Silvanus wrote it down, perhaps correcting Peter’s grammar. If that happened, we can see one way how the Holy Spirit guided the production of his inspired Word. At one level, it is an everyday activity, while at another level it is a most profound spiritual reality. Peter primarily had in mind his original readers while God had in mind his church down the centuries. So we get here some insight into how God produced his Word, and what a marvellous miracle the Word of God is. How thankful we should be for God’s overruling providence in arranging for the men to be together.
Peter then summarises the type of letter that he had dictated to Silvanus. We know that there are various types of letters and we respond differently, depending on what kind it is. Obviously the response has to be appropriate. If I treat a letter from the taxman in the same way as I treat a letter from a charity, I may end up in trouble because the first is a demand that I pay what I owe whereas the second is a voluntary donation. Peter’s letter is not merely providing doctrinal information or even news about how some Christians are doing. In addition, it is an exhortation and a declaration. These terms emphasise the authority of God’s Word and the passion with which it was delivered. Peter, as an apostle, had been given special authority to rule in God’s kingdom and here he does so. He was certainly aware that what he was writing had binding authority on his readers. Yet we are not to imagine him sitting in an easy chair dictating in a monotonous tone. Peter believed that his message was essential for his readers to hear and obey.
Peter wants his readers to be assured that his letter had described the ‘true grace of God’. No doubt he was aware that other messages were claiming to from God. One can imagine how it would be easy for a false teacher to argue that the persecution believers were facing was an indication that they were not following a message from God. Peter had written to them to remind them that their suffering for the faith was a common Christian experience and an opportunity for witnessing to their faith. They were not to be moved from it, no matter what happened to them.
She in Babylon
Peter next refers to a woman and to a place. His words can be understood in different ways. Babylon may be a reference to the city in modern day Iraq or even to a small military location in Egypt, although it is more likely to be a cryptic reference to Rome itself. The reason why he would use such an allusion helps us appreciate the estimation the apostolic church had of the great Roman Empire. For them, it was a cruel system that opposed God’s kingdom, but like the original Babylon it was doomed for destruction.
But who is the ‘she’? It is possible that Peter means his wife because we know from a statement by Paul in 1 Corinthians 9:5 that Peter’s wife travelled with him. So, assuming that she was still living, she would have been with him. Yet it is more likely that Peter is referring to the church or to the group of Christians he was with when he composed the letter.
The apostle highlights something that both his readers and his current companions share, and that is that they have been chosen. While he does not say who chose them, he would have had God in mind. Nor does he indicate which feature of God’s choosing was the focus of Peter’s mind. Instead he leaves it open to take the most comprehensive view of God’s purpose for them. So they could consider it from the point of view of his electing grace when he chose them before the world was made. And they could think of it as his providential choice for them to witness in particular circumstances. Further they could look ahead and focus on God’s determination to bless his chosen ones in the eternal world. In whatever ways they would look at his words, they would be reminded of the loving sovereignty of God who had selected his people. God’s sovereignty is a most comforting doctrine, and Peter wanted his readers to derive maximum help from it.
Of course, his readers would have included among them those who had failed God to one degree or another. Such would derive great comfort from the next person mentioned by Peter. Mark had failed on a previous occasion when he had abandoned Paul and Barnabas and returned home. He then became the initial reason for a dispute between those two devoted servants of Christ that became so intense they had to separate. Mark had unhappy memories caused by his lack of dedication, yet here he now is, restored to apostolic favour (Paul, too, had changed his mind about Mark and later regarded him with great favour). Indeed it is generally recognised that Mark’s Gospel was written with guidance or input from Peter. So whenever believers heard mention of Mark, they would recall the restoring grace of God, that he pardons those who fail him. Indeed they would see that restoring work in Peter himself as well as in Mark.
We should note how affectionately Peter describes Mark. The apostle regards him as his son, in the same way as Paul regarded Timothy. This indicates that Mark had learned an important attitude, that of submission, because sons always submitted to their fathers at that time in history. So Mark becomes an example of the spiritual discipline that Peter had required of his readers earlier in the chapter – the discipline of mutual submission.
On Peter’s part, there was both affirmation and affection. His affirmation as an apostle was important in the sense that it was a public declaration that Mark was now in good standing. Of course, his affirmation could only be given because he was fulfilling the tasks required of him. It would not have been right for Peter to affirm Mark if he was still doing his own thing. It is also clear that affection had developed between Peter and Mark as they served the Lord together.
Greet with a kiss
Here Peter refers to how a cultural practice should be done in the church. The obvious danger of cultural practices is that they become formal rather than spiritual. Yet it is obvious that a kiss is a display of friendship and affection. We may not realise it but a failure to do such little things can have consequences. For example, consider the effect on one’s witness if a neighbour observed two of Peter’s readers meeting and not greeting one another with a kiss. The neighbour would assume that something was wrong between them, even if there was not. A simple failure to perform an expected practice will affect our public witness.
How was this kiss performed? After all, we can kiss a person on the lips or on the hands or on the cheeks. I suspect it was a kiss on the cheeks. This action is not limited to men kissing women or to women kissing women; it also included men kissing men. It is common for men in Mediterranean countries to kiss one another on the cheek. Jesus rebuked a Pharisee for not welcoming him with a kiss (Luke 7:45). When Paul parted from the elders of Ephesus, they all embraced him and kissed him (Acts 20:37). Justin Martyr and Origen state that mutual kissing used to follow times of prayer in early church services, although it seems to have been confined to the same gender. Augustine also says that giving one another such a kiss was part of a worship service in the early church.
It is important to note that this statement of Peter’s is a command. He requires his readers to express their love to one another through a cultural activity. Further, it is a comprehensive command because he expects them all to do it. And it should be a consistent action, one that is done whenever Christians meet. Body language often speaks louder than words.
What is the equivalent of this form of greeting in our culture? It is not a handshake, because the early church also gave one another the right hand of fellowship, and here Peter further requires them to greet one another with a kiss of love. I don’t think it would be wise in our culture for men to practice this, but the principle is that our body language should show that we love one another.
Peace to all in Christ
Peter’s desire for his Christian readers was that they would know peace. This peace is unique to Christians; no-one else can have it. Sadly, it can be undermined by Christians through their wrong actions (it is interesting that a desire for enjoyed peace follows a command to express love). Yet it should be the uniform experience of all of them, no matter their circumstances. After all, Peter’s readers faced an uncertain future, but they could have peace.
As we come to the end of our study of this letter, can we say what its overall message is to us in the twenty-first century? No doubt more than four details could be mentioned, but I will highlight the four that have convicted me. First, we should be heavenly-minded – our eyes should be on the world to come, and this them runs through the letter. Second, we should be ready for opposition to our expressions of faith in Jesus. Third, we should imitate the example of Jesus against our opponents and towards one another. Fourth, we should rejoice in Christ, our Saviour who died for us on the cross, and who is preparing glory for us in the world to come.